Page 3 of 5

Re: Northeast (and Southeast) - General Topics

Posted: June 11th, 2015, 12:12 pm
by twincitizen
On April 21, twincitizen wrote:Does anyone know if the city has any obligation to approve vacation of the alley? Unlike the Site Plan Approval application, which only goes to the Planning Commission, the Alley Vacation application must be approved by the City Council. Any legal experts out there? Could the city technically deny this building by way of denying the alley vacation?
Also just want to point out that I'm a friggin' genius. Assuming the city does not get sued, you're welcome everyone.

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 11th, 2015, 12:19 pm
by grant1simons2
I just hope the C3A zoning happens soon!

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 11th, 2015, 12:26 pm
by Wedgeguy
They put up moratoriums in other areas, this might be a good one to do the same until they get the zoning issues corrected.

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 11th, 2015, 1:15 pm
by twincitizen
With all of the proposed towers in the immediate area, probably not a great idea here. A moratorium on a specific property or very narrow selection of properties would be frowned upon, if not outright illegal.

If the City wants to upzone the area, they should do so. If they want to institute a minimum FAR in all commercial districts (lack of a minimum FAR requirement is the entire issue here!), they should do so immediately. I will probably follow up with some CPED contacts on that very issue, and with CM Bender. Without a minimum FAR in activity centers or Ped Overlay Districts, we will continue to see 1 story buildings like this proposed in other parts of the city (see all of the parking lots available along Lyndale, Hennepin, Nicollet, etc.)

There are obviously many, many areas of the city where single story retail buildings are just fine. More than fine even, as they would represent a major upgrade over parking lots and vacant lots in many places. What we need CPED to do is clearly define the areas where single story retail buildings are not an acceptable development.

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 19th, 2015, 12:58 pm
by Silophant
The alley vacation was rejected by the full council today. Whew.

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 19th, 2015, 1:04 pm
by grant1simons2
Best way to kill a project "imo"

:roll:

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 19th, 2015, 2:08 pm
by Wedgeguy
Now the city need to get their ducks in order for what they want, what the neighborhood wants, and find common ground and put it on paper so that developers have a standard as to what is really required to participate in this part of town.

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 19th, 2015, 2:12 pm
by twincitizen
Or just adopt a minimum FAR (floor area ratio) in more zoning districts, or in more "activity centers" to ensure that something like this is never proposed again.

There is no minimum FAR in the C2 district (and presumably C1 as well). That should probably be looked at.

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: July 9th, 2015, 8:43 am
by twincitizen
Was just "driving" around the area in Street View.

At the very least, whatever gets built here should render this billboard useless: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.988899, ... 312!8i6656 (i.e. minimum of 2 stories)

Y'know, looking at the rest of this triangular block, it would be pretty nice to save the rest of the commercial structures there today. I mean, none are remarkable or anything, but probably don't need to be torn down anytime soon either. They all appear to be pretty serviceable for continued commercial use. Whatever gets built on the 420 Hennepin property should act like it's the last thing that will get built on this block for a while. Like eventually the rest of the block could be redeveloped, but there's no reason any of the existing buildings need to come down today.

Once Superior Plating 1 & 2, US Bank site, presumably someday the Wells Fargo half block are all developed, that puts this site in line to potentially be something pretty substantial. Not necessarily a tower, but something worthy of its location. Something at least on the scale of the Aveda building or Red20 (4-6 stories)

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: July 9th, 2015, 7:27 pm
by mplser
I agree that the rest of the buildings on this block should probably be preserved (with the exception of the one with the billboard)

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 5th, 2017, 7:39 am
by hamdog

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 5th, 2017, 8:28 am
by Silophant
Cool! I wonder if they had been planning for this to be condos for however long or if this is a quick reaction to the recently changed liability laws.

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 5th, 2017, 10:19 am
by spearson
Any chance that this will make for a substantial development? Irregular blocks like this can make for a unique building. 20 stories would be nice even.

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 5th, 2017, 10:52 am
by MNdible
I'm thinking that even something in the 8-12 story range could be pretty dynamic here. Squeezing an efficient parking garage layout on this irregular site could be a real challenge.

Do people have any thoughts on the future of the 416 Hennepin building? It looks to be a potentially historic storefront building that we should maybe think about before demo'ing. Dates to 1907. (The 416 property also includes the surface parking lot next to Whitey's.)

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 5th, 2017, 11:48 am
by mattaudio
Flatiron on one corner, expanded Holiday-White Castle-Drive Thru-Car Wash motorplex on the other corner. #MAGA

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 5th, 2017, 12:16 pm
by bapster2006

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 5th, 2017, 1:04 pm
by MNdible
Interesting that the write-up in that presentation says 11 floors of condos over commercial, but the rendering definitely shows 10 floors total.

The design is a little underwhelming in the way it addresses its flatironness.

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 5th, 2017, 1:19 pm
by Nathan
I'm not unhappy about this at all.

I like the shape and more cohesive use of materials, that said if it's cement board, that's upsetting, but a cream brick would look nice.

I like the way the balconies are incorporated into the structure as well. Especially at the Hennepin and central angle.

I agree there could be better ground floor uses, but it appears that space will have some activation.

I honestly doubt changing the architect would give variety in the style... just me.

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 5th, 2017, 4:17 pm
by Blaisdell Greenway
Working with City of Lakes land trust for 20% of units to be an "approachable" cost is a win. Still pretty high approachable cost at ~ $185 per square foot, though the "market" cost units are $300+ PSF. Is that where the DT condo market is right now?

Re: 420 E Hennepin Ave

Posted: June 5th, 2017, 4:50 pm
by grant1simons2
It's not about the style. It's principle. Should an entire area be built by a singular firm in a small era ? This isn't a small town.