Chris Johnson wrote:
In the former vein, there is David Greene's statement: "We have a million more people moving into the area over the next 25 years and they have to live _somewhere_." Wow. It sounds like darn near a crisis, and gosh, well, many of those million people will need to live in Uptown, won't they? Except that in the old 7 county metro area (which excluded counties recently added to make it the newer 9 county or 11 county, depending on what measure you use), that means 1.8 acres per person for those million people. In other words, adding one million people over the next 25 years is not only NOT a crisis, but we will barely notice it. Even in the older 5 county metro area, there's 1.3 acres per additional million inhabitants.
This is a question of urban planning. Do we really want to increase the already excessive land area of the metro? It is extremely expensive to run services (bus, sewers, etc.) out into the exurbs. Our metro area is going to be in for a major change over the next 15 years. We cannot simply stick our heads in the sand and pretend there's nothing to do. No, they don't all need to live in Uptown and your statement to that effect is clearly specious. I would prefer that they live in the core cities and first-ring suburbs, however.
I can think of large swaths of land in Minneapolis where the density is quite a bit lower than Uptown. Maybe some of the development should go there instead into an area already overburdened with automobile traffic. That's right; how many people here can remember why they split Lake and Lagoon into opposing one-way streets? Because Lake and Hennepin was the single most polluted intersection in the city (or was it 5-county metro?).
Why do we, as a region, insist on a single solution for our transportation needs? We're going to grow well beyond the point of feasibility of an auto-dominated urban design. We need a fundamental shift in how we think about our growth.
it, it's still a fragile balance. Screw up the character a little too much, and it will die. It's a mix of hip, bohemian, gentrification,
Can you state exactly why this will happen. Uptown has been changing constantly. Have we just been extremely lucky all these years, or is it that the area is not as unstable as you posit?
Is 13 stories too tall where the Lagoon project was to be built? Yes. So is 10. Both because they ruin the skyline.
This is entirely subjective. Personally, I can't stand many of the two-story building around the area. I'm thinking of places like Bennett (great store, lousy building), Campiello and Stereoland/Tuthill's.
Congestion is a problem. Piece-meal approval of projects is also a really large problem. As Mr. Zuckman pointed out, what the city and the neighborhoods need is a long term, comprehensive plan which finally some majority agrees is acceptable. Any such plan will not please all people. But we need to go through through the long, public process of setting a vision for the area after examining what's important, what will be lost and what will be gained.
I agree planning is needed. But we don't want a building moratorium either. It's not one or the other. Projects can be individually considered until the comprehensive plan is ready. My inclination is to apply strong scrutiny to them. In this case, many parties agreed it was a good idea. Then the mayor killed it.
And thinking about not just Uptown, but the city as a whole, and the city in relation to the region.
Hallelujah! I've been trying to get this message out for years! We need to think regionally! That means we need to build more densely and provide excellent public transportation, inclusionary housing, public benefits for public investment and so on. I lived close to Detroit for many years and know quite intimately what will happen if we don't break our auto addiction.
Transportation is a chicken and egg thing, as someone pointed out, and it is also NOT a chicken and egg thing. Intelligent planning says "we will build more transportation (especially those with fixed locations like LRT) here over the next 30 years. Most development will naturally go along those corridors." Define the corridors well in advance. Give people time to provide feedback and to adjust their life plans. Some people will want to move; others will want to push for changes sooner rather than later.
The corridors are already defined and have been since at least 2000. We don't need any more planning for the first phase of our transit system. We need MONEY to build it! Uptown sits near two of these corridors, four if you count downtown as "near." So it's entirely within your desires that it should be built more densely. David Greene The Wedge REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact 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 Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
