urbanMSP

1. Are we at the point where we can spilt the Doran development off to it's own thread.
2. This looks like the stump 20 story version of Galtier Plaza with less glass.
3. I'm with Mr. Shoes on this one. The whole project could have been amazing with two skinnier towers on opposite corners of the block with town homes and street level retail covering the rest of the frontage but everything considered I think this is a fine project that meets the cities goals but not much more.

That south elevation is pretty blah. And I still think the SW corner needs something more active.

I know the idea of housing wrapping the parking ramp across the street has flown the coop...

Was this idea originally floated by the consortium? Look at how much space is between the existing ramp and the sidewalk next time you go by. There's no room for a townhouse there!

This solution has been done before, but better - https://goo.gl/maps/U5Pw3n21roB2

Wrapped ramp, townhomes, a walkable courtyard. And somehow pulled it off without 7-10 different colors.

I'm sure it will get better as it gets refined, but the current proposal feels dated before it makes it off the page. While I don't think any neighborhood should prescribe a "style", it does feel a bit out of sorts with the rehabbed and new properties in the immediate vicinity. It's all better than a parking lot, and some of my dislike is purely aesthetic and not the most objective from that standpoint.

When I am talking about entire urban blocks being used creatively, I'm dreaming (clearly dreaming) of projects like The Mountain and VM in Copenhagen (https://www.architonic.com/en/project/b ... in/5100164). I know the market probably can't support that sort of approach financially, but the current proposal seems like the first thought out of the gate. I'm also really confused by the decision to "open" the pool deck toward the North West, rather than SW or SE. I get having residences facing the parking ramp isn't great, but neither is the "lap pool of perpetual shadow".

Way past time for this to have its own thread.

I know the idea of housing wrapping the parking ramp across the street has flown the coop...

Was this idea originally floated by the consortium? Look at how much space is between the existing ramp and the sidewalk next time you go by. There's no room for a townhouse there!

The "Rampton Apartments" plan was to vacate 20' of the 2nd Street ROW and narrow the roadway, which would have provided the necessary space for the apartment building. I had theorized that this crazy project was only proposed because the city had required some minimum level of investment/development as a condition when it sold that parking ramp years prior. If anyone wants more details on that now-dead (and possibly always infeasible) project, see the locked thread here: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=1370

Following the quiet death of the Rampton proposal, some early renderings for Alatus' tower showed narrow "3-story townhomes" wrapping the ramp, but those were never included as part of their actual project submittals to the city. Nothing is currently proposed to wrap the ramp.

HPC agenda has an update on this. Now 26 stories and slimmer. Looks so much better.

HPC agenda has an update on this. Now 26 stories and slimmer. Looks so much better.

Link?

The base looks fine, but, the tower is still fairly bland and uninspired

It kind of reminds me of some of those older Loring Park apartment and condo towers from the 80's.

materials are all off

materials are all off

Agree. The mid rise portion is ok but the tower is poorly appointed.

It looks like the architects planned for 10 more stories but had to chop it down and instead of redesigning the structure they simply stopped it where they were required. Even a simple crown-type structure would help.

I haven't figured out how I feel about the tower yet. Some of the balconies look a little...precarious? Diving board-y? I like the mid-rise portion a lot, however. It looks like some real high-quality stuff.

We're at the stage of this development where the Heritage Preservation Commission would prefer a heritage parking lot to an actual building.
http://www.mndaily.com/article/2017/10/ ... rcy-holmes

The interesting thing is that the staff report recommends approval, and is pretty sympathetic to the building.
http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 205352.pdf

The minutes report (http://www.minneapolismn.gov/meetings/hpc/WCMSP-205508)
Action: Notwithstanding staff recommendation, the Heritage Preservation Commission denied the certificate of appropriateness to allow a new 26-story residential building, based on the following findings:
1. Does not meet design guidelines requirement 9.9 – The overall height of the buildings shall be compatible with the character area.
2. Does not meet design guidelines requirement 9.10 – Position taller portions of a structure away from neighboring buildings of lower scale.
3. Does not meet design guidelines requirement 10.8 – In the University Avenue Transition Area, the maximum building height should not exceed eight stories.
4. Does not meet the intent of the character area – “The grain elevators should also continue their visual prominence over the rest of the district.”report that

Wasn't 200 Central also denied by the HPC?

So the 40 story tower the next block over is approved but the 25 floor tower is not. Logic.

Not going to go look it up, but my recollection is the same as spearson and my guess is that this will be allowed higher up the chain. Or at least it should be.

Meanwhile, the opposition seems to be centered on magical people with the ability to tell 18 stories from 25 stories while standing on the ground: http://www.mndaily.com/article/2017/10/ ... rcy-holmes

But sure, from the north, the grain elevators will no longer stand slightly taller on the horizon than the GM buildings in front of them and a lot shorter than the existing tower next to them, and a lot shorter than the taller future taller not far away.

I went and looked it up. HPC denied 200 Central, but Zoning and Planning and the full Council both approved it unanimously upon appeal. I don't see any particular reason this would be different.

I went and looked it up. HPC denied 200 Central, but Zoning and Planning and the full Council both approved it unanimously upon appeal. I don't see any particular reason this would be different.

Sweet. Well here's to this flying through the approval process!

Will be interesting to see if NEBL applies any resistance to this. My bet is not, because apartments won't compete with their property values...