urbanMSP

The new renderings that are out are very well done! Thankfully they got rid of the spaceship that was the public art piece for something a bit more approachable.

Damn this looks so good.

The taller portion looks talky nice and the shorter sections which I worried would be kinda blah look to be finished really nicely.

This might be my new favorite proposal.

Terrific looking building. Talking to some PP residents this weekend, the reception for this is mixed, but there is a real discussion happening and the 'parking at all costs' folks seem more isolated if not still vocal. Adding the grocery store in the link and the convenience of it seems to be helping people accept bigger developments on University.

The only thing I don't like about beside 17 stories being a bit much, is the setback white building with only one? floor at street level. I would have out a few floors right up to street there and then setback.

IDK why, but several story buildings - like 3-4-5 right close to sidewalk and street seem to work better for street appeal. I think of Snebly compared to other parts of Snelling where buildings setback. Where the traditional buildings on aerterial street sruvived and are jammed up to sideawakk also to seem to be the more appealing stretches of these streets.

This post from T-Rex Cookie indicates that they're not necessarily being kicked out.

Many of you have heard the rumors. Here is the latest article about what is coming.

We will keep you posted on this development! Meanwhile we are open to ideas on what T-Rex Cookie should do during this build. Our theme song of late is by The Clash - Should I Stay Or Should I Go

It's a nice design. There's a lot of variation of materials and volume, that's reminiscent of the Montage (Nye's) project. In the most broad sense, I like the contrast between the masonry A&A building and the glassier tower. But I also like that there's been attention to detail, the windows in the tower have mullions that call back to the industrial A&A building. With renderings like this, I'm kinda baffled they only showed sketches in their planning commission submission, this project looks great in these images.

The one issue I have is an echo to Karen's comments. I don't like how the lower buildings at the Bedford St. intersection aren't flush to the street. That it steps back only compounds the issue. University Avenue is so wide, I think it's unfortunate that those buildings don't move forward to the lot line in order to give the street a more closed in, urban feel. What looks like a strip of random grass in the renderings isn't going to accomplish much, even if they landscape it or put in a BMP or something.

Could the setback be a shade thing? There's something to be said for a closed in urban feel, but on the other hand I think plopping a blocklong six-story building flush with the south side of university would make this stretch a lot darker in the winter.

I am also a fan of a consistent, tight street front along the sidewalk, but our redesign of University does not help this cause. I can see why developers are basically forced to do this. You have a 6 foot sidewalk, maybe with a spindly tree or a lamppost and then two 12 foot travel lanes with not insignificant traffic counts.

University is extremely unfriendly to walk or sit along... pretty sad for a street that was only redone 6ish years ago. I was at the newly opened Hodges Bend at 2700 University this evening and they will have porch seating in a few weeks on the corner of University. I can only imagine how loud it will be when 18 wheelers roll by every few minutes only feet away, nothing but a concrete gutter to separate.

I am also a fan of a consistent, tight street front along the sidewalk, but our redesign of University does not help this cause. I can see why developers are basically forced to do this. You have a 6 foot sidewalk, maybe with a spindly tree or a lamppost and then two 12 foot travel lanes with not insignificant traffic counts.

University is extremely unfriendly to walk or sit along... pretty sad for a street that was only redone 6ish years ago. I was at the newly opened Hodges Bend at 2700 University this evening and they will have porch seating in a few weeks on the corner of University. I can only imagine how loud it will be when 18 wheelers roll by every few minutes only feet away, nothing but a concrete gutter to separate.

Agree with this. I'm sure that end location is going to target a full service restaurant. This set back allows a good amount of patio seating while not being blasted in the face with exhaust.

On the contrary, going flush with the rest of the block and adding a beer garden in the back would be nice alternative that you don't see very often in newer spaces, or much at all in the twin cities.

I hear this. But pulling buildings back from the street only makes it feel wider and less safe, compounding the problem.

There ought to be design solutions for a corner restaurant space (e.g. wide doors that can be left open for warm days, nice looking bollards to prevent a Buildings In The Way situation), to create a safe outdoor patio feel without compromising the urban feeling of the street.

If you support this project and live in Prospect Park please consider sending an email to the PPA Community Outreach Coordinator Jessica (jessica at prospectparkmpls dot org) and/or attend one of the meetings listed by exiled_antipodean. The comments received so far have been numerous and mostly negative. The next meeting is tomorrow May 3rd at the Textile Center at 6:30pm and will consist of a general overview followed by public input. I expect a large anti crowd to be present (someone has put up flyers around the neighborhood mentioning that the tower will be taller then the Witches Hat and asking people to attend). The vote on whether to support this project or not will occur on May 15th at 7pm in the PPA office. Positive comments at either meeting or via email would be very helpful in passing a motion of support or at least adopting a neutral position.

Large meeting of the PPA land use committee voted something like 67-35 to approve the MOU with Vermillion, and therefore add the neighborhood's support to the project when it goes to Planning Commission. You'd never have predicted this result if you read the local neighborhood email list.

67-35? How many people are on this committee?

102

Heh.

The revision of the PPA bylaws a couple of years ago replaced the former standing committees with defined membership with the city-recommended practice that any resident, business owner, can attend and vote in a committee.

Typically the Land Use committee does not get 102 people, normally 10-20. But much interest in the project, so membership ballooned for the night to over 100. This point came up, when a vocal local whose name is an anagram of ranTi, said that the "standing members" of the Land Use committee should be seated up the front. Land Use chair and PPA president had to explain this to her.

Planning commission recommends to approve.

http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 211953.pdf

Planning commission recommends to approve.

http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 211953.pdf

This development is both apartments and condos, correct?

Planning commission recommends to approve.

http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 211953.pdf

This development is both apartments and condos, correct?

Yes!

Planning commission recommends to approve.

http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 211953.pdf

This development is both apartments and condos, correct?

Yes!

Oh nice, I would totally buy a condo here!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk