Bill Dooley wrote: Madeline makes a great point. Too many lofts jammed together and Minnepolis will begin to look the the concrete jungles of New York and Chicago. I prefer the lofts scattered throughout the various neighborhoods such as the ones on 26 and Nicollet and 38th St. and 23rd Av
Madeline Douglass wrote: Perhaps if one has megabucks and a view of the Mill Ruins Park, a downtown loft would seem great, but if you have whole sections of the city that are lofts, lofts and more lofts you've got a glut of too much of one type of structure, and many vacancies... And not enough diversity, no GREEN space, and no room for such things as art studios, legacy industries, a hardware store, a grocery store, a school, etc. Nick Frank responds: I think we need some areas in this city that are more concetrated in order to get a critical mass to drive service and retail business along with mass transit. People should be able to choose to live in a area that is slightly more reminicent of NYC than the neighborhoods of Minneapolis. Besides we are nowhere near that kind of density yet and there is no way anyone is going to mistake anywhere in downtown Minneapolis for Manhattan anytime soon. I'd actually encourage more dense infill within the neighborhoods in addition to the higher concentration downtown but most neighborhoods won't allow density to be scattered throughout as Bill suggests. If you have any suggestions on how to change that I'd be very interested. I'm not sure I follow the logic that there would be a glut of lofts and vacancies would ensew. Would you say that there is a glut of single family homes in Minneapolis of which there are far more than loft units? Have vacancies resulted? Demographics are moving the direction of condos and townhouses in general with baby boomers and young professionals, etc. and the market is responding. A 39 story highrise called the Carlyle with prices from $250K up opened it sales office on Saturday at 3rd Ave S. and 1st St. and more than two-thirds of the 300 units were reserved by 3:30 that afternoon. I've never heard of a single family development that recieved such a response. I don't think we need to worry about massive vacancies in these projects at this point. Also downtown is nowhere near fully developed and there is plenty of room for all of the things that Madeline mentions. In fact I would say downtown is far more likely to get many things like a grocery store due to the housing boom. The green space issue has as much to do with the city and county road/sidewalk improvements as it does with any particular developers or development types for that matter. Furthermore many of the loft projects have green areas that otherwise would be parking lots or alleys. We also need to remember many of the projects haven't been moved into yet. This is especially the case in the area between 5th st and N. Washington Ave. where only 100 or so units have been completed so far but some 700-1,000 or so are slated for the next few years not counting any ballpark residential component. The area is still a work in progress. We haven't seen the service businesses because the people aren't yet there. At the North Loop neighborhood association meeting last week a few developers brought up the idea of forming a special services district to improve the streetscape. As I mentioned in a earlier post, most of these projects are being built on parking lots and in semi-vacant and obsolete buildings. If the buildings were economically viable for industry they would have had industry in them to push out. That simply hasn't been the case for the most part. > I guess I see downtown as a great place to build a community that feels more like Boston or Chicago than what really is currently an underpopulated, underdeveloped core for the most part. I think that most of the projects that are being pursued are very good for the city. They generally enhance a pedestrian experience. Most are of fairly high quality design. Even if I don't prefer the particular architecture of some of the projects, diversity is a plus. The projects lateley seem to have more moderate priced units which are good. (They really sell fast) The density is what is needed to drive the retail and service industries that serve downtown. It will make transit more efficient. It makes the likelyhood of existing without a car more plausible. The "eyes on the street" and increased pedestrian traffic make downtown safer. As civic projects like the Guthrie, the library and a potential Twins stadium get completed the core will also draw more people from outside of the city in for events and their experiences will be more positive than walking through a sea of parking lots to the dome. I thnk about 60,000-80,000 people in the loop (bordered by I-94, I-394, I35W and the river) would be about right for a complete and vital community. We are currently at only 30,000 or so. The fact that the market is pushing us this direction is fantastic since the city can grow its tax base and doesn't have to (shouldn't) continually finance projects to increase viatality. Streetscape seems to be the most lacking area in my mind and we do need city involvement to improve that. I see the connections between downtown and the neighborhoods that border it getting stronger. I think adding density to those neighborhoods will be good too. Nick Frank North Loop REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
