urbanMSP

Are you only counting the cranes that have a worker up in it, or also the shorter ones operated from the ground?

It seems a lot of people are taking the "Crane" in Crane Watch literally. There doesn't have to be a crane involved in the project. Many don't. Many are just in the proposal stage or haven't secured financing, etc. etc.

Ah, I keep my ear to the ground in the triangle of Hopkins, SLP, and Edina for things. How close to completion will you pull it off the map? And how early in proposal will something show up?

Our building is getting a new roof. Crane will be up Thursday through Saturday of this week.

Good question. I would assume we'll pull if off when apartments or offices open, though sometimes this happens in phases. There's no hard and fast rule for when we put it up, but generally speaking, once it shows up on a city planning commission, we consider it "proposed."

I welcome any feedback or projects I should be including.

Looks like you're missing the West Publishing site project in Downtown St Paul.

I welcome any feedback or projects I should be including.

Looks like you're missing the West Publishing site project in Downtown St Paul.

Do renovations count? Seems like you should have Millworks Lofts, 4041 Hiawatha. Isn't there something over off of 27th Ave SE too (or is that open already)?

Shameless plug here, but we at the Business Journal just published Crane Watch, an interactive map of development projects under construction or proposed in the Twin Cities. Below is a link. It's free (no subscription required). I welcome any feedback or projects I should be including.

http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/f ... rane-watch

Thanks,

Nick Halter

The Bell Museum & Lux Arden Hills TAACP development are missing.

Central Lutheran Church proposing to demolish all additions to original sanctuary and construct new round glass addition:
http://minneapolismn.gov/www/groups/pub ... 198345.pdf

Umm...no.

That seems to really take away from the original building's architecture by blocking a lot of important features.

It looks like an outdated elementary school.

That seems to really take away from the original building's architecture by blocking a lot of important features.

I'm not in love with the plan, but it's worth noting that the hodge podge of existing buildings that this would replace are already blocking all of these important features.

I guess I don't see that as relevant. Unless those features were completely destroyed, we ought to try to restore them and make them visible.

Things have been accreted to and scraped off of the sides of cathedrals forever. This addition doesn't impact the primary facades, it doesn't impact the prominence on the skyline, and it makes the building more functional for the people that use it.

I'm not at all saying no addition whatsoever. I'm not even saying to match the existing architecture (I like additions to be seen as additions).

But it seems like some of those rooflines and such could be altered to make it a little less obstructive.

It looks like an outdated elementary school.

That is a pretty accurate assessment Kind of reminds me of a Catholic High School in my hometown that felt like some odd amalgamation of architecture like this. In any case, I like that they are trying to re-imagine the space for their needs. I would agree though that perhaps they should try to at least match the architecture a little so it looks more like an addition and less like a contemporary art piece commenting on religion.

"CPED has design concerns with the addition. Specifically, its relationship to the existing church that will not be demolished."
But it doesn't elaborate.

Oof. This destroys any semblance of human-scale frontage along 4th Ave S by demolishing the existing buildings. The entire concept of having a circle oriented to the middle of the block seems to say they don't want to be an urban church. And I can't imagine a circle is actually a good idea for future expansion and adaptability of their land use, either. I don't like the architectural style, but I won't hold that against them. The real concern here is the low FAR and the low activation of the streetscape. Maybe they can atone for this by selling their surface lot to a developer.

The remodel of the building the Barnes and Nobles occupied could bring a public pocket park?

http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/n ... ml?ana=twt

The remodel of the building the Barnes and Nobles occupied could bring a public pocket park?

http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/n ... ml?ana=twt

I couldn't read the article (locked), but from the picture it looks like the Panera will be going away as well? Or will the park just be in front of the Panera and they didn't bother including signage in the renderings?

So, basically opening the Panera patio up rather than hiding it behind walls and gates when Panera closes up?

Man, this would be a perfect opportunity for the City and the Downtown Council to partner up on an actual public bathroom for downtown.