New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

The Most Livable City in America™
Nathaniel
Metrodome
Posts: 50
Joined: June 7th, 2012, 11:52 am
Contact:

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby Nathaniel » January 13th, 2014, 6:05 pm

I just wrote a piece on Streets.MN about this Building Proposal:

https://streets.mn/2014/01/13/demand ... -building/

I mentioned this before, and I wanted to say it again. I don't mean to have this be some type of self-promotion, but wanted to share the conversation here so UrbanMSP doesn't miss it. I argue the following:

1. The Planning is Bad.
2. The Urban Design is Bad.
3. The Parking is Bad.
4. The Architecture is Bad.
5. We Need to Stop Being Incompetent at Building Stuff that has Bad Urbanism.

at40man
Rice Park
Posts: 438
Joined: January 3rd, 2013, 6:49 pm
Location: Maplewood

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby at40man » January 13th, 2014, 7:57 pm

I'm sure there could be some shuffling of the office space in the Capitol area to accommodate those who have a real need to be near the capitol, and those who work for the government but don't truly need to be quite as close to the capitol. There is no way that all the staff who work in the area actually have need of being that physically close to the Capitol.

Heck, Wells Fargo and Target have offices scattered all throughout downtown Minneapolis. When I worked for them we would walk through the skyways to go to meetings with different departments. The LRT would certainly be quicker than that.

If they truly need more space, I would rather see them use the taxpayer dollars more wisely. Reclad the Macy's building, build out the mostly empty space, and keep the individual offices on the interior of the building so that if windows are punched in the walls, the workers can actually see the light of day. Plus, the building already has a parking garage attached and a restaurant/kitchen area within that could be reused for the people who would work there.

Win-win.
Last edited by at40man on January 13th, 2014, 8:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5989
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby MNdible » January 13th, 2014, 8:00 pm

Streets.mn would benefit if they could turn down the righteous indignation dial just a little bit.

Nathaniel
Metrodome
Posts: 50
Joined: June 7th, 2012, 11:52 am
Contact:

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby Nathaniel » January 14th, 2014, 1:25 pm

Streets.mn would benefit if they could turn down the righteous indignation dial just a little bit.
It'd be easier to do if we weren't right so often, and then just thoroughly ignored. ;)

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4617
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby David Greene » January 14th, 2014, 2:09 pm

Streets.mn would benefit if they could turn down the righteous indignation dial just a little bit.
It'd be easier to do if we weren't right so often, and then just thoroughly ignored. ;)
Myopic.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby mattaudio » January 14th, 2014, 2:10 pm

People DO realize that they're free to write something that they feel is less righteously indignant and submit it to StreetsMN... I bet it will get posted.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby FISHMANPET » January 14th, 2014, 2:17 pm

Streets.mn would benefit if they could turn down the righteous indignation dial just a little bit.
I don't really get this statement. If the analysis is wrong, then point out the flaws. Otherwise it sounds like the same crap the media feeds us when there are two sides to an issue, that the correct answer is always in the middle. Sometimes something is wrong, and it needs to be pointed out.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5989
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby MNdible » January 14th, 2014, 2:54 pm

Streets.mn would benefit if they could turn down the righteous indignation dial just a little bit.
It'd be easier to do if we weren't right so often, and then just thoroughly ignored. ;)
And to be fair, I think you're right about most everything in the article.

bubzki2
Foshay Tower
Posts: 811
Joined: September 19th, 2012, 5:38 pm
Location: Snelling-Hamline

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby bubzki2 » January 15th, 2014, 3:26 pm


Nathaniel
Metrodome
Posts: 50
Joined: June 7th, 2012, 11:52 am
Contact:

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby Nathaniel » January 20th, 2014, 6:23 pm

In a bit of good news, I've spoken to a few decision-makers on this project. The Board has read the article, and private conversation on the topic has been encouraging, and I may present in front of them during their February meeting. Anyway, myopic.

go4guy
Foshay Tower
Posts: 921
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 8:54 am

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby go4guy » April 4th, 2014, 5:37 pm

Looks like this project is a go. Anyone know how to findout who voted which way?

tabletop
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 120
Joined: June 7th, 2012, 3:24 pm

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby tabletop » April 5th, 2014, 7:31 am

DFL for, Republicans against. Although they managed to cut the cost by about $20 million with one of the more noble features, the green roof, falling to that budgetary ax... http://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy ... e-building

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby mattaudio » April 7th, 2014, 1:28 pm

But the "free" parking ramps remain....

How will people and organizations make efficient car storage choices without paying for the cost of their decisions?

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5989
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby MNdible » April 7th, 2014, 2:06 pm

The plan cuts out a big chunk of the structured parking -- that's mostly how they're able to add offices at the same time they're reducing cost. Green roofs and reflecting pools aren't that expensive. As I understand it, they're also making the remaining parking "user financed".

Sorry for ruining your narrative, though.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby mattaudio » April 7th, 2014, 2:12 pm

If parking was truly user financed, the state legislature wouldn't have needed to be a part of it. It's a private good. It can be privately developed and financed on the private bond/credit markets.

nickmgray
Union Depot
Posts: 319
Joined: July 3rd, 2012, 10:40 am

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby nickmgray » April 7th, 2014, 2:54 pm

I don't understand why the state doesn't partner with a developer to build something better. They need office space and a few extra parking spots, but this area needs a development that actually offers something to the community. Why not a mixed use development for the entire block with housing and more and a portion of it is office space. What's so hard about that?

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4617
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby David Greene » April 7th, 2014, 4:10 pm

I don't understand why the state doesn't partner with a developer to build something better. They need office space and a few extra parking spots, but this area needs a development that actually offers something to the community. Why not a mixed use development for the entire block with housing and more and a portion of it is office space. What's so hard about that?
The Capitol grounds planning board.

talindsay
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1533
Joined: September 29th, 2012, 10:41 am

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby talindsay » April 14th, 2014, 9:02 pm

I don't understand why the state doesn't partner with a developer to build something better. They need office space and a few extra parking spots, but this area needs a development that actually offers something to the community. Why not a mixed use development for the entire block with housing and more and a portion of it is office space. What's so hard about that?
Also security. I don't think post Oklahoma city government buildings are likely to be designed a mixed use when they can be more fully secured as single use facilities.

nickmgray
Union Depot
Posts: 319
Joined: July 3rd, 2012, 10:40 am

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby nickmgray » April 16th, 2014, 9:48 am

I doubt security has anything to do with their decision. Most government buildings are intended for easy in and out access for the public. Adding retail, a coffee shop or anything else would not change the security constraints they would have.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: New Senate office building (St. Paul Capitol Hill)

Postby FISHMANPET » April 16th, 2014, 10:00 am

Post Oklahoma City government security became about keeping people away from building that didn't belong there, which is why the Fort Snelling government building is so far away from the station (it was supposed to drop off at the front door, either by moving the building or moving the station) but I think security is a little more nuanced now.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests