Suburbs - General Topics

[Mdcastle]

I know this is getting way off topic, but are buyers really wanting "open concept" or is that a trope of home remodeling shows so they get to show a bunch of walls being busted down. I like having a "closed concept" where I can't see all the clutter in the kitchen while watching TV.

[David Greene]

Sure, plus a bath!- http://j.mp/1VLNMrG

Yeah.

I have a suspicion that supply of these kinds of houses is low not because demand doesn't exist but because builders are stuck in a 1950's mode of thinking.

We've visited some of these homes on the Minneapolis/St. Paul Home Tour and while they're not my individual style (no new construction is ) they would make very nice homes for many, many people.

[RailBaronYarr]

I know this is getting way off topic, but are buyers really wanting "open concept" or is that a trope of home remodeling shows so they get to show a bunch of walls being busted down. I like having a "closed concept" where I can't see all the clutter in the kitchen while watching TV.

I mean, to each their own, right? I would say there are definitely trends that aren't just style (color of tile or cabinets or granite or fixtures, which come and go moreso) defining what buyers want. A more open floorplan is definitely on my want list. Before I had a kid, it was just a sharper look in my opinion. Now that I have a 15 month old walking around (and may have another 1-2, who knows!), an open floorplan on the main level would make it MUCH easier to see what he's doing (climbing up the stairs? getting into the garbage can on our kitchen floor? too close to the stairs to the basement?). Open layouts also allow light from different sides of the house to pass to other rooms, which is nice if certain sides are shaded or lacking bigger windows. I also prefer openness when people congregate in my house. I've noticed that people congregate int he kitchen whether it's dirty/cluttered or not anyway, so I'd rather be able to see everyone and keep the flow open. I find that if I don't like clutter, it's best to just clean it up

Anyway. Other examples of things people want/like that are difficult or cost-prohibitive (to get most/all) in renovating old homes include: a private master bathroom, main floor half bath, finished basement with a ceiling height >6.5', main floor laundry, forced air heating (and, cooling), I could go on. To be sure, we can judge how worthy these "needs" are (and, against other societal goals like reducing climate impact). I'm with you that the "need" for each child in a house to have their own bedroom is ludicrous. In a world where the vast majority of households have <3 people (and most family households have 3-4 people), a 2 BR home could suit something like 80% of households quite comfortably if both children shared a bedroom, with 3 BRs being a total luxury (but quite easy to find in many attached housing developments - including row homes and even apartments).

Full disclosure, I live in an old 2 story home with 3 BR (up) and an 800 sqft foundation, just carved out space from the biggest bedroom for a small master, and plan on eventually converting the back porch (which has finished space above it but is used mostly for the dogs to chill out when we're gone) into a finished pantry/mud room/laundry/possibly small half bath. My personal opinion is that a home of this size could easily have 2 parents and 3 children, plus a dog, no sweat.

[Mdcastle]

Sure, plus a bath!- http://j.mp/1VLNMrG

Yeah.

I have a suspicion that supply of these kinds of houses is low not because demand doesn't exist but because builders are stuck in a 1950's mode of thinking.

We've visited some of these homes on the Minneapolis/St. Paul Home Tour and while they're not my individual style (no new construction is ) they would make very nice homes for many, many people.

Although it's on an urban lot, is seems to be 1950s thinking in terms of size and features. What about building a new street full of a dozen of these instead of three or four 3000 square foot houses?

[Anondson]

Turns out exporting the suburban experience to northern lake shores permanently damages the northern lakes. And the northern county boards really don't seem to mind and don't like that people care about it.

http://www.startribune.com/from-runoff- ... 321099071/

[Tiller]

I've noticed over the summer that Maplewood is putting in sidewalks all over the place. Is there a plan or something that shows where these are going in, or is it just happening ad-hoc?

[sdho]

I've noticed over the summer that Maplewood is putting in sidewalks all over the place. Is there a plan or something that shows where these are going in, or is it just happening ad-hoc?

Maplewood has possibly the best vision for local streets anywhere in the metro through their excellent Living Streets policy. Not only are they adding sidewalks, but the new streets are generally quite narrow, provide for more green space, and manage most of the runoff within the right-of-way:

http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/docum ... policy.pdf

Seriously -- Minneapolis, St. Paul, and every other city and suburb could stand to do this well. When I went to a presentation on it a few years ago, they'd only had a chance to reconstruct a couple streets under the policy so far, but they seemed to be working really well.

[sdho]

26' roadway is typical, as narrow as 24' as needed. My only gripe with this cross section is that I think the roadway should remain centered to provide the space for sidewalks on both sides, should they wish to add the second walk later on.

[Mdcastle]

Bicyclists still have to ride on the street or sidewalk though, no cycletracks or MUPs.

On a different note, I went to Menards and noticed the Richfield pedestrian-scale light fixures come in two styles of of High Pressure Sodium, as well as Ceramic Metal Halide and LED...

[sdho]

Bicyclists still have to ride on the street or sidewalk though, no cycletracks or MUPs.

The cross section I posted was just a minor residential street. If you look at the whole policy, collectors and arterials have MUPs and/or bike lanes. Cycletracks are not envisioned, although hopefully a future update might include them

On a different note, I went to Menards and noticed the Richfield pedestrian-scale light fixures come in two styles of of High Pressure Sodium, as well as Ceramic Metal Halide and LED...

Yeah there must be like 8 different iterations of those shepherd's crook lights. The oldest are around 77th and Lyndale, followed by City Bella and 66th roundabout areas. There are also slightly different "dark sky" models in front of city hall. I believe those are all HPS. The ones along 77th, and in front of Wendy's, Lakewind's, and LA Fitness farther up on Lyndale are purchased by the developer, and I think each is slightly different. Same general style, though.

I actually think it was pretty clever how Menards continued the lights along their building where the building hugs the sidewalk. I wish they'd also included the light posts along the Nicollet frontage, though.

As part of the Portland reconstruction, I'm told all the lights along Portland (67th-77th) will be replaced with LED shepherd's crook, plus some taller "shoebox" fixtures at the intersections.

[twincitizen]

I've noticed over the summer that Maplewood is putting in sidewalks all over the place. Is there a plan or something that shows where these are going in, or is it just happening ad-hoc?

Maplewood has possibly the best vision for local streets anywhere in the metro through their excellent Living Streets policy. Not only are they adding sidewalks, but the new streets are generally quite narrow, provide for more green space, and manage most of the runoff within the right-of-way:

http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/docum ... policy.pdf

Seriously -- Minneapolis, St. Paul, and every other city and suburb could stand to do this well. When I went to a presentation on it a few years ago, they'd only had a chance to reconstruct a couple streets under the policy so far, but they seemed to be working really well.

This is a great subject for a streets.mn post.

[MNdible]

Seriously -- Minneapolis, St. Paul, and every other city and suburb could stand to do this well.

Comparing apples to apples -- that is, low volume residential streets to low volume residential streets -- I'd say that Minneapolis and St. Paul's typical street sections stand up quite well. As noted, they have sidewalks on both sides, and generally have decent boulevards. Lane widths seem reasonable. The only aspect which one might quibble with is providing parking on both sides of the street, but it's no doubt easier to dispense with this in Maplewood because of the lower density and greater likelihood of off-street parking.

[Mdcastle]

Ceramic Metal Halide is very common in Chicago, but Richfield is the only place here I've seen them used for street lighting here. There's a few induction lights around, on the 46th test section and in Hudson, but they never were used much here either.

I do like the Shepards Crook lights, there about the best of the "fake history" lights. I really think the dark sky lanterns Minneapolis uses look dumb, like the glass that's supposed to be there isn't. And using ones, even with glass, in front of the Shakopee Walmart is dumb. In some history districts non-cutoff lighting might even be appropriate. Stillwater uses full-cutoff lighting downtown but now they want to floodlight the building facades.

Also of note, mercury vapor bulbs are banned at the end of this year. So the last remaining street lights and everyones NEMA head "barn light" will need to be converted. There's a few Bloomington maintained mercury lights left at signalized intersections.

[sdho]

Comparing apples to apples -- that is, low volume residential streets to low volume residential streets -- I'd say that Minneapolis and St. Paul's typical street sections stand up quite well. As noted, they have sidewalks on both sides, and generally have decent boulevards. Lane widths seem reasonable. The only aspect which one might quibble with is providing parking on both sides of the street, but it's no doubt easier to dispense with this in Maplewood because of the lower density and greater likelihood of off-street parking.

I think Minneapolis and St. Paul (especially Minneapolis) have a great baseline, but there's been very little innovation. Nothing is catastrophically wrong, but I see some deficiencies:

1. St. Paul streets are too wide at 36', unless it's moderately busy and has heavy parking usage.
2. Minneapolis streets are fine at 32' typical, but 28' would probably be better where there isn't really heavy on-street parking usage
3. Minneapolis streets could go down to one-side parking in many neighborhoods -- down to a 24 or 26' section like that. There are some areas that already have sections like this, like in Tangletown.
4. Minneapolis residential sidewalks are excessively wide, in my opinion. I think 5' would serve just as well in a single-family home area as 6-7' with less impervious surface and less for homeowners to shovel.
5. Not addressed in the Maplewood plan either, but the junctions of minor streets aren't great. Basketweave stop signs are used in Minneapolis -- but options like neighborhood traffic circles might be better.

[sdho]

I do like the Shepards Crook lights, there about the best of the "fake history" lights. I really think the dark sky lanterns Minneapolis uses look dumb, like the glass that's supposed to be there isn't. And using ones, even with glass, in front of the Shakopee Walmart is dumb. In some history districts non-cutoff lighting might even be appropriate. Stillwater uses full-cutoff lighting downtown but now they want to floodlight the building facades.

Unfortunately, there are few options in terms of attractive, modern-looking street lights -- except those 70s designs everyone hates, like the frosted globe on a bare metal pole, or the retired glass cube mercury lights that used to grace the Minneapolis parkways.

The Metro Transit facility along Hiawatha LRT trail used to have some cool, simple plain metal ones, but they've been removed in favor of a much bigger installation of "historic"-style lights.

I actually really dig those glassless dark sky lights Minneapolis uses. Nice look, less space for dead bugs to get in, and less glass that could get broken by a vandal. For a bizarre mix of post lights, you should check out E 42nd St between 35W and 4th Ave. There are like five different styles of lanterns within a couple of blocks, mostly LED.

[seanrichardryan]

New 'lifestyle center' in Chanhassen to replace farmland: http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/m ... mland.html

[mattaudio]

15.9 acres of conservation. How wonderful!

[MNdible]

Is this the development that they're conjecturing the Vikings will move into?

[Mdcastle]

Yes it is.

Seems like a good fit for the area. Eden Prairie Center is a ways away, and a lot of people don't like parking in the next state and then walking all the way across the mall to visit a mall type store anyway. I've always preferred the Mall of America over the others based on how close to the door you can park.

[David Greene]

I really think the dark sky lanterns Minneapolis uses look dumb, like the glass that's supposed to be there isn't.

I agree. Most of the lights in the Wedge are decent enough, as they have glass, but the ones installed south of 28th (by developers, I presume) are awful, exactly because of the missing glass.

I love the '60's-era cube lights the park board put up. It's sad to see them slowly being replaced.

I also really dig the globe lights along Linden Hills Blvd.