Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Parks, Minneapolis Public Schools, Density, Zoning, etc.
tmart
Union Depot
Posts: 348
Joined: October 6th, 2017, 10:05 am
Location: Expat

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby tmart » December 10th, 2018, 3:40 pm

Yeah that took a nasty turn within the first few (non-quote) paragraphs. Yikes.

Anyone see any responses on the "2040 plan doesn't go far enough" side? So far Councilmember Johnson's blog is the only official comment I've seen that even acknowledges that there were critiques beyond the Red Sign Brigade and other conservatives.

I'm pretty happy with the housing side, but I think it distracted from pretty lackluster policies supporting the mixed-use availability, climate change, and transportation goals. I'm a bit disappointed that the triplex thing drowned out any conversation on those other important subjects. Would love to hear city officials addressing those concerns.

User avatar
Anondson
IDS Center
Posts: 4046
Joined: July 21st, 2013, 8:57 pm
Location: Where West Minneapolis Once Was

Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby Anondson » December 10th, 2018, 3:51 pm

Followed a twitter conversation by @happifydesign and @zacharywefel where each expressed sadness that it doesn’t do enough to break away the system that built our segregation.

https://twitter.com/happifydesign/statu ... 3167226880

I haven’t seen longer form posts or articles however. I’m really hungering to hear from the non-libertarian “didn’t go far enough” side.

User avatar
Bob Stinson's Ghost
Landmark Center
Posts: 204
Joined: January 20th, 2018, 11:36 pm

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby Bob Stinson's Ghost » December 10th, 2018, 5:17 pm

I'm still trying to figure out if it's a real victory, (in the sense that a lot of triplexes will actually be built) or a symbolic victory. At the moment I'm not seeing a horde of investors and developers chomping at the bit to do anything different from what they were already doing.

tmart
Union Depot
Posts: 348
Joined: October 6th, 2017, 10:05 am
Location: Expat

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby tmart » December 10th, 2018, 5:27 pm

I mean, I think one of the real wins of the plan is that the biggest opportunity for housing growth is not from investors and developers, but hopefully homeowners converting/expanding their properties and becoming live-in landlords. As you said, we aren't seeing the people who usually murmur about development talking about triplexes, but I think that's sort of by design. I think consolidation of real estate wealth is something we don't really talk about in the Twin Cities, and should--I mean, without batting an eye we're handing Ryan Co. an entire blank canvas neighborhood in the heart of St. Paul!

That said, it remains to be seen how many of those homeowners actually do expand or become small-operation landlords, and it will definitely be gradual.

It also represents a shift away from the old model, where new housing stock is confined to a few carefully-selected sites in rapidly-gentrifying neighborhoods, and almost exclusively giant controversial developments. It's nice to see the city thinking in terms of more structural, city-wide solutions, and spreading the burden of densification and change evenly throughout the city.

seanrichardryan
Capella Tower
Posts: 3935
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 9:33 pm
Location: Merriam Park, St. Paul
Contact:

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby seanrichardryan » December 10th, 2018, 5:29 pm

Anondson wrote:
December 10th, 2018, 3:06 pm
Now for a skeptical take: Thomas Lifson blogs at The American Thinker, https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/20 ... ality.html

Basically casts shade at everything in ways we’ve come to see from the Red Sign Brigade at Minneapolis for Everyone (Already Here).
And here I thought the Strib comments were bad.
Q. What, what? A. In da butt.

Multimodal
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 667
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby Multimodal » December 10th, 2018, 6:47 pm

tmart wrote:… I think consolidation of real estate wealth is something we don't really talk about in the Twin Cities, and should…

That said, it remains to be seen how many of those homeowners actually do expand or become small-operation landlords, and it will definitely be gradual.
I agree. I think a big part of the reason we don’t see missing middle housing in the Twin Cities is because it’s not big enough for the big developers. They want a whole or half a block to redevelop.

As you said, smaller missing middle housing is more likely to be naturally by the property owner than by a tear down builder. And I think it takes a certain mindset; a mindset that a modern almost-suburban single family homeowner doesn’t have (people who moved to their house because it was an enclave of other SFHowners and was not too “urban”).

Back in the day, people might convert their house into a duplex after the kids moved away, or started a business by adding on to the front of the house to meet up with the sidewalk. Is that allowed anywhere in Mpls?

In any case, it’s unreasonable for anyone to expect that every SFH has the same probability of becoming a triplex, and that they will pop up randomly throughout neighborhoods. It’s much more likely they will pop up in or adjacent to already semi-dense areas such as old streetcar corners or modern transit lines.

User avatar
Bob Stinson's Ghost
Landmark Center
Posts: 204
Joined: January 20th, 2018, 11:36 pm

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby Bob Stinson's Ghost » December 10th, 2018, 6:56 pm

If the majority of added triplex (or coulda been fourplex) units are owner occupied I'm not sure if it will desegregate very much. Owner occupant landlords have pretty broad discretion to decide who lives in the same house with them.

Multimodal
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 667
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby Multimodal » December 10th, 2018, 6:59 pm

Well like I said, it wouldn’t be current SFHowners that would convert to triplexes. Newer owners would presumably be people who wouldn’t be horrified by the Mpls2040 plan and its implications for diversity.

John21
Union Depot
Posts: 328
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:23 am
Location: 38th Street Station

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby John21 » December 10th, 2018, 8:02 pm

In the near term it will probably have the biggest effect on all the empty lots on the northside? Building sfh there doesn’t pencil out right now.

tmart
Union Depot
Posts: 348
Joined: October 6th, 2017, 10:05 am
Location: Expat

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby tmart » December 10th, 2018, 11:54 pm

Multimodal wrote:
December 10th, 2018, 6:47 pm
Back in the day, people might convert their house into a duplex after the kids moved away, or started a business by adding on to the front of the house to meet up with the sidewalk. Is that allowed anywhere in Mpls?
I'm not ready to categorically say nowhere in Minneapolis allows this, but even the much-lauded 2040 is extremely prescriptivist in its land use rules--the residential zones may have gotten a bit less restrictive in terms of types of residences, but they're still single-use residential. We're stuck in this mentality where the city has to foretell the location of every small business; where "complete neighborhoods" are a goal, but we expect people to walk a mile-plus to an arterial road for a gallon of milk; and where "mixed use" is a type of large-scale corporate infill development the city occasionally parcels out, and not something that happens organically in neighborhoods where there are service needs.

BBMplsMN
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 144
Joined: August 21st, 2015, 3:09 pm

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby BBMplsMN » December 11th, 2018, 8:16 am

Here’s the best article I could find on the plan and next steps. And it comes from Portland, Oregon.

https://www.sightline.org/2018/12/10/mi ... g-housing/

User avatar
jtoemke
Landmark Center
Posts: 236
Joined: March 5th, 2015, 8:04 am
Location: Columbus OH

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby jtoemke » December 11th, 2018, 9:02 am

I'm mildly optimistic about seeing more missing middle housing- the continued reduction in required parking is doing a lot to help make buildings in the 4-20 unit range more viable.

Unfortunately things that won't change but have made missing middle more difficult are ADA laws and an ever more stringent fire code that some of our favorite building from the 30s/40s didn't have to navigate. (think elevators, type A v type B units, multiple staircase separated by specified distances)

So builders like the bigger structures because more units means splitting the cost for the elevators/stairs/public areas amongst more parties.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7936
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby mattaudio » December 11th, 2018, 11:01 am

ADA does not regulate accessibility for housing, the Fair Housing Act does. It requires, for smaller projects, that all first-floor units are accessible. If there are no units on the ground floor, that requirement transfers up a floor (elevator time). I'm fairly certain you can build a 3-3.5 story 9-12 unit building with a single central staircase and no elevator. Sprinklering is required, though.

Multimodal
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 667
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby Multimodal » December 11th, 2018, 11:03 am

I suppose this answer isn’t relevant because the zoning is still residential-only, not mixed use, but it seems quite creative:

https://www.rjohnthebad.com/plain-talk/ ... p-building

User avatar
jtoemke
Landmark Center
Posts: 236
Joined: March 5th, 2015, 8:04 am
Location: Columbus OH

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby jtoemke » December 11th, 2018, 2:47 pm

Multimodal wrote:
December 11th, 2018, 11:03 am
I suppose this answer isn’t relevant because the zoning is still residential-only, not mixed use, but it seems quite creative:

https://www.rjohnthebad.com/plain-talk/ ... p-building
Yeah I like that guy, I have seen this before - very helpful.

I guess my point was that it is more difficult, not impossible. You'll note that all units are exactly the same because you can't have anything on the upper floors not available on the first floor.

So again, not impossible - just a bigger design challenge. I'm just saying I get why we see larger buildings.

mamundsen
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1109
Joined: November 15th, 2012, 10:01 am

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby mamundsen » December 11th, 2018, 4:14 pm

Slightly off topic... I'm confused by the following article about Brooklyn Park.

http://www.fox9.com/news/city-of-brookl ... tegic-plan

They are working on a 2025 plan?!?! I thought every city in Metro area was required to do a 2040 plan. I know WBL (where I live) has been working on our 2040 plan. Why is BP only on 2025?

Multimodal
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 667
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby Multimodal » December 11th, 2018, 4:53 pm

mamundsen wrote:Slightly off topic... I'm confused by the following article about Brooklyn Park.

http://www.fox9.com/news/city-of-brookl ... tegic-plan

They are working on a 2025 plan?!?! I thought every city in Metro area was required to do a 2040 plan. I know WBL (where I live) has been working on our 2040 plan. Why is BP only on 2025?
That doesn’t sound like a comp plan, but rather a strategic plan (nothing to do with Met Council).

Edina has had other initiatives recently that are not comp plan plans, like Vision Edina and Living Streets, for example. Vision Edina was kind of our springboard for jumpstarting our comp plan.

mamundsen
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1109
Joined: November 15th, 2012, 10:01 am

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby mamundsen » December 11th, 2018, 7:39 pm

Multimodal wrote:
December 11th, 2018, 4:53 pm
mamundsen wrote:Slightly off topic... I'm confused by the following article about Brooklyn Park.

http://www.fox9.com/news/city-of-brookl ... tegic-plan

They are working on a 2025 plan?!?! I thought every city in Metro area was required to do a 2040 plan. I know WBL (where I live) has been working on our 2040 plan. Why is BP only on 2025?
That doesn’t sound like a comp plan, but rather a strategic plan (nothing to do with Met Council).

Edina has had other initiatives recently that are not comp plan plans, like Vision Edina and Living Streets, for example. Vision Edina was kind of our springboard for jumpstarting our comp plan.
Thanks for the clarification. I didn’t realize it wasn’t the same thing with just a different name.

BBMplsMN
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 144
Joined: August 21st, 2015, 3:09 pm

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby BBMplsMN » December 13th, 2018, 6:39 pm

The New York Times picks up the 2040 discussion.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/13/us/m ... &smtyp=cur

Multimodal
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 667
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Re: Minneapolis 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Postby Multimodal » December 13th, 2018, 9:56 pm

Go, Janne!


Return to “Minneapolis - General Topics and Citywide Issues”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests