EK == Ed Kohler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
EK I'm still trying to understand the resistance to the Lagoon
EK Project.
Here are four reasons why I resist the project:
1. It seems to reflect a capricious flouting of the existing zoning
ordinances and planning. I don't want to see
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Ed Kohler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BTW, David Greene has been suggesting that tons of people are going to
be moving in in the near future. Is this really true? My impression
is that, with exceptions in favored neighborhoods, the central
Terrell == Terrell Brown Terrell writes:
Terrell - Original Message -
Terrell From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Terrell To: Ed Kohler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BTW, David Greene has been suggesting that tons of people are going to
be moving in in the near future. Is this
Nick Frank wrote:
How does the city council plan to make up the difference in tax revenues
that would have been generated under the original proposal and the
project that actually gets built (if any)? If the office component is
scaled back that is a significant reduction in property tax
Nick Frank wrote:
If the office component is scaled back that is a significant reduction in
property tax revenues due to the higher rate offices pay. The only real
options would be to raise property taxes or somehow get more state aid
(unlikely at best)
David Greene:
There is another,
I'm still trying to understand the resistance to the Lagoon Project.
One concern I heard has been potential shadowing caused by the building, but
this satellite image from Google shows that the location is on the South
side of the Midtown Greenway with a couple parking lots to the North (you
may
TB == Terrell Brown Terrell writes:
[...snip...]
TB The Lake Calhoun area has many taller buildings. Lake Point
TB is 20 stories (242 feet), Calhoun Towers is 21 stories (191
TB feet), Calhoun Beach Club 9 stories (118 feet), the new
TB Calhoun Beach apartments come in at 12
rpgoldman stated:
Actually, those buildings are all in a different neighborhood, on the
North and West of the lake and don't put stresses on the CARAG
neighborhood (my old neighborhood). I can't speak to the issues of
the neighborhood where those buildings are, but it just isn't the same
one as
David Brauer writes:
I think this may have missed my point - someone said height was the issue; I
said local traffic/congestion/environmental effects should have been. The
idea that a 10-story building would have as much density as the 13 (and be
approved) only reinforces my view that,
Andy Driscoll wrote:
Cause it ain't about the money, but about a quality of life that was
threatened by overbuilding, overdeveloping.
Why don't people get this stuff: that it cannot always be about the
potential money. The project might gain a few bucks in the short term, but
the loss of Uptown
My pithy view:
The difference between 10 stories and 13 is trivial. I favor density.
Traffic/environmental is the bigger problem. Fact is, we don't have a
reliably funded transit system to make people believe we can be
denser without the attendant auto pollution and congestion spilling
David said
Sadly, it's a chicken-and-egg thing...density boosts transit, but without
transit people can believe in, they can legitimately, IMHO, oppose that
density that may, someday, cause transit to flourish.
I think we need to control car use somehow with carrots, not sticks,
hopefully
I wrote:
Sadly, it's a chicken-and-egg thing...density boosts transit, but
without transit people can believe in, they can legitimately, IMHO,
oppose that density that may, someday, cause transit to flourish.
I think we need to control car use somehow — with carrots, not
sticks,
DG == David Greene [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DG Andy Driscoll wrote:
Cause it ain't about the money, but about a quality of life that was
threatened by overbuilding, overdeveloping.
Why don't people get this stuff: that it cannot always be about the
potential money.
DB == David Brauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DB My pithy view:
DB The difference between 10 stories and 13 is trivial. I favor density.
DB Traffic/environmental is the bigger problem. Fact is, we don't have a
DB reliably funded transit system to make people believe we can be
Robert P. Goldman: If it's leverage you want, how about requiring renters
in a big development like this to commit to not having cars? I dunno if
that's
enforceable, though...
Thatcher Imboden: Or why don't we figure out a way to offer discounted bus
passes to new renters/owners. If people in
Thatcher Imboden: Or why don't we figure out a way to offer discounted bus
passes to new renters/owners. If people in Uptown are _so_ concerned about
traffic, then perhaps they should be more upset about all the new two-car
garage construction that's taken place in the last year. A two-car garage
David Said:
I think this may have missed my point someone said height was the issue;
I said local traffic/congestion/environmental effects should have been.
The idea that a 10-story building would have as much density as the 13
(and be approved) only reinforces my view that,
Sez da Strib:
Uptown won't be getting up-sized just yet.
The Minneapolis City Council Zoning and Planning Committee said no
today to a privately funded project in the trendy entertainment
district by the Ackerberg Group and Clark Gassen. Their vision would
have turned a 287-space surface
-
From: List manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: mpls@mnforum.org
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 1:56 PM
Subject: [Mpls] Council committee turns down Lagoon Project
Sez da Strib:
Uptown won't be getting up-sized just yet.
The Minneapolis City Council Zoning and Planning Committee said no today
From: Terrell Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Mpls] Council committee turns down Lagoon Project
To: mpls@mnforum.org
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1;
reply-type=response
Two lines in the Strib story that caught my attention
As a nearby resident of Grand Avenue in Saint Paul, I am witnessing how
overdevelopment can kill an area. Grand Avenue has become so congested on
Friday nights and Saturdays, I no longer attempt to drive across Grand, except
at lights.
The parking situation in the surrounding neighborhood
Sorry, to burst the bubble, but almost ALL that development accomplished in
the last three years was already in the pipeline before Rybak even entered
office. We will only begin to see any real development under Mayor Rybak
after the next year or so. Does anyone know of such development that
many denizens back to other lairs.
And there goes the neighborhood. This is a great decision.
Andy Driscoll
St. Paul
From: Nathan Hunstad [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 21:09:12 -0500
To: mpls@mnforum.org
Subject: [Mpls] Council committee turns down Lagoon
24 matches
Mail list logo
