Kraus-Anderson, HQ Apartments, Finnegans "Brewtel" - 9th St S/5th Ave S

[twincitizen]

Should the project be approved in this form, the applicant would then submit an Interim Use Application
to the City for review and approval by the City’s Zoning and Planning Committee and City Council of a
158 space surface parking lot on the premises (resulting in a total of 206 surface parking stalls to serve
the proposed office building). An interim use may be allowed as a temporary use of property until a
particular date but for a period not to exceed the maximum allowable timeframe of five (5) years.
Should the property not be redeveloped during this interim period, the surface parking would need to
either be completely removed or formal land use applications submitted to the City to legalize the
surface parking lot as a permanent use of the property. It is important to note that Staff would not
support the permanent use of the remainder of the block for surface parking as it would conflict with all
applicable adopted City policies. The property is zoned B4N (Downtown Neighborhood) District and is
located in the DP (Downtown Parking) Overlay District.

The existing Kraus Anderson facility (which consists of a two-story building, and the remainder of the
block a 297 space surface parking lot – with 112 surface parking spaces reserved for a total of 104 Kraus
Anderson employees that travel to the site daily), located at 525 8th Street South, would remain in use
until the new building is constructed should the proposal be approved. Once the new facility is
occupied, the existing building would be demolished for additional surface parking to be established
through the Interim Use Application process. The applicant has stated that they do intend to pursue
development on the remainder of the lot but no detail on potential future phases has been included as
part of this application.

There's the info about them needing an Interim Use Permit for the surface parking. It's still not a commitment to develop anything, but it at least sets a timeline. Personally, I still don't believe they're completely serious.

Reading into the report, it sounds like rotating the building to 9th Street helps with height transitions. The 4-story K-A building will help transition down to the 2-4 story structures along 9th Street, leaving 8th Street open to develop with taller buildings. The Elliot Park neighborhood doesn't like it though, because they wanted housing along 9th that fits in with 9th Street Historic District.

[grant1simons2]

This is voted on today! If people could please contact the council members serving on the planning commission about this it would be great! I know most of you are in opposition of it, so please speak out your word. Also this is a public hearing meeting so if you'd feel more comfortable going, do so.

Here are the members: Tucker, Bender, Brown, Forney, Gagnon, Gisselman, Kronzer, Luepke-Pier and Slack

[MNdible]

I could be mistaken, but I think that lobbying individual members of the planning commission (as opposed to elected officials) is sort of frowned upon.

[grant1simons2]

I've been mostly contacting Bender because I've worked with her before and I know her. I don't see why this would be wrong, they do have the power to to decline certain projects if they're not adequate for the area

[twincitizen]

For the Planning Commission, the proper etiquette is to email the staff member in charge of the project. It's ok to copy CM Bender as well. Planning Commissioners are private citizens and should not be contacted directly (aside from maybe Gagnon and Forney, as they are elected representatives of the School Board and Park Board, respectively). If you feel so strongly about something that you'd want to lobby the Planning Commission members individually, you should just attend the hearing.

[grant1simons2]

Good to know. I usually do make it up to the meetings but today I missed the bus and if I took the next one I'd be late.

[go4guy]

Why are most opposed to this project?

[grant1simons2]

It's a full block controlled by Kraus-Anderson very close to Downtown East that could be used for taller hotels or commercial and office space. And Kraus wants to build about 3 less than 10 story buildings. 2 of them are just verbal promises, nothing in writing.

[MNdible]

My gauge of the temperature on the forum was that "most" people were lukewarm towards the project. There was some initial kvetching, much of which was responded to in the project's re-submission.

Yes, there's some concern about the surface parking lot and its longevity, but the simple fact is that if there's demand for something to be built there, KA will be delighted to build it for you.

[mattaudio]

There is an irrational fear of "taking away free parking from employees" that I've seen take on more weight than dollars on a spreadsheet. That's my primary concern re: the "temporary" parking lot.

Heck downtown developed before the car, so in a sense all of our parking lots are temporary. The Gateway was temporary parking, dontchaknow...

[MNdible]

I get where you're coming from -- but I guess my original point was that I didn't really sense the groundswell of opposition on the forum that was being alluded to.

In any case, it's becoming clear to me that the regime of downtown land so cheap and abundant that surface parking was economically justifiable is coming to a close. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.

[go4guy]

My quesion is, why would this not be a solid project? We are adding a much more dense building that what already exists on this block. And wouldnt this project create less surface parking than what already exists? On top of that, isnt the city saying they will allow the surface lot for x number of years and then it has to be developed or removed? How is this not WAY better than what is already on this lot. And, we have no idea what they will actual build on the rest of the block, the images they showed are just what could potentially go there. And I would not be opposed to what they pitched. Seems like perfect height for that area. This isnt an area that needs to be filled with skyscrapers. Just my opinion.

I think the current proposal would be a great addition to the area, and a great improvement over what is currently on that site.

[Wedgeguy]

As long as the X number of years is small and any extensions they would have to pay thru the nose to keep it as parking. The extension few would double each time they try and keep it parking. Extensions would last 2 years at the most. They need to make it so that is cost them more to keep as parking instead of developing it.

[grant1simons2]

Actually it's 5 years. And then they can still renew it after that but it'll take longer. The Planning commission decided to forward this to next meeting so they didn't vote on it today.

[lordmoke]

Delayed until at least spring:
http://www.journalmpls.com/news-feed/ne ... rs-delayed

[HiawathaGuy]

Delayed until at least spring:
http://www.journalmpls.com/news-feed/ne ... rs-delayed

I just hope KA doesn't call the Neighborhood's bluff and move to the suburbs...

[go4guy]

Heaven forbid they try and add density to this block.

This height actually does blend in well with the neighborhood. And brings more employees into downtown. My opinion is that this is still a great addition to this neighborhood.

[MNdible]

What do people mean when they say "suburban feel"?

[HiawathaGuy]

What do people mean when they say "suburban feel"?

I think they mean that this building looks like it belongs in the suburbs, not downtown. In a way, t looks like Best Buy or Medtonic's HQs. But I think this area (Elliot Park & Mill District) have a different vibe/feel than the CBD, so this building does work as planned. I think a super glassy building would look out of place here too.

[MNdible]

I think they mean that this building looks like it belongs in the suburbs, not downtown.

Well, I get that's what they're saying, but what does this really mean? What are they reacting to? I ask because this is a comment that neighbors seem to make with some frequency recently.

If the rendering looks like anything, to me it looks quite a bit like the Target HQ. Which is downtown.

Is it the style? The materials? The scale? The fact that it's new? Or is it an effectively meaningless comment that is used when people just don't like a project?

To me, it seems like a socially acceptable way for city-dwellers to slam a project.