Following last year's collapse of the Sherman Associates proposal to develop a Cub Foods and housing on the US Bank site on Central Avenue in the Holland neighborhood, Sherman and Cub parted ways. However, Cub has continued to express interest in locating a store in the area-particularly if they can get the city to pave the way (and presumably to give them a healthy subsidy while they're at it). Cub and their current developer, Oppidan Development Company, have been looking around for an alternative site, preferably as close to the Central Lowry intersection as possible. The trouble is, there are no large undeveloped parcels in this area so anything they do will require the destruction of significant amounts of existing commercial and residential property.
Despite that fact, Cub appears to have the strong support of Paul Ostrow's office, which has been heavily involved in promoting and facilitating a new Cub proposal. This time around the MCDA is involved as well. Their prime target is now the block between Lowry and 24th Avenue NE on the east side of Central in the Windom Park neighborhood. The MCDA is reportedly now looking at the possibilities of clearing that whole block for Cub or, alternatively, of clearing the rest of the block behind the existing storefronts on Central, closing Polk, and getting the whole next block to the east as well. This would save the commercial strip but end up leaving much of the Cub development protruding far into a residential area. Either option would entail the loss of significant amounts of housing. There are about 23 units of low-cost housing above the commercial spaces on Central and another 19 units of single family homes or duplexes on the rest of the block. The block to the east has approximately 30 single family home and duplex units. The threatened commercial businesses include some longtime Northeast landmarks-B Sharp Music, Tom's Nails, and American Quality Jewelers, plus many newer businesses--including the ethnic merchants now making the street so colorful. A new taqueria and new Caribbean restaurant are now in the works for a couple of the currently unoccupied storefronts on the block. There is a great deal of history on the block--one business had a "speakeasy" in its basement back during prohibition of which many of the fixtures still remain. In all, it is a colorful and interesting block with several very nice multi-story classic old brick buildings all right in the heart of the increasingly vibrant Central-Lowry shopping district. In an attempt to soften the expected neighborhood opposition to the proposal, the developer, with the strong encouragement of the city, commissioned a market study aimed at demonstrating that a Cub Foods at this location--one block from the site of the soon to open Eastside Food Cooperative--would not have a serious impact on the co-op. (Three neighborhoods and close to 700 area households have now invested in the co-op). Even the representative of Cub Foods was reportedly very skeptical of this idea due to the fact that such studies are notoriously unreliable. They are based on so many subjective assumptions that they can easily be made to show practically any conclusion the surveyor (or those paying them) want them to show. In this case the market study showed exactly what the Cub proponents who paid for it wanted-that impacts will be minimal and both stores will do just fine. I'm not going to go into all the questionable assumptions likely to be contained in that market study in this post but�I'm sure the developers got what they paid for. The Windom Park neighborhood group will be hearing from the proponents of the proposal at its meeting on Tuesday, June 17th at 7pm at Pillsbury School Park Addition, 2251 Hayes St.NE. That meeting might be a good opportunity to ask our public officials some questions. For instance: Why are people supposedly so committed to maintaining the uniqueness and diversity of Central Avenue supporting and facilitating proposals that would essentially rip the heart and soul out of the center of the whole area? How will the housing lost be replaced? Will the public have to pay for any of this replacement? What is the best current estimate of the total public subsidy needed for this proposal? At a time when the MCDA is being eviscerated, its residential finance programs terminated, and staff being laid off left and right, why is the agency wasting staff time evaluating completely inappropriate and unrealistic proposals that are unlikely to gain neighborhood support or to be implemented without large city subsidies (which, given our current financial state, are unlikely to be provided)? With a new $1.7 million grocery soon to open a block away and many other grocery shopping options nearby, why is this initiative such a high priority? Why do we need to use our very limited city resources to help out Cub Foods, already the dominant grocery retailer in the region, in their Coke vs. Pepsi style competitive game with Rainbow? Has it been demonstrated that, due to the lack of a Cub in the immediate vicinity, the northeast Rainbow is significantly more expensive than other Rainbows in the metro area? Bruce Shoemaker Holland Neighborhood TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. 2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject (Mpls-specific, of course.) ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
