urbanMSP

Someone (Zach Stofferahn) is appealing the City Planning Commission's approval of this. There will be an additional public hearing before the Zoning and Planning Commission on May 4.

Any word on what happened at the last hearing?

Work seems to be starting on this. It seems that he only has a permit to do the foundation work, because the rest of the building hasn't been approved? So who knows what we'll get...

From the Mpls permit:
FOOTING AND FOUNDATION FOR NEW OFFICE BUILDING
SEPARATE PERMIT REQUIRED FOR SUPERSTRUCTURE
BUILDING CODE REVIEW FOR FULL PROJECT HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED
ISSUANCE OF FOOTING AND FOUNDATION PERMIT DOES NOT REPRESENT ACCEPTANCE OF LAYOUT AND DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS RELATING TO WORK NOT INCLUDED IN THIS PERMIT.

This is underway. I drove by last night and there are jersey barriers surrounding the site and they have already started driving piles. I believe this was approved and the appeal denied.

This is still just a decorated parking structure right?

IIRC, five (above-ground) levels of parking, seven levels of office on top of that. So, kinda a glass half-full/half-empty kinda thing.

I think it looks fine. You can't REALLY tell it's parking on the lower sections. AND, they did exactly what is always asked for... level floors that are easily converted in the future. I give a Thumbs Up.

When talking about converting parking to other uses, there's way more involved than just having level floor plates. Just as important:

1. Higher than normal floor to floor height. Parking doesn't need ducts, and having 8' (or less!) clearance to bottom of structure is generally acceptable.

2. Making sure that the slabs are structured correctly. This is a big one. Even though cars seem very heavy, on a pounds per square foot basis, they're not. Typical parking ramps are structured to carry something like 30 P/SF. An assembly space, where people are concentrated, will be required to carry 100 P/SF.

Not saying that they didn't do this here -- but unless you've got better info, it's hard to know.

Isn't the ground level pretty active with retail space? I think the parking will be mostly hidden by the office space, even at the 2-5 levels.

When talking about converting parking to other uses, there's way more involved than just having level floor plates. Just as important:

1. Higher than normal floor to floor height. Parking doesn't need ducts, and having 8' (or less!) clearance to bottom of structure is generally acceptable.

2. Making sure that the slabs are structured correctly. This is a big one. Even though cars seem very heavy, on a pounds per square foot basis, they're not. Typical parking ramps are structured to carry something like 30 P/SF. An assembly space, where people are concentrated, will be required to carry 100 P/SF.

Not saying that they didn't do this here -- but unless you've got better info, it's hard to know.

Ok. Thanks for making me check the info MNdible. From the HPC packet online:

Levels P1, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, and 3 are only 9 feet, 6 inches in height. This does not meet guideline
3.26. Floors 4 through 10 are 13 feet, 4 inches in height, which meets the guideline.

Looks like it's not as simple as I thought. (for reference, I'm just an observer. I don't work in the industry or have training. I learn a lot from the forums!)

They've apparently found an anchor tenant, and will begin construction soon.

Am I crazy, or have they still not actually gotten planning commission approval for this project?

https://www.minnpost.com/politics-polic ... de-parking

This seems to suggest that the parking floors will be built in such a way that they can be converted.

There’s a tower crane going up here today.

Taken this past weekend. I think they've reached the top floor here.


419 Washington by
ZTR Norge, on Flickr

3rd St N with the new office building at 419 Washington

North Loop at N 3rd St Minneapolis 8-25-19 by Matt Bappe, on Flickr

It fits right in. Great pic!

Thanks a lot. I was shooting blind over a 6’4” concrete wall (I’m 6’ 3”). I also think it fits in from this distance

I had seen a lot of photos of 419 Washington and the entire building, especially the front facade, has always read as extremely flat.

But then I visited the building in person a few weeks ago, and it turned out that the pictures were totally deceiving. It's completely fine. The facades have far more texture than it seemed, and there are details in places like the ground floor entryway which are really nice. While this building is not as detailed as The Nordic and is not going to be appearing in architectural magazines anytime soon, there's really no big problem with it.

The only thing I'm worried about now is that at night, the windows will fail to mask how much of the building is parking, and you'll see the glare of fluorescent parking ramp lights and car headlights in a really unattractive way.

This is a decent and inoffensive addition to the neighborhood. I agree that it won't soon be seen in any architecture journals and it may have carried the contextualism flag a bit too far, offering no real new variations on the theme.

It's telling that a mostly obscured view of the back of the building is its most flattering angle.