The Holland neighborhood's meeting on the Cub proposal two weeks ago attracted over 100 neighborhood attendees. A straw poll conducted at the end of the meeting resulted in well over 90% of the attendees indicating that they do not want a Cub Foods at this location on Central AT ALL. However, project proponents, including some city officials, appear to be trying to portray the growing opposition to this proposal as merely some "concerns" regarding traffic congestion and noise which can be mitigated by tweaking the design of the store.
In reality, we are talking about two fundamentally different visions regarding the future of Central Avenue: One is to preserve its historic urban "Main Street" appearance as it evolves into an increasingly vibrant community of new and existing housing and small independent businesses. In many ways Central is starting to become another mini-"Eat Street" featuring a variety of ethnic restaurants, shops, and services. Many recent and upcoming developments around Central are supportive of this vision. Examples include the Holy Land expansion, VOA housing/commercial proposal for 19th and Central, the Patel development, and the New Holland Townhomes, along with a variety of art spaces and new restaurants. A key component of this vision could be the community-owned Eastside Food Co-op, intended to meet many of the recognized needs for a full-service grocery store on Central Avenue. Allowing Central to fill up with big box retailing, generic mega-stores, national fast food franchises, and strip malls would represent a very different vision-one that would strip the Avenue of its uniqueness and historical appeal and turn it into just one more generic strip of corporate chain stores. These are competing--not complementary-visions. There is little evidence to support the idea that big box chain stores help neighboring small retailers. In many ways they do the opposite, increasing a sense of isolation and alienation as people drive into huge parking lots, shop, get back in their cars and leave. Take a look at the urban areas around the big box stores along University Avenue in St. Paul, the Target on West Broadway, Rainbow in Columbia Heights, or the K-Mart/Super Value at Nicollet/Lake. These are not friendly inviting urban streetscapes, especially at night. In contrast, look at those urban streets that do have a sense of community-Nicollet's "Eat Street," Grand Avenue in St. Paul, East Hennepin/St. Anthony, or Central in the vicinity of the Heights Theatre. All are remarkably free of generic big box retailers. At this point Central Avenue is already on the upswing and more and more people are realizing what a unique asset it is-one of the few major urban thoroughfares in Minneapolis that retains a historic feel and hasn't been stripmalled. The city-approved Central Avenue Plan is based on the premise, widely accepted by most engaged community members, that future development on Central Avenue should strive to retain a pedestrian-friendly vibrant urban streetscape promoting local businesses and improved housing. Should Cub prevail we can expect other similar types of development to follow. Last year Walgreen's explored buying up and leveling most of a whole block at Central/Lowry in order to build a larger store with attached drive-through. (Thankfully, that proposal appears to already be derailed due to neighborhood opposition and zoning conflicts). If the whole US Bank site on Central is available for development, what is needed is a community dialogue about how this should occur. A variety of options should be on the table. There may well be the opportunity to develop a substantial amount of new housing and commercial space there in a way that would much better meet community needs than would a Cub Foods. This shouldn't be so difficult--the Holland Neighborhood has already developed a good relationship with US Bank through the development of the New Holland Townhomes on land that was provided by US Bank. I am puzzled why CM Ostrow and perhaps others are seemingly so supportive of the Cub proposal. It is likely to require a big city subsidy for the parking ramp and to replace the housing that would be lost. I thought this had become a discredited model of late--city subsidies for developments that end up with little or no net gain in affordable housing, tearing down existing housing to build new housing...accommodating big box chain stores at the expense of local ambiance. Where is the learning process? It is sort of depressing how much time has to be spent fighting bad development proposals rather than in working for positive community-supportive development here in Northeast. Bruce Shoemaker Holland Neighborhood _______________________________________ 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
