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

[HiawathaGuy]

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

Great point, and I'd have to say I agree with you.

[mattaudio]

No, I think it's people criticizing a design with the best language they know how. They know what they love about an urban block, and they just know in their gut that this building does not provide it. But we have not equipped people with the language to explain that. The reality is that our zoning code, even downtown, results in very suburban outcomes. Much of the new development downtown could be described as suburban. Low engagement of the public realm.

[xandrex]

No, I think it's people criticizing a design with the best language they know how. They know what they love about an urban block, and they just know in their gut that this building does not provide it. But we have not equipped people with the language to explain that. The reality is that our zoning code, even downtown, results in very suburban outcomes. Much of the new development downtown could be described as suburban. Low engagement of the public realm.

Are we accusing zoning code of implementing de facto Newspeak?

[MNdible]

No, I think it's people criticizing a design with the best language they know how. They know what they love about an urban block, and they just know in their gut that this building does not provide it. But we have not equipped people with the language to explain that. The reality is that our zoning code, even downtown, results in very suburban outcomes. Much of the new development downtown could be described as suburban. Low engagement of the public realm.

I'm sure we'd all love to see the street frontage along here be made up of ten adorable little storefronts in ten buildings designed by ten different architects. It's not going to happen.

It's not going to happen on Nicollet Mall, and it's definitely not going to happen here. And it's not because of our zoning.

If everybody's idea of what equals urban is a precious street that they saw in Copenhagen once and OMG why can't we build that here now, then every single thing that gets built in downtown Minneapolis is going to look suburban. Similarly, if they're comparing it to the spectacular brownstones in Elliot Park, they'll also be disappointed because we don't build like that anymore.

I'm not saying this particular project is perfect. It's clearly got some real problems with how the main floor meets the street (although the article does refer to an updated version that worked to respond to some of the neighbors concerns). But suggesting that the issue is driven by the zoning code, rather than by the market and how a particular owner feels about how their first floor offices should interact with the public street, seems to miss the point. Or rather, to twist the point about so as to better serve a particular narrative.

[grant1simons2]

No, I think it's people criticizing a design with the best language they know how. They know what they love about an urban block, and they just know in their gut that this building does not provide it. But we have not equipped people with the language to explain that. The reality is that our zoning code, even downtown, results in very suburban outcomes. Much of the new development downtown could be described as suburban. Low engagement of the public realm.

I'm sure we'd all love to see the street frontage along here be made up of ten adorable little storefronts in ten buildings designed by ten different architects. It's not going to happen.

It's not going to happen on Nicollet Mall, and it's definitely not going to happen here. And it's not because of our zoning.

If everybody's idea of what equals urban is a precious street that they saw in Copenhagen once and OMG why can't we build that here now, then every single thing that gets built in downtown Minneapolis is going to look suburban. Similarly, if they're comparing it to the spectacular brownstones in Elliot Park, they'll also be disappointed because we don't build like that anymore.

I'm not saying this particular project is perfect. It's clearly got some real problems with how the main floor meets the street (although the article does refer to an updated version that worked to respond to some of the neighbors concerns). But suggesting that the issue is driven by the zoning code, rather than by the market and how a particular owner feels about how their first floor offices should interact with the public street, seems to miss the point. Or rather, to twist the point about so as to better serve a particular narrative.

So are you just pessimistic or do you know people who claim they will never ever build this in Minneapolis. I agree, won't work on a Kraus site but on Nicollet mall? That's going to happen someday not too far ahead. And yes, this is based off of what I've been told by developers

[EOst]

People don't build things like that because economically and socially they don't make sense to build anymore, and not just in Minneapolis. Even in super-high-density places like NYC and SF, new buildings are mostly done on large lots with only one or two retail spaces. Similarly, brownstones of the quality you find in historic places would be prohibitively expensive to build now; skilled craftsmen are rare now and demand skilled wages.

[grant1simons2]

Building one building on one block isn't how cities should work. And what do you mean that's what they do in NYC? A lot of the new buildings going up will only take a quarter of a block or replace a building that already is a quarter. Buildings are getting slimmer.. Check out some of these high rises on skyscrapercity. They're pretty skinny but about 40 stories. 10 on a block of course would be insane but 4 isn't reaching too far

Even 4marq! If Xcel hadn't wanted to build their, there could've been 3 more ~30 story buildings put on that site. See what I mean about skinny? 4marq has retail facing North towards the Opus block, and like I said previously if Xcel decided not to build we could've had... 4 different buildings by 4 different developers or architects on one block :O

[RailBaronYarr]

It's not just the zoning code. It's all the financial, regulatory, tax, 60 years of entrenched transportation design, etc things that combine to make this the pro-forma outcome. It could change, but it would take sweeping efforts across multiple levels of government and a lot of time to do it.

But that doesn't address the fact that "looks suburban" has been used to describe projects that aren't too engaging (like this) to slam-dunk designs like The Venue in Dinkytown. It has no meaning unless expanded on. If I had to guess on this project, I'd say the mostly blank walls against the street, an entrance that faces the surface parking lot, modern construction materials that lack much flair, and yes, no mixing of uses. I guess for this size building and for this type of company and what they plan on doing with the remainder of the lot, the neighborhood opposition may be a little over the top..

[MNdible]

But remember that this suburban building is occupying less than a quarter of the block. That means two buildings per block face, which I think is realistically about the best we would expect to see in any new construction. In an area where retail could be supported, you could have an entrance for the office lobby and a couple of retail entrances in each building, but you're not going to see that here.

[grant1simons2]

I agree, won't work on a Kraus site

[MNdible]

It's not just the zoning code. It's all the financial, regulatory, tax, 60 years of entrenched transportation design, etc things that combine to make this the pro-forma outcome. It could change, but it would take sweeping efforts across multiple levels of government and a lot of time to do it.

But that doesn't address the fact that "looks suburban" has been used to describe projects that aren't too engaging (like this) to slam-dunk designs like The Venue in Dinkytown. It has no meaning unless expanded on. If I had to guess on this project, I'd say the mostly blank walls against the street, an entrance that faces the surface parking lot, modern construction materials that lack much flair, and yes, no mixing of uses. I guess for this size building and for this type of company and what they plan on doing with the remainder of the lot, the neighborhood opposition may be a little over the top..

Your second paragraph here does a better job of getting at what I really wanted to get at than I did.

As for your first, I'd agree with everything you say, but add that one of the biggest things that's killing the old streetfront is the way that people are shopping. There simply isn't the demand for small retail frontage that there used to be, because big boxes and now the internet have usurped so much of that retail demand.

[mullen]

if i were KA i'd just move to the 'burbs like every other consturction firm. you think golden valley or eden prairie would quibble with this building? sorry they arent going to get a starchitect to design their offices.

look at all of these cookie cutter apartment buildngs built in the last five years and we're going to make our stand this perfectly fine office building? silly.

[mattaudio]

As for your first, I'd agree with everything you say, but add that one of the biggest things that's killing the old streetfront is the way that people are shopping. There simply isn't the demand for small retail frontage that there used to be, because big boxes and now the internet have usurped so much of that retail demand.

I'm doubtful of that. And that's despite ignoring all of the ways we tilted the scales towards big boxism as RailBaronYarr has listed out. But let's look at this particular project. It had a cafeteria and a workout facility on the first floor, completely insular, with zero sidewalk interaction. That's suburban. Just think if the cafeteria was one or two little public cafes, and the workout place was a Snap or a Fitness19.

[HiawathaGuy]

It had a cafeteria and a workout facility on the first floor, completely insular, with zero sidewalk interaction. That's suburban. Just think if the cafeteria was one or two little public cafes, and the workout place was a Snap or a Fitness19.

While I think that's ideal - what I don't understand is why should a private company have to take on leasing space in their building? Is that the price of admission for building a new corporate building of their own downtown? Or is that the goal of hopefully not having people calling this "suburban"?


If KA had interest in leasing space in their building - or thought they could attract businesses onto the first floor - don't you think they would? That's what they do.

[mattaudio]

you think golden valley or eden prairie would quibble with this building? sorry they arent going to get a starchitect to design their offices.

Good urbanism can be very boring architecturally. There's not really anything wrong with the architecture here, just with the urbanism. And they can move to Eden Prairie, and then witness massive attrition when their workforce realizes they now need to buy a car, or when they realize that they will spend 3x each month fueling their existing car, etc.

[xandrex]

Good urbanism can be very boring architecturally. There's not really anything wrong with the architecture here, just with the urbanism. And they can move to Eden Prairie, and then witness massive attrition when their workforce realizes they now need to buy a car, or when they realize that they will spend 3x each month fueling their existing car, etc.

Don't they already give their employees free parking on the block? They're blocks from the nearest transit spine and away from any good food and not connected to the skyway system. They may as well be in a suburban office park. A move to Golden Valley, St. Louis Park, Roseville, or Richfield would hardly hurt (even if it didn't help).

[mattaudio]

While I think that's ideal - what I don't understand is why should a private company have to take on leasing space in their building? Is that the price of admission for building a new corporate building of their own downtown?

It should be the price of admission, yes.

[go4guy]

Even 4marq! If Xcel hadn't wanted to build their, there could've been 3 more ~30 story buildings put on that site. See what I mean about skinny? 4marq has retail facing North towards the Opus block, and like I said previously if Xcel decided not to build we could've had... 4 different buildings by 4 different developers or architects on one block :O

Are you saying that the Xcel building could be replaced by 3 more towers? I dont see how that would be possible at all. Unless half the residents would have windows looking into someone else's unit 10 feet away.

[go4guy]

So we are willing to see a company move to the suburbs because they dont have a Starbucks and a Snap Fitness? That is unreal. This is a company wanting to EXPAND downtown. Build a nice new building that is currently on a site of parking, surrounded by other blocks with a lot of surface parking. And we are b!tching because they street level activity wont have doors to the outside? Not sure I understand that at all.

[RailBaronYarr]

The costs associated with leasing the space out to a cafe or fitness center (or whatever) relative to just keeping it in-house (and likely contracting out to Sodexo or whoever for the cafeteria) may be marginal. And I'm sure there's probably demand for a cafe of sorts. But not every street or building front can support retail/commercial space. I would love for that to be the case, and maybe in a place that sees daily influx of office workers + neighborhood residents the ratio of active sidewalk to inactive is higher than I'm guessing. But even in hyper-dense Manhattan or Paris neighborhoods, there sure are a lot of blocks I've walked along, not even that far off the major commercial streets, that only have residential entrances every 30-50 ft.

We should demand more from the frontage - where cafeterias or company-owned gyms exist, require windows. Demand better from sidewalk reconstructions, and at least hold the city to re-allocating street space to be more urban. The one-ways surrounding this block are way, way over-built:

8th St: 7,047 AADT
9th St: 4,518
5th Ave: 8,139
Portland Ave: likely shy of 9,600

Given a LRT <0.5 miles away, the 94 and 5 (future Chicago aBRT) stopping even closer, there's no reason the city couldn't commit to making this area (and beyond) "less suburban."