urbanMSP

Thrilled that the first phase is one of the towers. Get it out of the ground and happening before any downturns please and thank you

It would be fun to see who winds up being the bagholder.

does anyone know if SWLRT is staging on the former county site? would that be why it's the last phase? or is it where Bader is staging the towers?

Last I heard, yeah, they’re using the affordable housing site for staging for train construction, which is part of why it’s the last phase.

SO is it just me or is that phase also going to provide additional difficulties for future LRT along the Greenway corridor?

So I'm trying to figure out some stuff here, especially related to the (now former) Hennepin County land, located at 3421 Lake St W, with Property ID 0502824210243.

I've been able to find a preliminary record of sale with the state : https://finance-commerce.com/files/2019 ... er-CRV.pdf https://www.mndor.state.mn.us/ecrv_sear ... ry+eCRV+ID
I can see a number of recorded documents with the county, including the planning permission, the CUP, land sale, and a Met Council easement https://txpr-reinq-pd.co.hennepin.mn.us ... 01&lot=002

Finance and Commerce says the land was sold on December 21, based on the date on that (preliminary) sale record filed with the state: https://finance-commerce.com/2019/01/ba ... rdability/

Searching the Hennepin County meeting agendas for Bader or Calhoun Towers or various addresses, and all I find is environmental cleanup grant requests for the project. I can't find any public action about the county selling the land or any kind of agreement between the county and Bader (technically Calhoun Towers, LLC) to build affordable housing on the land they bought from the county. Is there somewhere else i should be looking for this? Does anyone know who at the county I could contact to learn more about this land sale?

One tower now:

http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/www/gro ... 220289.pdf

But it got thicc.

I liked the two tower version for aesthetics, but fine. They’re doing a lot to wrap the parking structure, just wish they could cover the top of it with something.

9 fewer residence units? 94 fewer parking units?

But just start already.

Downgrade for sure, but if this were the original proposal we'd still be pretty excited about it.

Also covers the "oops recession hit, guess you're just getting one of the twin towers" problem. Easier to back out of a couple of 6 story buildings.

I always felt the 2 new tower plan was a bit over ambitious. I'm really not a fan of these little buildings surrounding the towers. But yes, I agree with a previous poster.. Lets start already!!

Elegant isn't word I would use to describe that proposal but it isn't terrible. Like everyone else I just hope some of these more ambitious proposals hurry up and get started

I don't mind the twin tower drop. To many matching towers end up looking rather out of place outside of places where they are wrapped by other towers. What I DO mind is that they decreased the sidewalk crossings from 3 to 2 along West 31st. 3 crosswalks line up well with the station, while 2 are making pedestrians have to walk more out of there way to cross the street. There by encouraging more jay walking and making a less safe interaction zone. This not only will affect residents in this development but those surrounded by this development and those future developments. It's a minor change but will have a big effect on decreasing walkability. Hopefully sombody else makes enough of a stink to get them to switch it back.

More detailed packet

http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/www/gro ... 221447.pdf

Seems a lost opportunity to build Building D and not have it include a doorway with access to Lake Street.

Since they will be reconstructing the street by the station, I want them to make those pedestrian crossings into tabled crossings. Keep drivers from whipping around at speed to drop off or pick up riders, keep drivers slow back there.

What if there could be some sort of vertical circulation access/easement in Building D from the Lake Street overpass down to the platform level?

I definitely agree that the city needs to work with Bader to add some vertical circulation to Building D through some means at both the Lake and 31st Street ends. I understand why a developer might have some security concerns around that although those should be reasonable to overcome. It would also be a great chance to add a small amount of retail for both residents and passengers.

What if there could be some sort of vertical circulation access/easement in Building D from the Lake Street overpass down to the platform level?

The station design already includes vertical circulation from Lake Street down to the platform level, so this would have a very limited benefit for pretty significant cost.

YouTube video of the station design.

Too...bulky. I feel like this is exactly what NIMBY types picture every time they hear "tower".

Yeah. The twin tower approach was aesthetically better. Wish the financials worked better for it.

Partial demolition/remediation to begin in February, we’re hoping.
Water table is fairly consistent at 856’, both on the property and the former Jiffy Lube to the east.
I am unsure if the tower property sits atop the landfill that was in that area prior to 1955.
Remediation of the former Jiffy Lube showed remnants of the former landfill above the water table, except the N-NE corner of that lot, where it continued down lower.