urbanMSP

Update on Malcolm Yards food hall project: The city has decided that the food hall has to be considered a shopping center instead of a restaurant which will require different zoning and this has led the Met council to require that an environmental review be preformed on the site. The end result is that there will be at least a nine month delay.

That seems like an odd trigger for environmental review.

Exhibit 904,208 in the costs that asinine zoning laws impose on redevelopment.

Anyone have any information on the Green on Fourth? any speculation/information on a groundbreaking date, or has that already broke ground?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The developers are aiming to close by end-of-year. Standard caveat: closings with multiple sources are complex, and schedules can shift by a few months.

The order of construction in this area, based on CPED submisssions is...?

1. The Link/Rise, 2. Senior housing at Uni-Malcolm, 3. Aeon Affordable, 4. The Green, 5. Malcolm Yards Food Hall

Do I have that right?

That was the order of CPED submissions, but given the frequency of delays for affordable projects, it won't surprise me if the Food Hall moves up the construction order.

I would move green on fourth up to 2 since that is suppose to start in January.

https://twitter.com/timberlandptnrs/sta ... 6020566019

Last I heard the senior housing project is scheduled to start spring/early summer.

I would move green on fourth up to 2 since that is suppose to start in January.

https://twitter.com/timberlandptnrs/sta ... 6020566019

Last I heard the senior housing project is scheduled to start spring/early summer.

Thanks, I must've just missed this going through the approvals. I walked down 4th on Thursday and saw that there did seem to be some construction prep going on. Folks in a pick-up truck with hi-viz vests looking around and talking in the middle of the site.

I wasn't sure where to post this, but has anyone else heard about the U of M transitway being moved north to the railroad yard to make room for Prospect Park development? A quick glance at Google Maps and it appears it could run alongside the tracks and go under 280 and then quickly veer over to the pre-existing bridge over the railroad yard.

http://www.mndaily.com/article/2017/12/ ... transitway

Eyeballing it, it actually looks like it could shorten the travel distance through there.

Eyeballing it, it actually looks like it could shorten the travel distance through there.

I agree. I think it's also worth noting that the U of M won't pay for it. They said the city and developers would have to fit the bill. I think the space could make for a great linear park or Greenway maybe with a small road?

I'm just curious where they would move the west end to - line it up with 6th St, 25th Ave, extend it all the way to Oak, etc. And I'd guess it'd be the final nail in the coffin of Granary Road.

As long as there's room for my fantasy Maroon LRT Line, I'm good

Anything new in here?

http://www.tdtmpls.com/news/2018/1/2/10 ... spect-park

For anyone who might be interested I have attached below a planning framework document done by Prospect Park in December intended to inform the 2040 comprehensive plan update.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/6i2nqyx6cat81 ... 0.pdf?dl=0

Some highlights:

• Granary Road starting at 8th street on the west side going along the railroad tracks before crossing the rail yard east of Malcolm to connect with Kasota ave. Map on page 34. This bridge would then double as the bridge for the Grand rounds missing link.

• Transitway relocation further north along railroad tracks starting at the end of an extended 25th Ave SE. Not sure if the idea is for the transitway and granary to share roadway or run adjacent.

• Changing Essex St SE into a two way street.

• Bikeway system expansion. See map on page 35

• Calls for a mixed used employment intensive area north of the current transitway (see map page 37) with residential being allowed only after a minimum FAR of 1.0 for non residential uses has been met. By right maximum FAR of 2.5 and height of 80 feet (with adjustments to both being allowed as conditional uses). Full description of proposed zoning page 25.

Thanks for sharing. Prospect Park/Tower Hill is the smartest neighborhood in MSP in terms of planning for the future. Instead of opposing changes and losing, they chose instead to better shape those changes and improve their surroundings. Smart NIMBYism.

Yeah, nobody can say they don't support development in their "neighborhood" because of where the boundaries for PP are drawn. Maybe if all of the SFH-zone of PP was zoned R4, developers would still prefer the brownfield sites across University Ave, and my belief is moot. But I have a hard time believing there aren't rundown homes that would make for good townhome, 4-plex, even 3-4 story apartment building redevelopment sites. There are many areas south of University closer to Green Line stations, with better access to the river and the West Bank/Cedar-Riverside by bike and bus, and they shouldn't be off-limits.

Obviously from the perspective of "upzone everything" then PPNA's plans fall short, but in a lot of ways this is exactly what I wish other neighborhoods (and the cities as a whole) would do. Almost uniquely, they've managed to have a serious conversation about which parts are worth preserving and which parts are okay to sacrifice, and to codify that distinction in a way that's transparent for developers and leaves plenty of room for growth.

Well the thing is, most neighborhoods don't have a giant brownfield zone directly across the street from them to direct growth to, which is why most neighborhoods don't end up having this conversation in the first place. It's also *extremely* convenient that the neighborhood's serious conversation concluded that the majority-single family home zone was the one worth preserving. It's not hard to envision a different plan that said north of University was a better spot for, say, more intensive commercial, office, and dense light industrial (to keep and encourage jobs in a transit-heavy location) rather than mixed-use with a heavy focus on residential (particularly nearer University) and south of University is where residential infill and redevelopment should occur. I'm not saying the plan and market aren't giving PP jobs and light industrial, but there's certainly stuff left on the table here.

Signature Cafe closed at some point.