The 700 on Washington - (700 Washington Avenue Southeast)

Northeast, Near North, Camden, Old St. Anthony, University and surrounding neighborhoods
mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7893
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby mattaudio » April 29th, 2013, 9:37 am

I hereby propose a settlement which I assume is agreeable to the developer and fully mitigates this concern:
Developer of 301 Walnut buys a half dozen shovels for the owner of 718 Washington.

User avatar
Nick
Capella Tower
Posts: 2996
Joined: May 30th, 2012, 9:33 pm
Location: Loring Park, Minneapolis

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby Nick » April 29th, 2013, 10:38 am

MNdible wrote:And I thought that Nick had given NIMBY the v-----t treatment.
Stay tuned for my upcoming streets.mn post about that...

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4602
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby FISHMANPET » April 29th, 2013, 12:34 pm

If both this and the Caspian's claims are legitimate, then maybe it's time to revisit building codes that are allowing these buildings that are on the edge as far as capacity of snow loads.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5775
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby MNdible » April 29th, 2013, 1:44 pm

You'll notice that both of these buildings are quite old. I'm sure that plays into it. But when you're designing a building, you do need to take into account the building geometry to calculate how snow will drift around it. If you change the building geometry (or add a neighboring building that will effect it) significantly, you'll need to recalc and potentially beef up the structure.

It's no different than having to recalc the structure if you were to change the building use from residential to high-density storage.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4602
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby FISHMANPET » April 29th, 2013, 1:53 pm

So it seems reasonable to me that if a building is significantly going to change the snow load on a neighbor, that the new building should pay to mitigate that in some way. Does current zoning take this into account? Is it even technically a zoning issue, since as the complaint mentions, it's a building code issue?

If there are two legitimate complains about the same exact issue, then maybe there's a flaw in the approval process somewhere?

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5775
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby MNdible » April 29th, 2013, 2:03 pm

As I've suggested elsewhere (and please note that I'm not a lawyer), this seems to me to be a civil matter between two private property owners, and the zoning code shouldn't really be involved in this.

talindsay
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1534
Joined: September 29th, 2012, 10:41 am

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby talindsay » April 29th, 2013, 5:45 pm

Tom H. wrote:So, they're saying that the height differential between the two buildings will cause snow to drift up against the new building, increasing the snow load on the old building?

Follow this argument to its logical conclusion, and you see that all adjacent buildings must either be exactly the same height (or within an inch) or have air gaps between them.

This is a fallacy, as far as I'm concerned. Look at some of the buildings along, say, Michigan Ave in Chicago and you'll see adjacent buildings that differ by a dozen stories. They've managed to not have their roofs collapse.
If the shorter building was *ENGINEERED* for the snow load that its neighbor will put on it, it isn't a problem. If it wasn't, it's a really, really serious problem. Snow is very heavy in Minnesota; ever notice how Minneapolis houses have very steeply-pitched roofs? That's both to get more snow to roll of the roof in the first place, and to substantially strengthen the roof's ability to hold the remaining snow. Houses with shallow-pitched roofs need much stronger and more narrowly-spaced trusses than houses with steeply-pitched roofs. Flat-roofed buildings (i.e., most commercial buildings) have a bigger problem, and especially given that the drifts would put more of the weight on one side of the structure than the other, and potentially keep it there longer (since the new building may also cast a shadow that keeps the snow from melting), it makes perfect sense that this could be an issue. And obviously, it *IS* a city approvals issue, since once the new structure is built the other property owner has no reasonable recourse other than to sue their neighbor to rebuild their roof to handle the higher loads. The city would be negligent not to consider this in their approvals.

Now, with all that said, I have no idea whether it's actually an issue in this case; but at the very least, the people proposing the new building should have to pay for a structural engineer to investigate the neighbor's building and determine whether it will be a problem; and if it will, the new building should certainly have to pay for any changes to mitigate the issue.

Tom H.
Rice Park
Posts: 423
Joined: September 4th, 2012, 5:23 am

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby Tom H. » April 30th, 2013, 10:51 am

I guess I just don't expect to be so big of an issue, for a few reasons:

1) The increased snow-load if likely to be largely distributed very near (within a few feet) the interface with the new building. Being near the edge of the building (and its load-bearing side wall) should help mitigate most of this increased snow-load. Perhaps some snow-load simulations could be useful in determining the likely profile of the snow drifts on this building's roof, with a higher neighbor next door.

2) I'm not exactly sure what bordered this building in the past on that side, but I would imagine that for a building of this age, snow-load due to a taller adjacent building would probably have been a design consideration at the time of its construction. Of course, I'm not an architectural historian, so this could be wrong. It's also worth noting that it might be reasonable to expect systematically higher snow-loads in the future due to wetter winters, but this wouldn't seem to be an issue unique to this particular structure.

Of course, as MNdible mentioned above, this seems like a matter well-suited for a tort suit between the two parties involved, not a zoning / building code dispute brought before the city.

User avatar
woofner
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1329
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:04 am

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby woofner » April 30th, 2013, 11:26 am

talindsay wrote:And obviously, it *IS* a city approvals issue, since once the new structure is built the other property owner has no reasonable recourse other than to sue their neighbor to rebuild their roof to handle the higher loads. The city would be negligent not to consider this in their approvals.
Municipalities are allowed to exercise their police power, but I can't think of any requirement that they proactively seek out situations in which to exercise it. It is only when political pressure is put on them that they enact ordinances to do so. Probably since no one has built any traditional urbanism in the state of Minnesota for the past hundred years it hasn't been an issue, so there's nothing on the books about it. This doesn't mean they're negligent, it just means they haven't yet been pressured to do so. Maybe this will change now that we're not wasting so much space on parking and pointless lawns.
"Who rescued whom!"

talindsay
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1534
Joined: September 29th, 2012, 10:41 am

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby talindsay » April 30th, 2013, 11:45 am

redisciple wrote:
talindsay wrote:And obviously, it *IS* a city approvals issue, since once the new structure is built the other property owner has no reasonable recourse other than to sue their neighbor to rebuild their roof to handle the higher loads. The city would be negligent not to consider this in their approvals.
Municipalities are allowed to exercise their police power, but I can't think of any requirement that they proactively seek out situations in which to exercise it. It is only when political pressure is put on them that they enact ordinances to do so. Probably since no one has built any traditional urbanism in the state of Minnesota for the past hundred years it hasn't been an issue, so there's nothing on the books about it. This doesn't mean they're negligent, it just means they haven't yet been pressured to do so. Maybe this will change now that we're not wasting so much space on parking and pointless lawns.
Heh, your take is a bit cynical but probably accurate. I do hope that we see city ordinances continue and accelerate the gradual shift we've seen towards more urban expectations from the city.

Didier
Capella Tower
Posts: 2418
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 10:11 am
Location: MSP

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby Didier » April 30th, 2013, 9:39 pm

Does this mean Tofu House is screwed?

Silophant
Moderator
Posts: 3768
Joined: June 20th, 2012, 4:33 pm
Location: The Gateway

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby Silophant » July 3rd, 2013, 5:55 pm

As of today, Gold Country, Toppers, and Steady Tattoo were closed for construction. Looks like this will be getting under way pretty soon. Sally's is still open, and I'll probably go down there tonight for a last drink before they close as well. The signs at Gold Country and Toppers said they'd return after construction, while Steady Tattoo's said they'd be reopening on West Bank in September.

min-chi-cbus
Capella Tower
Posts: 3131
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 9:19 am

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby min-chi-cbus » July 3rd, 2013, 6:20 pm

Awesome news, thanks! This is still easily one of the 3 best projects going on in the Twin Cities!

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5775
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby MNdible » July 4th, 2013, 7:17 am

I'm not sure I understand all of the love for this project. Formally, it's pretty good (basically the same as the Station next door). But from the renderings, it looks like the thing is just going to be clad in corrugated metal. That doesn't excite me.

Silophant
Moderator
Posts: 3768
Joined: June 20th, 2012, 4:33 pm
Location: The Gateway

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby Silophant » July 10th, 2013, 5:09 pm

Since my predictions are never ever right, Sally's is still open. My new guess is that the other businesses' leases all ended June 30th, so construction will presumably start before the end of the month. I could be wrong, though.

gpete
Union Depot
Posts: 335
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 9:33 am
Location: Seward, Mpls

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby gpete » July 17th, 2013, 6:48 am

Buried in this MN Daily article, it says that construction will begin on July 26.

http://www.mndaily.com/city/business/20 ... g-students

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4602
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby FISHMANPET » July 22nd, 2013, 11:05 am

I was walking by last week, wanting to stop at Sally's for one last tuna melt with a cup of chicken & wild rice soup, and they were closed already. The signs say they'll be open next summer. Are these apartments planned to open for September 2014?

Silophant
Moderator
Posts: 3768
Joined: June 20th, 2012, 4:33 pm
Location: The Gateway

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby Silophant » July 22nd, 2013, 1:57 pm

I would guess so. July/August to the following August has been the approximate construction timeframe for the other six-story stick student housing buildings around Stadium Village. Although maybe they'll massage the construction order to get Sally's and Goldy's open for as much of the summer as possible.

Tom H.
Rice Park
Posts: 423
Joined: September 4th, 2012, 5:23 am

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby Tom H. » July 29th, 2013, 11:49 am

Workers on site this morning, apparently salvaging re-usable materials. Lots of copper pipes being sorted, cut, and put into bins.

RailBaronYarr
Capella Tower
Posts: 2702
Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm

Re: 301 Walnut (Sally's Building)

Postby RailBaronYarr » July 29th, 2013, 12:55 pm

Who says big developers aren't environmentally conscious??? :)


Return to “Minneapolis - North, Northeast, and Southeast / University of Minnesota”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests