urbanMSP

I actually find American and Lyndale quite useful the way they are- nothing pretty but easy roads to drive on, and I'm an east Bloomington resident with no objection to Toro. Not every development has to be one of those that try to fake history by using random materials on the outside and have a coffee shop on the corner and are difficult to drive and park in. There's room across either freeway for the people that want those, and I think there's already too much retail on Lyndale, looking at the number of vacant parcels, and that the credit union on 95th and the parcel on 94th can't find anyone that wants to be in a new development. At least Toro is reinvesting in their headquarters instead of moving all the jobs to China.

I don't mean to play Billy Goat Gruff, but this gets at a question I've had for a long time: what exactly is ever hard about driving? Don't you just move your right foot slightly and transport yourself faster and with less physical exertion than 99% of humans that have ever existed?

To put it in a less value-laden way, can you explain more about developments that are "difficult to drive and park in"? In what way are they difficult and what design elements make them so? Is it about sight lines, sharp turns, frequent stops, etc?

I actually think this is on-topic for General Suburb News as many TC suburbs are currently transitioning from places that focus exclusively on making driving "easy" to places that try to fit enough tax-paying uses to actually pay for "easy" driving.

Perhaps he means "difficult" in that they are dangerous to drive in. If a street it dangerous to drive in and increases the chances that I may be hit or hit somebody else, it becomes "difficult" at the very least, and I avoid it if possible. Streets that make driving easy, with helpful and clear signage (don't take this for granted, it can be a LOT worse outside of the Twin Cities!) are a joy to drive on.

There is a possible phase 2 a few years after this is built, if the market stays strong and the company keeps growing. They do own all of the properties between the north side of the current building and American Blvd, I believe.

The area around Toro is pretty easy to drive in. There's lot's of double left turn + right turn lanes, you can park right in front of the store you're going to. Driving through some of the "new urban" developments the roads are narrower, you might have to park some distance away, possibly in a parking garage. I understand why some people like them but I try to stay as far away from them as possible, driving everywhere is my lifestyle choice.

Normandale Lakes - Covington Apartments cranes by mattaudio, on Flickr

They are having a groundbreaking ceremony today for the expansion. I hear the governor will be on hand as well the mayor and other dignitaries. The construction has a pretty tight timeline. They want the building to be ready for the 100th anniversary celebration next July.

Good thing it's a somewhat small and simplistic design then!

On the latest drawings at the ceremony today, it appeared that the wood on the exterior was a little darker and almost a reddish color than in the earlier drawings. I liked the change. It will be interesting to see what it will look like when it's done.

Looking again at the site plans linked to above, it really seems like Toro should step up and buy those last four lonely houses on the stub of Harriet Avenue.

Is there any hope for this place or will it remain a giant sprawling mess for all eternity?

Bloomington is far from the worst. The streets have the ability to become more walkable (a lot of low-traffic 4-lanes that are better as 3-lane streets), and if transit is improved on the main roads (American, Nicollet, 35W, Old Shakopee) a decent transit-share could be created. Additionally a lot of the aging commercial areas are ripe for redevelopment in the coming decades. I wouldn't expect too much considering that Bloomington itself is surrounded by sprawl, and considering it's 8 miles from the core you are going to have less commuters to the city (who are more likely to use transit).

A lot of the single-family home areas are likely to stay where they are. It doesn't make sense to redevelop a lot of those properties.

East Bloomington is mostly on a grid street network, so I tend to tie terms like giant sprawling mess to suburbs like Eden Prairie (West Bloomington is sprawl-laden but is at least not as entangled as bad as EP). Bloomington in my opinion is one of the easiest suburbs to improve on given it's already developed and has a large employment base. It definitely needs work and more density, along with greater suburb-suburb connectivity through transit. Bloomington along with similar places like Roseville should be at least getting overall city density levels to over 3,000 ppsm (doable with South Loop developments and more apartments along 494) and becoming stronger suburban transit hubs with both arterial and freeway BRT lines connecting both suburban and city employment centers. Like how Snelling is getting aBRT, they should rush American Blvd's aBRT line at least to tie in with the METRO Orange Line.

I figured this thread could use a link to Bloomington's planning dept. home page.
http://www.ci.bloomington.mn.us/cityhal ... anning.htm

There's lots of useful stuff there: development map, pages for each redevelopment area, even an easy-to-read height limit map.

I see Bloomington as a first, second, and third ring suburb, all mashed into one, but generally transitioning from east to west. Cleaning up the aging commercial strips and replacing them with mixed-use development, along with the above mentioned 4:3 conversions will go a long way toward making Bloomington more walkable and less sprawling.

The view from high up of these new apartments


Luxembourg apartments Bloomington 10-25-13 by bapster2006, on Flickr

I like it as a giant sprawling mess, so hopefully it'll stay that way, at least the parts of town I frequent. But as has been pointed out there are more compact parts of town and the city is starting to at least pay lip service to walkability in some of the areas being redeveloped.

I like that you acknowledge what most suburbs are doing; basically paying lip service to walkability. 98% of land area will continue to be a subsidized, polluting death trap. But that's ok, I suppose.

98% of land area will continue to be a subsidized, polluting death trap.

Come on, you can do better than that, right?