urbanMSP

Gregory Scott, owner of buildings home to Herkimer and LynLake Brewery, said parking is crucial. The Jungle Theater couldn’t survive without the Garfield lot, he said

Just like ACME couldn't survive without their lot, right?

Gregory Scott, owner of buildings home to Herkimer and LynLake Brewery, said parking is crucial. The Jungle Theater couldn’t survive without the Garfield lot, he said

So buy the lot yourself...

District parking like at LynLake is a great solution to the parking needs of business districts like these. Not sure what all the snark is for.

District parking like at LynLake is a great solution to the parking needs of business districts like these. Not sure what all the snark is for.

You're not wrong, it wasn't a brilliant comment.

Alex, they did buy it for parking. The businesses partnered with the city to have a municipal parking lot established and the businesses and parking lot users paid the bonds the city used to purchase and build it. That's not to say they shouldn't rethink how it is used, but they did purchase it for parking.

Nobody has implied that the new development wouldn't include some sort of new parking avenge correct? I mean it seems easy to build an underground garage and throw a plaza and some shops on top. Win win

Yes, that's what I took from the article, and so was surprised at the negative response. Or maybe I wasn't surprised.

I think in general these businesses are under-valuing how neighborhood changes (population increase, shift in income, etc) and even shift in how people are willing to get around over the past 10 years has made *directly adjacent* parking less necessary for them. What percent of people visiting LynLake Brewery or Lago Tacos or anything else near this corner are folks not walking/biking/(gasp!)busing there? And of the remainder, how many find it easier to just park on some side street (or they did so because they drove to their friend's apartment and then walk to the bar/etc)?

But yeah. I think it's a wholly different conversation when a city is spending money buying property to tear it down and build a vertical parking ramp and then giving the spaces away for free. If this is tied to redevelopment, a level of underground and even surface (shielded by retail) public parking is fine. Even better if it's paid parking - the Venue in Dinkytown is a good model.

Pretty safe to assume it would be paid parking, considering the existing lot is paid parking.

Other than facilitating the sale of the land and re-development, I have to imagine the city would not be an active ongoing owner of the project. That is, the underground/structured public parking built into a future development would be owned by that developer, not by the city.

If enough parking were built as part of this project, I'd urge removal of some of the on-street metered stalls nearest to the Lyn-Lake intersection, to provide for wider sidewalks, better bus stops, etc. Currently, bus stops are given only the absolute minimum distance, sidewalks get congested, etc.

Hopefully, the parking would be able to be converted to other uses if it's not needed in the future. The Midtown Streetcar and Lake St BRT and eventually the mythical driverless cars may impact this site.

There's a design workshop planned on Saturday, April 7. 9:00am-noon
Link to registration: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/lynlake-de ... 2610968554

According to a cat on the internet, some are worried about it being overrun with pro-parking folks who don’t want it to change. So consider attending

Parking study found ...

http://www.southwestjournal.com/news/20 ... -of-spots/

Only 64% utilization at peak hours.

So... about that parking crisis...

From the article:

Any redevelopment on the lot will look to a similar project at 29th & Aldrich, where the city once owned a 50-space lot. The Aldrich parking lot was sold several years ago for development, but includes 30 public, hourly parking spaces in an underground parking garage. The business owners that invested in the Garfield lot have been told redevelopment will similarly include public parking, ideally with more signage.

I hope someone will ask the city and CM Bender who this requirement will really serve. The parking study found unequivocally that there is no shortage of spaces in this area. So instead of demanding that any future development replace the lost public parking for this site, why not swap out that demand for someone more worthwhile—like some units of housing affordable to people with incomes in the 30% AMI range?

The Lake Street B Line BRT should help improve access to Lyn-Lake. It would be nice to have more bike friendly street designs of Lyndale and Lake around this intersection too. All of those driving lanes just get traffic moving too fast to be safe for anyone not in a car.

Here's good article on the upcoming (September) RFP release for development of the Garfield Lot at Lyn-Lake,

https://www.southwestjournal.com/news/2 ... rking-lot/

Hopefully the public gathering space mentioned in the article comes to fruition.

The RFP for redevelopment of the municipal parking facilities at Lyn-Lake was issued on January 16th

http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 222525.pdf

I had no idea Herkimer's parking lot and patio was a city owned lot. On one hand I'm supportive of removing the curb cut and car access but I'd also hate to see Herkimer lose their patio.

Wild that after a study found that Lyn Lake has more than enough parking, this RFP is still calling for 75 public parking spaces. My hope would be that a developer would deduct this number from the parking they might ordinarily offer to residents, and so just have fewer dedicated resident spaces than normal.

But as it stands, that's an insane ask from the city that (A) goes against comprehensive plan goals for reducing VMT and increasing housing affordability, and (B) goes against the findings of the parking study.