Uptown Hotel Discussion

Calhoun-Isles, Cedar-Riverside, Longfellow, Nokomis, Phillips, Powderhorn, and Southwest
MobJob
Block E
Posts: 19
Joined: July 31st, 2014, 12:07 pm

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby MobJob » February 15th, 2016, 1:26 pm

As mentioned discussed above, homeownership is traditonally thought to benefit society and the economy more than renting.

There is a paper written by Bostic & Lee entitled "Homeownership: America's Dream" (2007) that discusses the arguments. A few excerpts follow:

"Homeownership is also thought to contribute to life satisfaction, psychological and physical health, positive child outcomes, and greater civic engagement."

"On a broader scale, because homeownership limits houshold mobility, homeowners better maintain their properties and neighborhoods, which results in higher property values, greater neighborhood prosperity and sustainability, and reducuctions in crime.... owner-occupied housing is also thought to have a beneficial effect on the local economy by increasing consumer spending, providing tax revenues and fees, and growing businesses and jobs."

The paper is more about low-income housing, but it might still be of interest and aid the discussion. Perhaps this isnt the thread for it, however.

User avatar
Sacrelicio
Union Depot
Posts: 364
Joined: November 11th, 2015, 6:38 pm
Location: Field

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby Sacrelicio » February 15th, 2016, 1:53 pm

I think homeowners are more invested in keeping the neighborhood as it is because when they made the decision to buy, it was the neighborhood that existed then that spurred them to buy. Change is viewed skeptically because it is a threat to the lifestyle they thought they were buying and also their investment.

Renters are more mobile, which makes them less tied to a particular spot. Usually though, they stay within Minneapolis (or St Paul) as they move around so they are more likely to prioritize the dynamism of the city as a whole because they see the city though the prism of the whole rather than from their own little patch of it. Also, one group wants higher property values while the other wants lower rents. The nature of home ownership tends to make people change averse, while renters are more likely to embrace it.

There is a notion among homeowners that renters aren't invested, which is false, they are invested but in different ways.
I think age might have something to do with it too. As a young homeowner I don't care if they put a hotel in my neighborhood.

RailBaronYarr
Capella Tower
Posts: 2625
Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby RailBaronYarr » February 15th, 2016, 3:22 pm

^^There's a lot of "thought to"s in that paper. But there is a thread for that discussion in particular, and I'd advocate we try to stay on the specific arguments being made for/against the hotel by differing parties in this thread (not to be a wet blanket).

amiller92
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1983
Joined: October 31st, 2014, 12:50 pm

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby amiller92 » February 16th, 2016, 10:37 am

As a youngish (maybe??) homeowner, I want my neighborhood to get better, and adding stuff that people will use to it makes it better.

winterfan
Metrodome
Posts: 58
Joined: May 7th, 2014, 6:30 pm

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby winterfan » February 16th, 2016, 11:20 am

I think age might have something to do with it too. As a young homeowner I don't care if they put a hotel in my neighborhood.
No, age has nothing to do with it really. A lot of older homeowners would support a nice hotel in their neighborhood.

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4617
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby David Greene » February 16th, 2016, 11:28 am

There is a notion among homeowners that renters aren't invested, which is false, they are invested but in different ways.
It seems to me it's more subtle than that. Sure, some homeowners resent renters. I don't understand those people at all. As long as they are respectful to other people's property, don't make excessive noise at 2am, etc., I don't care who rents next to me.

Homeowners also sometimes resent landlords. It is true that someone who owns a building but does not live there isn't as aware of issues on the block as people who are there all the time. That's not the fault of the landlord, it's simple physics. We're fortunate to have good landlords next to us who maintain their properties well. But there is one triplex at the end of the block that is in various states of disrepair, with beer bottles in the yard, etc. Another one across the alley had all kinds of garbage out back for months. These are the things that set homeowners off and I can't blame them. Who wants to live next to a garbage dump?

seanrichardryan
IDS Center
Posts: 4092
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 9:33 pm
Location: Merriam Park, St. Paul

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby seanrichardryan » February 16th, 2016, 12:37 pm

After moving to St.Paul on a block similar to our wedge location, I was shocked what a difference a landlord can make. I've never lived next to apartments with thoughtful owners who invest in upkeep and seem genuinely care about tenant relationships.
On topic, a new well-maintained building is a net gain for the neighborhood versus the crap hole restaurant that's there now.
Q. What, what? A. In da butt.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby mattaudio » March 2nd, 2016, 10:57 am

Former (thankfully) CARAG chair Phillip Qualy is hotel hostile.
http://www.startribune.com/uptown-minne ... 370727011/

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby FISHMANPET » March 2nd, 2016, 11:14 am

Comments are going well. For now at least.

Wedgeguy
Capella Tower
Posts: 3404
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 6:59 am

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby Wedgeguy » March 2nd, 2016, 1:44 pm

Comments are going well. For now at least.
I like seeing those comments. Kinda puts the Phil in his place. Yes, this is a thriving commercial area. Not the middle of Armetage neighborhood. You were expecting there to be no changes to a neighborhood then you are naive. Just because 20 years ago the area was in decline, you did not expect all property owners and business not to work to get their Mojo back.

TroyGBiv
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 658
Joined: July 6th, 2012, 10:33 pm

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby TroyGBiv » March 2nd, 2016, 7:41 pm

You should see the garbage on Nextdoor Whittier... OMG... This hotel is going to stop the free world dead in it's tracks.

Minneboy
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 669
Joined: January 15th, 2013, 1:18 pm

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby Minneboy » March 2nd, 2016, 8:47 pm

I've known Phil for 26 years. He's a good man who raised children on his own and fights for his property values as anyone else would. Do I agree with him on this issue not necessarily but then again His house is just a couple south from the hotel. I understand. Do we not get a hotel because of a few people or do we get one for the greater good of the a viable economic area. I'll take the second choice.

thatchio
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 194
Joined: August 2nd, 2012, 6:49 am

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby thatchio » March 2nd, 2016, 10:52 pm

He threatened CARAG board members, committee members, and attendees at a CARAG land use committee meeting about the hotel stating that they better consult both the organization's legal counsel as well as their family counsel before voting at the committee meeting because he and his allies had lawyered up. He has been vicious to me in the past, specifically at the Bender/Killian/Tuthill Ward 10 DFL convention. While I can appreciate his values, passion, and commitment, his tactics are really aggressive. In my opinion, his threat at the meeting undermined his credibility and the credibility of the vote as people could have been compelled to vote a certain way due to his threat.

TroyGBiv
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 658
Joined: July 6th, 2012, 10:33 pm

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby TroyGBiv » March 2nd, 2016, 11:04 pm

I am in the middle of a Next-door fight about this right now... mostly around the SAP... The fear and aversion to development is irrational... not informed by fact and is regressive at best. Very small minded... I love how many group homes and drug treatment centers we have in Whittier... we speak up but jeez--- if one of them opened up with a Martini bar we would "check-in" for treatment...

thatchio
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 194
Joined: August 2nd, 2012, 6:49 am

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby thatchio » March 2nd, 2016, 11:23 pm

^ What is the crux of your argument? As someone who was on the USAP Steering Committee, the proposed hotel is not consistent with the full massing recommendations within the plan. The plan would support aspects of the project, such as increasing density, being located against the street, using district parking / parking management strategies, building a hotel, etc. We also have other plans that would support projects like this.

The argument that Phil lays out in the Strib piece is relatively reasonable. While I personally like the project, it takes a pretty broad read of the plan to say it supports it and it certainly doesn't fit with some of the recommendations, as he points out.

As previously stated, I'd much rather see the city revisit its approach to massing and height in zoning to make FAR and height rigid variance requests. Shift the fights to planning processes. It is silly that C2 and C3A zoning is 56' while R6 is 84'. It creates an ambiguous condition that creates expectations of flexibility in the development community based upon precedent and planning guidance...rewarding risk takers who see opportunities to make precedent-setting projects happen in areas that were often assumed to be off limits to certain heights. It sets up expectations with residents that height is an absolute while the code in fact is not that.

This project is a perfect example of where a developer is pushing what was previously generally accepted in the development community as unlikely to be approved. While other projects in the area have grown as the market pushed for bigger projects and land prices have increased accordingly (thereby requiring larger projects) and community preferences have evolved to be more accepting of height (though clearly not exclusively), the developer is willing to take a gamble and propose this project. Growing up just a few blocks south of here, I never would have guessed that a project of this scale would be proposed here. That said, I do like the project but think the rationale for the city approving such a project should not be based on the USAP.

RailBaronYarr
Capella Tower
Posts: 2625
Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby RailBaronYarr » March 3rd, 2016, 8:52 am

If we want to change the planning process to be less restrictive while flexible in negotiating for variances/etc so that more intense development is allowed to a much more rigid ceiling, then we better make that change pretty substantial. Neighbors feel the USAP represents a pro-development tool that had very long optics, on the 20-30 year time frame. We're seeing that just isn't the case only 8 years after adoption. I'll beat by horse again by saying that focusing intense development in a very small share of the total greater Uptown land (the Activity Center plus urban village) is a pretty narrow reading of pro-development when blocks on blocks of prime Uptown-adjacent land in CARAG and the Wedge are zoned R2B, with R1A/R1 common in East Isles and ECCO. Add in the fact that the USAP actually recommended less intensity on the blocks north of 29th and south of Lake relative to what zoning allowed in order to protect SFHs.

What I'm getting at is, if we change the USAP or Comp Plan or combination of the two, it better be pretty big to have a much longer relevant life than 8 years. And, we should care less about protecting the values of SFHs as a core principle of whatever redo there is. We SFH owners represent 15-20% of the population, and people who bought any time in the last 10-20 years have seen 6-7% annual returns on the estimated value of their homes **despite the massive housing market crash**.

acs
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1364
Joined: March 26th, 2014, 8:41 pm

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby acs » March 3rd, 2016, 9:27 am

If you want to make the SAP the gold standard for planning, then you should be required to re-do it at least every 2 years and include much more input from the much broader neighborhood outside of old white homeowners who bout and raised kids 15+ years ago. I know that's not practical, which is why we have other more flexible methods that are more responsive. I don't really give a shit how long Joe Shmo has lived in X house, he doesn't have a crystal ball let alone a 40 year one. Why should we let these people have any say in what the city looks like in 2040 when they will be long dead and forgotten by then? The ones with the most say in our land use and transportation planning are also the ones who won't have to live long with their decisions.

amiller92
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1983
Joined: October 31st, 2014, 12:50 pm

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby amiller92 » March 3rd, 2016, 10:07 am

Comments are going well. For now at least.
Is there a plan for comments? If not, how can anyone know what to say?

grant1simons2
IDS Center
Posts: 4371
Joined: February 8th, 2014, 11:33 pm
Location: Marcy-Holmes

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby grant1simons2 » March 3rd, 2016, 10:24 am

Shenanigans

acs
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1364
Joined: March 26th, 2014, 8:41 pm

Re: Uptown Hotel Discussion

Postby acs » March 3rd, 2016, 12:19 pm

http://m.startribune.com/uptown-hotel-l ... ection=%2F

Appeal denied, we have clearance for takeoff.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests