Page 12 of 41
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 19th, 2016, 3:54 pm
by SteveXC500
Hell yes, no parking ramps!
It's in the planning stages, as noted in the article. I know they are working to decide how much parking will be needed. Ramps are obviously expensive, so they could potentially build a smaller one, but research was ongoing (last I heard) regarding expectations for number of fans driving vs. transit.
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 20th, 2016, 7:55 am
by nate
I live in the neighborhood, and I know this idea in heresy to most of my neighbors, but parking really is quite easy to come by on most residential streets. I would rather have people parking there in game days then having a giant ramp that eats up developable land and is underutilized most of the time.
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 20th, 2016, 10:10 am
by Mdcastle
But it's not me.
What? Really? Who on this forum besides us two regularly comments on Strib articles?
I didn't see this one but I do regularly comment on Strib articles, using the same username as here.
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 20th, 2016, 11:12 am
by David Greene
Anyone know if there are any streetcar rails still under there?
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 20th, 2016, 6:33 pm
by Mdcastle
Ah yes, the classic argument that absolutely any investment in transit, biking or walking is nothing less than an all-out war on the mode of transportation that would still receive essentially all of our government's transportation investment. The horror!
Reading the comments. "Yankee69" is a troll, right? Can't be real.
Did I miss it? I didn't see anywhere in the article where they were talking about investing in transit, biking, or walking, just about making it more difficult for people driving cars due to not building parking at a major regional amenity and banning drive-thrus in Minneapolis.
Also, I'm not sure I'd characterize it as "trolling". Whether or not "Yankee69" is a poster here, sh/e does not hold opinions that are uncommon outside the city and outside this forum
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 20th, 2016, 8:14 pm
by David Greene
That's frightening. Have you actually read some of Yankee69's stuff?
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 20th, 2016, 8:17 pm
by David Greene
Did I miss it? I didn't see anywhere in the article where they were talking about investing in transit, biking, or walking
Already done.
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 20th, 2016, 9:20 pm
by Mdcastle
That's frightening. Have you actually read some of Yankee69's stuff?
I hadn't noticed him or her while I've been on the comments section before, just what s/he wrote in the linked article, so anything beyond that I haven't read.
As for the comments on that particular article: S/he kind of writes in an abrasive way, but some of his or her thoughts: Light Rail is a waste of money, there's a lot of criminals in the city, we need more parking, aren't exactly unique to him or her. Although I personally support Light Rail I know a lot of people that either don't care or oppose it. Note the number of Strib commentators that say it's waste of money every time an article on Light Rail come up. They can't all be trolls. Similarly I know people who won't / don't like to go into the city because of the perception of crime or the difficulty in driving and parking.
At the same time, the comment about people should be in cars instead of walking to the pharmacy seemed over the top, and I don't know anyone that thinks that way.
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 21st, 2016, 10:36 pm
by cooperrez
I read Yankee69's comments as jokes. I know there are many people who think that way, but the delivery felt more like satire. On the other hand, maybe people think if it works for Trump it'll work for them.
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 22nd, 2016, 7:38 am
by Mdcastle
That's another possibility. Strong viewpoints and sarcasm can come across as identical online.
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 22nd, 2016, 1:39 pm
by RailBaronYarr
I'm surprised no one has posted the full S9 site plan proposal.
https://www.stpaul.gov/sites/default/fi ... lans-2.pdf
I'll echo the general positive sentiment of other posters. The scale of the plaza/square between the stadium and University is much better than the Downtown East park IMO. I know it's conceptual, but I really think the proposed right of way widths, particularly the 90' ROW for the new E/W street, are too big and/or totally mis-allocate space. 4 thru-lanes with on-street bike lanes for the E/W street is a joke. This whole sub-neighborhood should be a place that pedestrians feel comfortable crossing the street wherever and whenever. In any case, the designers definitely seem to get it in general, but streets make up 23.2% of the area here, with private development only totaling 33% of the site. Given the tax-free nature of the stadium itself (and I'd assume the parks/plazas, right?) and the proximity to the GL/A-Line the city should push to make these streets narrower than the proposal to maximize development potential.
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 22nd, 2016, 1:58 pm
by mamundsen
I'll agree that none of the new streets should be 4 lanes. I would hope for 2 + left turn lanes.
Did anyone else notice that it seems like slide 11 has some mislabeling? Both the location of the corners and the #s seem off. Ooops! haha.
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 22nd, 2016, 2:54 pm
by Nathan
Hmmmmm... does it appear that the drawing on page 32 gives us an idea of what the roof is going to look like? It's strange that they would add those wavy grid lines to it for no reason.
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 22nd, 2016, 6:25 pm
by KML_1981
Renderings of new stadium shown to some politicos tomorrow at 430pm. Released to public on wednesday.
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 23rd, 2016, 12:23 pm
by seanrichardryan
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 23rd, 2016, 3:12 pm
by Didier
I'm obviously biased in this discussion, but every new development about the stadium makes Betsy Hodges look worse and worse.
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 23rd, 2016, 3:15 pm
by HuskyGrad
http://www.twincities.com/2016/02/23/mi ... t-to-city/
Team owners would like construction to begin around June 1, but some councilors are concerned they don't have enough information to vote on the proposal responsibly.
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 23rd, 2016, 9:42 pm
by MattW
I'm obviously biased in this discussion, but every new development about the stadium makes Betsy Hodges look worse and worse.
Agreed. It seems she made a decision based on premise then refused to even consider the input of her citizens, staff or council members.
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 23rd, 2016, 10:19 pm
by VAStationDude
Minneapolis voters favoring more stadium subsidies is laughable. Especially for a sports league marginally more than women's pro basketball whose biggest stars are either too old, too soft or too short to make a lucrative living overseas.
Re: Major League Soccer Stadium
Posted: February 23rd, 2016, 11:15 pm
by Didier
Agreed. It seems she made a decision based on premise then refused to even consider the input of her citizens, staff or council members.
Particularly noteworthy, I think, is the team's apparent earnestness about really making this stadium an asset to the neighborhood. If everything comes together as hoped for with the new street grid and non-stadium developments, this is a real game-changer for Midway.
From reading the accounts of how this all went down, it seems pretty clear that the team wanted very little from Minneapolis. Here's Jacob Frey discussing the informal negotiations:
I thought at the very least it was important to see what their best and final offer was. I don’t think we ever got to that point, but certainly they were able to sweeten the deal beyond the initial basic boilerplate. Initially, they said they wanted a full property tax break and they wanted a sales tax break for their construction fees. Subsequently, they said they were willing to do a property tax freeze.
"In other words they would continuously pay the $300 thousand that we currently get in taxes and going forward the tax breaks would not be in perpetuity. They were willing to make an effort to have a LEED Certified building, to have both minority and community/zip code hiring. They were willing to have their players coach our youth of color in the city. They were willing to have the area where the stadium would have sat to be written into the downtown food and liquor tax district. And that was just the beginning - after just a few conversations. I’m not sure how much further they were willing to go, but clearly there was a strong desire to be in that location.”
Seeing what's happening in lowly Midway, you have to wonder what would have happened if Hodges so much as took the proposal seriously.