MN-121 "Lyndale Connector" Turnback and Redevelopment

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
Archiapolis
Foshay Tower
Posts: 816
Joined: November 2nd, 2012, 8:59 am

Re: MN-121 "Lyndale Connector" Turnback and Redevelopment

Postby Archiapolis » May 26th, 2016, 10:59 am

MNdible wrote:I was just trying to channel Cano.
Nice!

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 5736
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: MN-121 "Lyndale Connector" Turnback and Redevelopment

Postby twincitizen » March 10th, 2017, 2:39 pm

http://www.southwestjournal.com/news/bi ... hen-space/

Great job buying this key piece of property, Hennepin County and City of Minneapolis.....NOT

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7234
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: MN-121 "Lyndale Connector" Turnback and Redevelopment

Postby mattaudio » March 10th, 2017, 3:51 pm

Why would they need to buy it to reconnect Lyndale?

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 5736
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: MN-121 "Lyndale Connector" Turnback and Redevelopment

Postby twincitizen » March 11th, 2017, 10:34 am

Perhaps not for the ROW itself, but the site would be the corner of the eventual development at Lyndale & 58th. It was an inexpensive piece of land that will cost them 2-5x as much to buy when there's an active business occupying it. Hard to justify in a public budget when there's no actual project here, but would've been a drop in the bucket for Hennepin County

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7234
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: MN-121 "Lyndale Connector" Turnback and Redevelopment

Postby mattaudio » March 11th, 2017, 5:36 pm

Why would the city, county, or any other public agency be responsible for site assembly?

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 5736
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: MN-121 "Lyndale Connector" Turnback and Redevelopment

Postby twincitizen » March 13th, 2017, 11:45 am

If this project ever happens, it will first and foremost be billed as a redevelopment project, not a road project. From the above discussions happening between Ward 11 & 13 councilmembers and staff, they are trying to get this project added to the list of major redevelopment sites and rank it favorably
Right now, CPED is also working on a request from the Council to develop a list of criteria to prioritize development projects that will require some level of City funding. If that process is weighted toward how quickly the anticipated property taxes would be expected to cover the City investment, then this project will score very high. But there are some projects on the list that are much more high profile (Upper Harbor Terminal, the Kmart location at Lake & Nicollet, etc.) that unfortunately may end up ahead of this project in the queue.
For a measly couple hundred thousand, compared to what it will cost a few years down the line (when they will also have to pay the business relocation costs, etc.), this key piece of land should have been an obvious purchase for the city or county. But I understand how difficult that would have been to secure those funds when this isn't even an official city project yet, but hopefully it will be soon.

Archiapolis
Foshay Tower
Posts: 816
Joined: November 2nd, 2012, 8:59 am

Re: MN-121 "Lyndale Connector" Turnback and Redevelopment

Postby Archiapolis » March 13th, 2017, 12:12 pm

twincitizen wrote:
March 13th, 2017, 11:45 am
If this project ever happens, it will first and foremost be billed as a redevelopment project, not a road project. From the above discussions happening between Ward 11 & 13 councilmembers and staff, they are trying to get this project added to the list of major redevelopment sites and rank it favorably
Right now, CPED is also working on a request from the Council to develop a list of criteria to prioritize development projects that will require some level of City funding. If that process is weighted toward how quickly the anticipated property taxes would be expected to cover the City investment, then this project will score very high. But there are some projects on the list that are much more high profile (Upper Harbor Terminal, the Kmart location at Lake & Nicollet, etc.) that unfortunately may end up ahead of this project in the queue.
For a measly couple hundred thousand, compared to what it will cost a few years down the line (when they will also have to pay the business relocation costs, etc.), this key piece of land should have been an obvious purchase for the city or county. But I understand how difficult that would have been to secure those funds when this isn't even an official city project yet, but hopefully it will be soon.
It is on the radar for the city but unfortunately sits well behind other priorities. The "list of criteria..." comment would seem to indicate that this project would fall under the "no brainer" category but "the wheels of government turn slowly" etc.

I say again, a large scale development in a desirable part of town represents a great opportunity for spreading affordable housing throughout the city but apparently it is a "low priority" so...

<sigh>

User avatar
sdho
Target Field
Posts: 545
Joined: August 17th, 2013, 12:54 pm
Location: Augsburg Park/Richfield
Contact:

Re: MN-121 "Lyndale Connector" Turnback and Redevelopment

Postby sdho » March 20th, 2017, 6:41 pm

mattaudio wrote:
March 11th, 2017, 5:36 pm
Why would the city, county, or any other public agency be responsible for site assembly?
Because they want a project to happen...

(But apparently they don't want it that intently right now)

seanrichardryan
Capella Tower
Posts: 3609
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 9:33 pm
Location: Merriam Park, St. Paul
Contact:

Re: MN-121 "Lyndale Connector" Turnback and Redevelopment

Postby seanrichardryan » March 20th, 2017, 8:35 pm

The current investment on the property certainly doesn't preclude later purchase and redeveloment.
Q. What, what? A. In da butt.


Return to “Transportation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests