urbanMSP

I went over to the library to read the locked Finance & Commerce article about this project's presentation to the CoW. Sounds like they pushed back pretty hard on the idea of having ground-floor parking and a curb cut to 4th, so all hope is not yet lost.

I hate to be the guy that thinks everything should be taller, but if this project was even just 5 stories higher, i think that would really help break up this stretch of buildings.

I got a notice of a public hearing regarding this project. They're now proposing a 342 unit residential building. Hearing is Monday, March 11 at 4:30, room 317 at City Hall.

Any further details? Probably about 30 stories with that many units? Hopefully retail frontage as well.

Up thread it said when it was 345 units it’d be 25 stories.

They definitely need to have retail footage. With all of the apartments in that area, I wonder if a CVS, Walgreens, or even a target would do well in this area.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hm, looks like I never updated this thread when they last presented to the DMNA. IIRC, it was 25 stories, with aesthetic lighting kinda similar to 365 Nicollet and an outdoor amenity area covering some of the ramp rooftop. They did add a ~1000 sq ft retail space on 4th, but were still insisting on needing the curb cut on 4th for their loading area. I guess we'll see the what's in the final application tomorrow.

A small convenience store or coffee shop or something of that nature would be much appreciated here. I hate how desolate that LRT Station is. Really though, this entire parking ramp lobby should've been retail space: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9753583 ... 312!8i6656 Huge fail allowing that ramp without retail in the lobby area.

Really though, the only thing that can actually save this terribly desolate concrete hellscape is a development on the MSFA plaza block (i.e. on top of the underground parking ramp beneath the LRT Station). Unfortunately we probably killed any chances of that happening by allowing the pedestrian bridge (which itself could've included a tiny retail space built into the elevator lobby)

Here’s your plans:
http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/www/gro ... 217523.pdf

Lobby on the corner, retail in the back, here I am just very very confused.

I don't disagree, but to play devil's advocate we have CVS closing downtown stories, Nicollet Mall as empty as ever and even suburban shopping malls hemorrhaging stores. Why should we expect developers to be betting on downtown Minneapolis retail right now?

Wow. This got ugly enough to be built on nicollet.
Lost all architectural dimension, any interest it had in the roof area is gone... it's about to be one of the most visible apartment buildings in the city... and it's generic af, doesn't even have decent retail. Not my favorite.

'tis indeed now quite the turd. (Left side is from here: https://www.ryancompanies.com/news/ryan ... ntown-east)

Lobby on the corner, retail in the back, here I am just very very confused.

What? The retail space is dead in the middle of the 4th St frontage.

What? The retail space is dead in the middle of the 4th St frontage.

Ah yes, continuing the proud tradition of the Wells Fargo twins, putting retail space mid-block and not on either corner, and then wondering why restaurants struggle. Seriously why do the new Wells Fargo buildings have residential units on the non-lobby corners and retail in the middle of the blocks...who was in charge of this?

Like I said above, you can't be too mad at this apartment building for not being able to provide much retail, with it's small footprint & complicated egress & parking issues. The parking ramp is really to blame for screwing up this block. The parking ramp lobby corner is really where retail space should've gone.

EDIT: I can't believe they are proposing a ground-level outdoor pet run...like in the little grass area adjacent to the building THAT is where the retail space could/should go, tied into the ramp's elevator lobby

EDIT2: Another thing that would help redeem this area is putting this traction power substation underground and/or integrating it into a building on this corner: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9753107 ... 312!8i6656 Seems like a great location for a skyway-connected hotel or something like that. Retail/lobby frontage would almost certainly be on Chicago and not at the corner, due to the tracks, but that would still be a vast improvement from the current situation

That parking ramp really was a mistake in so many ways. 3/4 block hostile frontages on Park and Chicago, and a full block of hostile frontage along 3rd St. And as you note we're only hopeful for meh frontage facing the stadium/park/4th St.

Opus should sue them for stealing the 365 design. But hey, the trees got a lot greener, so there's that...

Some of the details in the ground floor plan really are baffling. It's frustrating that Ryan built this big new downtown park and then across multiple buildings turned down the opportunity to create a ring of retail spaces around it. Add to that the insistence on building more parking when your building is literally being built on a huge parking ramp. This tower is certainly a net positive, but there are some big missed opportunities here.

When you look at the entire Downtown East project in total, it's been a tremendously ambitious undertaking. But somehow when it came down to a lot of the details, Ryan lost their nerve.

I wish it was unsurprising how buildings are so regularly built with terrible street interactions in this year. Especially the ones adjacent to public gathering spaces. The new city office building is a possible deviation from our history.

I went to the planning commission hearing, and made a meagre attempt at asking the commission to push back on the design and curb cuts. No dice, unfortunately. I was disappointed that at least a couple commissioners asked for pedestrian improvements to the 1501 Johnson St apartments (the weird teardrop lot in the armpit of the highway ramp by the Quarry), but nothing for this project.

This was my first time speaking at a planning commission hearing; perhaps there's a more effective strategy I could have used (advice welcome), and I could have been more prepared. One of the commissioners assured me after the meeting that they had a long discussion at a previous meeting about the two curb cuts, and said that they don't really have a legal framework to require things like inset balconies.

I talked to the team from Ryan on the way up to the meeting, and suggested that such a highly visible building, two blocks from their HQ, should look as nice as possible. As-is, this thing has a Churchill vibe; monolith with balconies sticking out and a poor street presence.

Video of the hearing is here (this project starts at 1:16 or so): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LE0MIEtkdTo