Like a number of others I attended the last meeting of the Implementation Committee.
I stayed through the two votes. I've been to a number of these meetings, presentations by architects, an afternoon with two architects from Architectural Alliance and more. I have also read some background information going back to 1989 when this process began. There are some concerns I have and some history behind this process that may be germane. I believe in the importance of this new library as a civic statement. Having said that, a concern of mine for some time is the expectations we may have for this building. Minneapolis has a well documented predilection for tearing down buildings. One of those buildings was the library farther south on Hennepin that preceded the one we have presently. I like to think I have a reasonable aesthetic sense. I think high expectations are good. I am also practical. I fear we may try to make up for all the sins of the past with this one step. If the decision of the Implementation Committee is to build on the south block, it is not unreasonable to put expectations on the developer of the north block for residential housing. During the recent mayoral campaign, Lisa McDonald, again and again, iterated the philosophy of Richard Riley, Mayor of Savannah. In essence, it was a guiding philosophy of his that no thing that was not beautiful would be built in the city. Lisa says it much better than I. One thing that should come out of this is some way to insure we don't let junk be built in the city. We have all manner of zoning regulation, too many or wrong, some believe and I cannot entirely disagree. If we can do that why not go one step further. Of course then we get into subjectivity. All the same I believe this thought may have merit. Now I will segue into some historical info. In 1993 a blue ribbon commission did a site analysis of nearly a dozen downtown locations. Not that this commission is necessarily the final or best arbiter of these matters but when they ranked blocks the south block was tied with the Powers block as the third most desirable site behind the Physicians & Surgeons block and the Ritz block. The north block was ranked seventh of the final eight. The deliberations of the '93 committee were guided by previous studies in 1989 and '92 done by Ellerbe Beckett, Faegre and Benson, etc. As far as I can tell there were no members of library staff on that board. I am not certain as to Library Board members though I did not see any I recognized as office holders. There were representatives of the Planning Dept and MCDA. The committee looked at a number of 16 factors from to library mission, to function and civic image. They gave different weights to all the factors. The south block was preferred over the north block in every category but two and those had a weight of one out of a possible four. The north block outranked the south block in access to LRT by a slight margin. This leads me to believe that at that time Washington Av was seen as a likely LRT corridor. Their has been an attempt I think to denigrate the opinions of the staff and the Library Board by subtly, and not so subtly, implying they are inflexible. I think that may be a bad rap. Not all of the ideas put forth by the staff and Board are entirely theirs. They conducted focus groups, they interviewed users of the library, and they applied their collective years of experience in Library Science, an actual honest to g-d professional field, just like architecture. Furthermore every member of the Library Board resides in the city of Minneapolis and only if one were deaf, dumb, and blind could one not be aware of preservation issues and the desire to create a grand civic building. Honestly, I believe they probably have an even greater desire than some others in seeing this library be a great building. This is the culmination of 13 years of study, dashed hopes and false starts. And just as the blue ribbon committee of 1993 weighed different factors I think we dishonor staff by not giving their opinions greater weight. I am one who argued strenuously for a north block site in a Saturday afternoon meeting with architects from Architectural Alliance. I walked into the meeting on Wednesday thinking north block. When the meeting was over I was not so sure anymore. I had come to see how much my previous opinion had been guided by emotion rather than reason. I understand well the desire to be on the north block. Undoubtedly it will be a more visible location. There is a theory of building though that suggest that the partially obscured or sometime observed site affords greater enjoyment. I love the river. I think the idea of a view would be great from the north block but i seriously wonder how much of a view there will be. Right now from the second floor of the library you are only at mid tree level in the leafless winter. You would need to be on the fourth floor to see over the trees across Washington and I don't believe you would ever be able to see actual water from the proposed plans. As to be surrounded by tall buildings that will shut out light, I doubt any people have actually sat outside the library for 365 days to see what exposure to the sun there is even now. The other day at 11:30 when I entered the library from Hennepin the whole southern side of the building including the first floor was awash in sunlight. It was also apparent that the sun very soon after would be shut out by tall buildings in the core. If the library is built on the north block, buildings on the south block may block southern sun, especially in the winter when the sun is low in the sky. And I might add, when it is most necessary. I am guessing that the south block will afford greater sunlight. As to visiblity. Imagine driving north on Washington and just as you are passing the old Fed building you glance to your left. You see a magnificent building. If it were I and I was just passing through town I would find a way to get back to see what that building was. Assuming we go ahead and remake Hennepin Avenue into a two way street that will be easy, though I may cut someone off in traffic. And then I'm into the strip of theatres along Hennepin. A number of people have suggested that a new library on the north block will be an exclamation point at the end of the mall. To my way of thinking we've had one since Reliastar, formerly NWNL, hired Minochu Yamasaki to build their headquarters. Those arches are the exclamation point that our city must never give up no matter how inconvenient floor plans etc from the '60's become in this new century!!! Before I close what I know has been a lengthy diatribe I would plead with others on the list to write less in cliches which I don't believe advance discussion. I mean nothing personal about this. My least favorite at this point is "think outside the box". I urge us to put our collective heads together, think outside the box and come up with a replacement Cheers and have an especially great weekend. Tim Connolly Downtown Resident __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
