urbanMSP

Will the city/county decide to do any sort of traffic calming on Fourth (and University) given all the pedestrian-friendly development going on? In my experience, people use the 36' wide roadway from 13th (sometimes 14th if the lights time) to speed through to the light at 10th - with no on-street parking, bollards, few trees, or anything separating the massive amount of people from 35 mph+ cars. If there is indeed commercial planned for this, then I'd say there should be a re-evaluation of the amount of sidewalk space and how traffic is treated.

http://streetmix.net/alexcecchini/59/4t ... -dinkytown (right side parking replaced with bus bulb at stops, and this lane could accommodate future streetcars)

Sorry, just thinking out loud about how one of the most pedestrian-rich areas in the state can manage with such bad street design.

http://finance-commerce.com/2014/05/co- ... dinkytown/ (locked)

60-65 units. Notice the nice retail frontage and "Coffee Bar" added to the rendering. I hope this happens.

a perfect example of a neighborhood group helping a good project become amazing. let's not forget that these groups aren't always terrible... lol

http://finance-commerce.com/2014/05/co- ... dinkytown/ (locked)

60-65 units. Notice the nice retail frontage and "Coffee Bar" added to the rendering. I hope this happens.

a perfect example of a neighborhood group helping a good project become amazing. let's not forget that these groups aren't always terrible... lol

Totally agree. The neighborhood groups around the University (Marcy-Holmes, Como, PPERRIA) have actually been more supportive of development than I thought they would. Aside from Dinkytown, MHNA is really trying to advertise density around major arteries in University, 4th, and 15th. PPERRIA wants really big development around the industrial area north of University. Como hasnt seen too much development interest yet and might see more resistance, but also hosts some new affordable housing stock by the old Bunge mill and Van Cleve Park.

Another thing about this project - I dont see the luxury market continuing for much longer, but more affordable projects like this have the potential to stake a serious market in the area. Gaining land and applying for subsidies seems to be an arduous appeal.

Floorplans & renders

http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/www/gro ... 126275.pdf

Looks good! Also, according to the renderings at least, this will be called "The Maison". Fits right in with The Chateau.

Ok just throwing some gas on a save Dinkytown fire, but I was really curious how these nonprofit co-ops stack up in terms of property taxes to private market rate units. Obviously things aren't 100% apples to apples, but the 412 Lofts building is on the very same block as the Chateau (technically a less ideal location being a bit further), and has no retail/commercial space. Here are some stats:

412 Lofts: 102 units (mix of studio, 1-, 2-, & 3-BR units), 0.86 acres, $356k/yr paid in property taxes
Chateau: 128 units (mix of studio, 1-, 2-, 3-, & 4-BR units), 0.96 acres, $115k/yr paid in property taxes.

Is it the non-profit status that allows the Chateau (and I presume other Riverton and future The Maison) to have such lower prop taxes, or is it the age/quality of the structure? Henn Cty lists the Chateau's market value at $8.3 mil, but taxable value at ~$5.6m, while 412 Lofts is both market and taxable at $16.3m.

Either way, the per-unit property tax gap adds about $216/mo. I'm not ragging on this development or Riverton (indeed, I like both quite a bit), I was just pointing out the gap and how our property tax structure treats different properties a bit unfairly (and if age/quality is a big component of the difference, it encourages letting properties deteriorate).

My property taxes are about $500 less than a neighbor with a smaller house. Why? Because ten years ago I took advantage of a state program to extensively remodel my house with a ten year 100% tax shelter on the improvements, with a five year adjustment phase after the full benefit ran out. you can't tell from the tax statement why my value is higher and my tax lower. So you may not have the whole story.

That's sort of what I was getting at by posing the question. I'm just wondering if anyone has any insight to what extent the NP status affects tax status with the city (excluding state/fed stuff), allowing Riverton to charge lower rents.

Deprecation of the asset must also be considered for the taxable value. This likely accounts for much of the gap.

As I understand it, depreciation only impacts corporate taxes, not property taxes.

Typically, the taxable value of a rental property is based on the amount of rental income that it generates, or its potential sale price (which is also ultimately based on rental income, because that's the only reason you'd own a rental property). So, it may be as simple as the older buildings not being able to (or not wanting to, because of a coop arrangement) command the same rent that the newer ones can.

Planning Commission Agenda tonight: http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/meeting ... S1P-127955

Staff report: http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/www/gro ... 127979.pdf

this came down! exciting!

https://flic.kr/p/oC3MAm

I was thinking this corner could be an awesome place for kafe421 to re locate!

Strib: http://www.startribune.com/business/273073631.html

Note: "The Maison" name is nowhere to be found. It is referred to as "Fourth Street Housing Cooperative" throughout. I'm guessing the name just hasn't been revealed yet, and clever UrbanMSP'ers are probably the only people who noticed it on the plans.

Photo from 9/5:


The Maison by twincitizen, on Flickr

What the heck is up with that tiny white apartment building in the background? Is that staying? *checks plans*

That building will be woefully out of scale with this new building and 412 Lofts, not to mention the Chateau. I can't believe it wasn't taken out when 412 Lofts was planned. Looks like it's privately owned and will almost certainly stay, as it's now basically impossible to redevelop, unless they wanted to build a *really* skinny building.

EDIT: Looks like they've set up a Flickr account of their own https://www.flickr.com/photos/riverton

I like when I see extreme variation in urban forms together like that -- makes me appreciate the different eras and needs during those eras. I personally am fine with it as-is, but if it were to get redeveloped into a skinny "shotgun" style building I'd love that just as well!

I noticed today walking by that this project has yet another name. According to Riverton companies it is now 4th Street Housing Cooperative.

Hello everyone! My name is Joe Goetzke and I am the Leasing and Marketing Manager for Riverton Community Housing. I happened across this thread while doing a Google search and I'm happy to see the discussion about our new building! We are definitely excited to be able to offer a brand new building to students that doesn't charge typical brand-new-building prices. Riverton is a non-profit housing manager/developer that specializes in developing and maintaining student-oriented housing cooperatives. It's a unique brand of housing that offers residents the opportunity to exercise control over their living situation, in addition to lower rents. As has been mentioned, we own the Chateau Student Housing Co-op directly northeast of the new building, in addition to the Marshall Student Housing Co-op (1405 5th St SE), the Marcy Park Student Housing Co-op (1000 8th St SE & 700 10th Ave SE), the Franklin Housing Co-op (2300 E. Franklin Ave) and Cole Townhomes (2425-2647 Cole Ave SE).

The new building will have 66-units ranging from studios to 3-bedrooms. The floor plans, rent rates and other info are up on our website at http://www.riverton.org/fourthstreet. 3D floor plans and more in-depth conceptual images of the lobby will be up on the site soon. I would be happy to answer any other questions!

Also - the co-ops we manage are considered "leasehold cooperatives", which means each unit is a homestead. This gives property tax benefits that the co-ops are able to pass onto to residents. This is one of the reasons the co-ops we manage are able to offer rents that are lower than most other buildings in the area. Additionally, for the new building we are skipping some of the amenities that other buildings offer (indoor basketball courts, movie theaters, tanning beds, etc.) in order to be able to offer students lower rent. We feel most students would gladly give up these lavish amenities in exchange for more affordability.

Have a nice day!

Joe Goetzke
Leasing and Marketing Manager
Riverton Community Housing
[email protected]