Rochester

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

Re: Rochester

Postby go4guy » December 16th, 2016, 11:24 am

Heart of the City project actually has a setback after the 5th floor. They talked about lack of setback for about 20 minutes, opened it back up for public discussion, and the developer came up and showed them the setback. Apparently some of them decided to ignore that. So frustrating to watch. One of the council members i believe is an architect. He always seems to have a problem with every building his firm did not design. Another Councilwoman seems to always harp on issues that are either not factual (setbacks) or something the developer has no control over (crosswalks and other actual street improvements).

I will say that with this project, one concern is the lack of any underground parking, and all parking being floors 2-5. I kind of agree, but they didn't ask questions as to why. I would think the water table is pretty high, so depth has to be an issue. And it must be hard to do underground on 1 floor, and then 3 above the first floor without ruining your ability to activate at street level with retail. Her main concern though was that she wanted 2nd floor balconies so residents can interact with people on the sidewalk. Problem is, the first number of floors are a hotel, so you would only have windows, and no balconies. I would have preferred them harp more on high quality materials, and making the parking garage portion appear the same as the rest of the building as much as possible.

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

Re: Rochester

Postby go4guy » December 16th, 2016, 11:27 am

Stencil projects from what I have seen are being done very cheaply. The Pines development by HyVee West Circle already was delayed a long time because they already had cracking in the concrete support above the parking portion. Projects are very bland, and mostly on the outskirts of town. Not ideal. Buckeye project seems to be moving VERY slowly. That project should have the exterior completed by now and working on interior work over the winter.

Thorondor
City Center
Posts: 33
Joined: October 5th, 2016, 4:40 pm

Re: Rochester

Postby Thorondor » December 16th, 2016, 12:11 pm

Thanks for all the insight go4guy! You make some excellent points. High quality materials is definitely a good point to emphasize, as it easily could look rather haphazardly thrown together if the parking floors don't blend well into the rest of the building.

I'm not sure whether I want the Heart of the City project to go forward anyway, since that Days Inn buildings probably could continue to be used effectively for retail and apartments/hotel if someone just put money into it. I've always thought it was one of the better historic buildings downtown (and I would miss Pannekoeken). But the other 3/4 of that block as well as across center street definitely needs development of this kind.

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2424
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: Saint Paul

Re: Rochester

Postby EOst » December 16th, 2016, 1:37 pm


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

Re: Rochester

Postby go4guy » December 16th, 2016, 10:00 pm

I will admit that I am not all that impressed with the proposal, and think they could do a lot better. However, I dont buy the notion that this hotel is considered a historic structure. I love history, and historic structures that obviously add to a community. But I have driven by this building hundreds of times and never thought it is a building worth saving. It just doesnt do anything for me. Always thought it was a really crappy building and have always hoped that important of a corner would get redeveloped. But, that is just my opinion.

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

Re: Rochester

Postby matthew5080 » December 29th, 2016, 10:30 pm

Some interesting quotes from the Post Bulletin today regarding the development boom in Rochester.

This one is on the apartment construction in the city
Apartment projects began to go up throughout every quadrant of the city at a rate never seen before in Rochester.

In late December, the city was on track to issue permits for 1,000 apartment units for the year, according to director of building and safety Randy Johnson. In 2014, that number was just 124. He said while 1,165 apartment units were approved in 2015, it was 2016 when most of that construction started.

"It's unprecedented. We typically average between 150 to 200 units a year," Johnson said. "We saw more new apartments last year than the last eight years combined."
http://www.postbulletin.com/news/local/ ... 22ca1.html


Now for hotels in the downtown area
The growing number of hotel rooms in Rochester has not slowed the growth of hotel occupancy, which Jones said is still on the rise of 3 percent to 4 percent. That means addition rooms have "absorbed" the demand, which continues to grow, he said.

This new Hilton, which will probably open in late 2017 or early 2018, could be the first of a new downtown hotel boom. Jones pointed to other proposed projects like the Bloom Properties' waterfront development and Hammes' Days Inn development as examples of what Rochester can expect in coming years.

"This is just the tip of the iceberg," he said. "I expect we'll see 600 to 700 new hotel rooms (including the Hilton) in downtown in the next two or three years."
http://www.postbulletin.com/news/local/ ... 25c28.html

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

Re: Rochester

Postby matthew5080 » January 2nd, 2017, 4:40 pm

"New" development proposal for a 6 story apartment building known as "Residence at Discovery Square". I believe this is what was once known as the Third Avenue Lofts
150 residential units, 20,000 square feet of commercial space, and underground parking
I'm not sure how I feel about the red facade...

Image
Image
Image

http://www.rochestermn.gov/home/showdocument?id=12344

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

Re: Rochester

Postby go4guy » January 2nd, 2017, 8:38 pm

If that is all actual brick on the facade, I think I would be fine with it. Any other material will look cheap and should not be approved.

Also, looks to be 7 stories.

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

Re: Rochester

Postby matthew5080 » January 2nd, 2017, 10:46 pm

That's what I counted as well, but the city's development proposal page says 6 so I just went with that lol

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

Re: Rochester

Postby matthew5080 » January 5th, 2017, 11:16 am

City Council approved an early demolition agreement for the Rosie Belle buildings last night. It's about time, seeing as the building has sat vacant for years and has become an absolute eyesore. Last time I walked by, one could see dead birds inside the building through the windows.. The plan by the property owners is to eventually build a performing arts center there.

The Titan/Opus apartment project received approval for its preliminary plan and goes back to Planning and Zoning with the final project later, then once again to the city council for final approval.

The decision on the Hammes 17-story mixed-use tower has been delayed until January 18th. The city has contracted the Collaborative Design Group from Minneapolis to review the developers plan over the next two weeks, while the city also considers the question of the current buildings historical significance.

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

Re: Rochester

Postby matthew5080 » January 18th, 2017, 2:46 pm

Expect bids next month for downtown ramp
For those who don't remember, this ramp will be directly to the east of Broadway Plaza and the new Hilton Hotel downtown (across the street from the Post Bulletin building). The ramp will take place of the current surface parking lot and has the possibility to add residential units above, to reach a height of 16 stories.

Image

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

Re: Rochester

Postby mattaudio » January 18th, 2017, 3:01 pm

Over $40,000 per parking space... It's impressive to think the public could not only subsidize so much new parking, but could spend so much in doing it!

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

Re: Rochester

Postby go4guy » January 18th, 2017, 7:21 pm

Over $40,000 per parking space... It's impressive to think the public could not only subsidize so much new parking, but could spend so much in doing it!
So the ramp will probably pay for itself in 5-10 years, and the city can still sell the air rights to a developer? Doesnt seem like a bad deal for the city at all. And then you consider that downtown will be down a ramp during construction of the bloom site, and this ramp will have that much more demand. I think the city will do just fine with this ramp. So are they really subsidizing new parking when the ramp will pay for itself?

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

Re: Rochester

Postby bubzki2 » January 19th, 2017, 8:06 am

This project will have a much less sour taste if they go with the 16-story residential version. Otherwise, I do like that future rail tunnel that would be built into it, with provisions for eventual LRT/streetcar.

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

Re: Rochester

Postby mattaudio » January 19th, 2017, 9:32 am

If a parking ramp can pay for itself in 5 to 10 years, what business does a city have financing it? (Of course, they'd have even *less* business financing and building parking that can't pay for itself). Parking is a private good; rivalrous and excludable. Let the market manage it.

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

Re: Rochester

Postby go4guy » January 19th, 2017, 7:56 pm

I would argue that a parking ramp is a public good, and I would much rather have the city manage them. In my opinion,
- Without convenient parking ramps, many people would not go downtown to spend money and spend their time in that area. I know we wouldn't go out to the many restaurants if we had to park multiple blocks away. But we do go downtown a lot because it is easy and convenient.
- Parking ramps can be used as an incentive to spur development, which this site is a great example of. Much better design than other projects with parking podiums.
- Parking ramps provide revenue for a city. Hard to argue with that.
- And one of the reasons I like the most, the city can run these as long as it is for the public good. If the site becomes much better as a development site, the site can issue an RFP to redevelop and pick and choose the best option for the city. If private entities own the ramps, we get stuck with ugly run down ramps and we can't do anything about it.

I know some on here hate cars, hate roads, and hate parking ramps. As someone who lives on the edge of Rochester, we would never go downtown if we didn't have a convenient place to park. We would stay out in this area instead. Having parking ramps actually creates an active and vibrant downtown because that many more people come down to enjoy everything downtown has to offer.

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

Re: Rochester

Postby mattaudio » January 20th, 2017, 9:10 am

Image

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

Re: Rochester

Postby matthew5080 » January 27th, 2017, 10:31 pm

Some recent comments on the Heart of the City North project.
The developer has submitted a request to the city of Rochester for $12 million in tax increment financing, Assistant City Administrator Gary Neumann said Thursday.
The project is expected to cost nearly $100 million, according to memos exchanged between city leaders and the developer.
The project could also provide almost $84 million in net fiscal gain, Dunn said, based on local and state taxes. Dunn argued the project would provide public benefit through its economic development benefits, particularly its cohesiveness with DMC plans and the renovated Mayo Civic Center.
http://www.postbulletin.com/news/local/ ... b577c.html

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

Re: Rochester

Postby go4guy » January 29th, 2017, 9:32 am

Can anyone explain why TIF would be required/needed for this site?

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

Re: Rochester

Postby mattaudio » January 30th, 2017, 9:19 am

Agreed. This seems like it would be an excellent legal test of the "but for" clause in TIF legislation. This is arguably one of the most prominent corners in Downtown Rochester.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests