Bloomington - General Topics

Twin Cities Suburbs
QuietBlue
Target Field
Posts: 579
Joined: September 14th, 2012, 8:50 am

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby QuietBlue » April 21st, 2016, 8:30 am

When they wanted to get out of the city for good, my parents looked around in Burnsville but ultimately bought a house in Bloomington because they didn't want the hassle of crossing the river... in 1968.
I feel like the river is as much a mental/psychological barrier for people as it is a physical one. I live on the west side of Eagan, and I often have to remind myself that I live closer to Bloomington than I do most of the south metro.

HiawathaGuy
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1636
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 12:03 pm

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby HiawathaGuy » April 21st, 2016, 8:37 am

I assume the plan is to start a northbound aux lane at Cliff Road (or even 13) and continue it right into the truck lane on the north end of the bridge? Or extend it even further to 98th Street exit-only?
From the 35W Transportation page: https://forum.streets.mn/viewtopic.php?f ... &start=140
Since the forum software does weird stuff with what MnDOT put in that URL, here's a better link.

matthew5080
Rice Park
Posts: 413
Joined: January 23rd, 2016, 6:06 pm
Location: Eden Prairie

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby matthew5080 » April 21st, 2016, 10:17 am

When they wanted to get out of the city for good, my parents looked around in Burnsville but ultimately bought a house in Bloomington because they didn't want the hassle of crossing the river... in 1968.
I feel like the river is as much a mental/psychological barrier for people as it is a physical one. I live on the west side of Eagan, and I often have to remind myself that I live closer to Bloomington than I do most of the south metro.
Funny, I actually know more people who WANT to be south of the river... You're correct about the river being more than just a physical barrier. A lot of people that I know see it as a suburban paradise over there.

Mdcastle
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1209
Joined: March 23rd, 2013, 8:28 am
Location: Bloomington, MN

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby Mdcastle » April 21st, 2016, 5:11 pm

I asked the engineer about a few things. The northbound aux lane will start at Cliff Road. I could see this changing in a few decades when the interchange is rebuilt or the area is redeveloped, but for now traffic modeling shows that traffic flows better with the lane starting at Cliff Road. All the trucks entering going about 15 mph from the Cliff Road ramp is a bigger issue than the large volume of vehicles from MN 13. Right now extending the truck lane (which is rarely used as such) to 98th St is something under consideration but not a formal part of the project at the moment.

At the time my father worked for Honeywell and my mother worked at Multifoods. Neither one of them wanted to fight the traffic across the river twice a day, which was horrible even back then. The were showed a lot of places in Burnsville but finally found one in Bloomington that they liked, and that was far enough away from the city for them. But I can see how it would be psychological barrier rather than just a physical one, I guess that works both ways depending on if you like being near the city or not.

User avatar
sdho
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 736
Joined: August 17th, 2013, 12:54 pm
Location: The Urban Hometown®
Contact:

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby sdho » April 21st, 2016, 8:29 pm

I walked around the OATI development site at Computer Ave and 494 today.

Building is chugging along, but I was surprised at the extreme security measures around the site. Computer Ave and W 78th St have an 8' pointed iron fence. And the north side, adjoining Seagate, has a 10' chainlink fence complete with barbed wire. I'm honestly surprised the city even allows fences that high, particularly adjoining streets.

Image

Image

min-chi-cbus
Capella Tower
Posts: 2869
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 9:19 am

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby min-chi-cbus » April 21st, 2016, 10:27 pm

Makes me wonder what they're protecting.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6368
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby twincitizen » April 21st, 2016, 10:41 pm

Looks like it should be 6' when adjacent to a street, 10' otherwise: https://www.bloomingtonmn.gov/sites/def ... ndards.pdf
They could have been granted a variance of course. Interesting that they allow barbed wire on non-industrial property...unless it's not supposed to be there.

User avatar
sdho
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 736
Joined: August 17th, 2013, 12:54 pm
Location: The Urban Hometown®
Contact:

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby sdho » April 21st, 2016, 11:21 pm

Makes me wonder what they're protecting.
Right? And, what could they possibly be protecting that the building doesn't protect? Keeping Seagate employees out of the parking lot?
Looks like it should be 6' when adjacent to a street, 10' otherwise: https://www.bloomingtonmn.gov/sites/def ... ndards.pdf
They could have been granted a variance of course. Interesting that they allow barbed wire on non-industrial property...unless it's not supposed to be there.
Actually the sheet you linked to says, "Barbed wire is permitted only on top of fences in nonresidential districts, a minimum of six feet above the natural grade." It is indeed at least 6' off the ground, in a non-residential district.

In general their fence code seems pretty loose. I can't believe you're allowed to build a 6' fence in the front yard of a residential property if it faces an arterial. Also interesting it doesn't seem to distinguish between front vs side yard (only adjacent to the street or not).

SamHartmen

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby SamHartmen » April 23rd, 2016, 10:38 pm

...I bet they have a low employee turnover rate, compared to the industry average.

User avatar
Tiller
Foshay Tower
Posts: 964
Joined: January 17th, 2015, 11:58 am

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby Tiller » April 24th, 2016, 10:00 pm

...I bet they have a low employee turnover rate, compared to the industry average.
"The barbed wire is to keep people in, not out."

SamHartmen

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby SamHartmen » April 24th, 2016, 11:17 pm

...I bet they have a low employee turnover rate, compared to the industry average.
"The barbed wire is to keep people in, not out."


..............yes..........hence the low turnover rate...

Mdcastle
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1209
Joined: March 23rd, 2013, 8:28 am
Location: Bloomington, MN

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby Mdcastle » May 3rd, 2016, 7:07 am

Assuming we're throwing existing zoning and codes out the window: Are there house designs that could fit it a standard Bloomington lot if it were divided into two? Say at least 1000 square feet and a 2 car garage and enough back yard for a small deck or play area. I'm assuming this would need to be 2-1/2 stories and probably a setback of only a couple of feet from the lot line.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6368
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby twincitizen » May 3rd, 2016, 7:17 am

If it's a 100+ foot lot width, yes you can definitely split that into two lots (if zoning allowed, which it currently does not). If it's an 85-foot lot (very common in Bloomington), then no, it probably cannot be split, unless you want a bunch of closely spaced snout-garage houses.

Being realistic, a 50 foot lot width is about as low as you can go with front driveways (no alleys) and two-car garages. Richfield has several large, newer houses built on 50-foot lots. They all have 2-car garages and at least 2,000 finished sf.

Technically speaking, of course Bloomington could allow 42.5' wide lots, but without alleys the street would pretty much just be driveways. There are parts of Linden Hills without alleys on 42' lots but I don't expect that would fly in Bloomington. And it definitely wouldn't meet your requirement of having a yard. 50' is really the minimum workable width for a suburban area. After allowing for 5' setbacks on each side, you still have 40' of buildable width for house+attached garage or house+driveway (to detached garage in rear).

Long story short, Bloomington should reduce its minimum lot width requirement to 50', and lot size to ~6500 sf.

min-chi-cbus
Capella Tower
Posts: 2869
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 9:19 am

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby min-chi-cbus » May 3rd, 2016, 8:17 am

I've actually wondered that myself, about suburbs like Bloomington, Richfield, and other inner-ring suburbs with wide, ranch-style plots. I even wonder about that for some parcels in the core cities that are currently 40-50 feet wide, in the event that the city becomes such a hot commodity that land values would justify 2:1 splits in some places. I think it could easily be done with 60+ foot-wide lots, with undersized homes respective to the value of the property, IFF they could add an alley behind the homes on the block.

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

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby mattaudio » May 3rd, 2016, 9:08 am

Any chance for ever retrofitting alleys? I love my alley (well, I love the streetscape it affords - a wonderful block without driveways).

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6368
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby twincitizen » May 3rd, 2016, 9:29 am

You already know the answer to that. In no way, shape, or form, is the city buying up ~12' of ROW through people's backyards, in many cases where they have already built detached garages, sheds, gardens, etc. Not gonna happen.

That said, one of my biggest "dislikes" about Richfield, aesthetically speaking, is that the major arterial streets were not built with more alleys. Little sections of Portland, Nicollet, and Lyndale have a block with alleys here or there, but those blocks are in the minority. With alleys, you wouldn't have so many goddamn driveways & curb cuts fronting on busy streets. The lack of alleys on busy streets may actually be my least favorite infrastructural aspect of Richfield. Other things like lot widths, lack of sidewalks, etc. can all be changed over time. But adding alleys won't happen without the city buying up whole blocks of property and replatting them...so it won't happen. It would be a terrible use of public funds, even if it were feasible.

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

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby FISHMANPET » May 3rd, 2016, 9:40 am

Just kind of a total spitball, but could the city buy an easement on the back 12' of every property of a block, say that the current owner has use of any structures in that space for as long as they exist, and at some time (in 100 years?) when everything's been cleared out the city could put an alley in.

I mean, I can think of a ton of reasons why that would never happen, but would it at least be possible?

RailBaronYarr
Capella Tower
Posts: 2625
Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby RailBaronYarr » May 3rd, 2016, 9:54 am

Assuming we're throwing existing zoning and codes out the window: Are there house designs that could fit it a standard Bloomington lot if it were divided into two? Say at least 1000 square feet and a 2 car garage and enough back yard for a small deck or play area. I'm assuming this would need to be 2-1/2 stories and probably a setback of only a couple of feet from the lot line.
I guess, if that's what you think is the minimum possible detached house someone would live in, then yeah, twincitizen's response is accurate. I don't think it's outrageous to dream a little bigger, though. One car garage, tradeoff deck or yard space, potentially smaller homes, etc (though, a 1,000 square foot home wouldn't need 2+ stories if you include the basement). I always preface with the fact that Nathan Lewis is a blow-hard, but here are a bunch of pictures of single family detached homes in Japan with parking (some garage, some open air - which many Minneapolis residents prove they're comfortable with) and private outdoor space. I'm not saying every example meets the typical American aesthetic (their streets look much more like a nicer-version of Minneapolis alleys), but it shows what you can do with a 1-2,000 sqft lot.

Obviously, your question is more one of specifically retrofitting Bloomington lots, without adding alleys or other public rights of way on any private property. These layouts still could be done on a standard Bloomington SFH lot (about 125' deep and anywhere from 75 to 125' wide) with a shared driveway and 4 small homes sharing that access. You'd have a minimum of 32'x62' for each plot on which to build a home and garage, with at least 5' setbacks on all sides. If a redeveloper wanted to do this on a smaller Bloomington lot (75' wide), they wouldn't get any yard space, only a deck above the garage. That's fine, humans are capable of making that tradeoff. On the wider lots, you'd end up with a "backyard" (it'd be against the side-yard of the neighbor) of about 35'x60', more than big enough for a patio/deck and small play area (my back yard is 40x25 plus a 12x12 deck). If you want to make new, detached single family homes more affordable, allowing this configuration in Bloomington would be a great place to start.

Mdcastle
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1209
Joined: March 23rd, 2013, 8:28 am
Location: Bloomington, MN

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby Mdcastle » May 3rd, 2016, 10:53 am

Here's one idea I thought of
ImageIMG_9154 by North Star Highways, on Flickr
A shared wall on a garage wouldn't be as objectionable as one on a living space, the driveway would be a shared easement or else one person would own both lots with the second one being rented out. That is still a lot of garage in front, but it's kind of unavoidable assuming a double garage and you don't want the garage taking up valuable backyard space.

The interior layout would be laundry and utility on the same floor as the garage, the kids bedrooms in front and great room facing the back yard with an upper level deck in back on the first floor, and master suite on the top 1/2 story.

Maybe I dislike alleys more than most people, but I think there's some sort of selection, with the people that like alleys buying houses in the cities, those that don't farther out, and those that don't care in both places. So Bloomington would be on a range of don't care to don't like. Besides logistical reasons that was one of my reasons for excluding them in my parameters.
Last edited by Mdcastle on May 3rd, 2016, 10:56 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
sdho
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 736
Joined: August 17th, 2013, 12:54 pm
Location: The Urban Hometown®
Contact:

Re: Bloomington - General Topics

Postby sdho » May 3rd, 2016, 10:55 am

That said, one of my biggest "dislikes" about Richfield, aesthetically speaking, is that the major arterial streets were not built with more alleys. Little sections of Portland, Nicollet, and Lyndale have a block with alleys here or there, but those blocks are in the minority. With alleys, you wouldn't have so many goddamn driveways & curb cuts fronting on busy streets. The lack of alleys on busy streets may actually be my least favorite infrastructural aspect of Richfield. Other things like lot widths, lack of sidewalks, etc. can all be changed over time. But adding alleys won't happen without the city buying up whole blocks of property and replatting them...so it won't happen. It would be a terrible use of public funds, even if it were feasible.
A complicating factor for Richfield is that much of Nicollet and Lyndale have alleys, but they're extremely underutilized. In fact I believe every block of Nicollet 66th-76th has an alley on at least one side. However, many of the houses are older and preceded the installation of the alleys, or some homeowners took it upon themselves to add parking pads in their front yard, in lieu of on-street parking. It seems that in the name of access management, it would be worthwhile to provide money to homeowners to connect/reconfigure to existing alleys in exchange for removing driveway access. Portland has a couple of blocks that are platted for alleys that never got built, or only got built part-way.

And I actually do think in a few narrow cases, new alleys might work in Bloomington -- like during major street construction. Bloomington's approach to access management thus far has been even more extreme, tearing down over a dozen homes along Lyndale Ave.

But I can't see it ever being worth it on a minor street. Only exception might be splitting a 100' or 150' corner lot. Then, by all means, create a private drive to serve the three. With 40-50' lots and no alley service, it seems to be a choice: ruin your front yard by doing a snout house and wide front driveway, or significantly decrease your backyard by having a long narrow driveway with space to maneuver in back.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 14 guests