38th Street Station Area

[Mooglemuffins]

The at-grade parking is mostly under the apartments above and largely hidden from view from the street. The at-grade parking is intended for commercial users/customers, and is important for retail to succeed. The portion that is at-grade and open to the sky, not covered by apartments, will be landscaped. There will be a few pedestrian paths from parking to sidewalks, plaza and retail.

It is the "hidden from view from the street" that concerns me. Parking spaces beneath apartments and hidden from the street seems likely to increase the risks of physical/verbal victimization; it seems to create spaces where someone could easily hide/lurk, or where someone could be easily dragged.

This location (unlike the Longfellow Grill location), poses a distinct safety risk in that it is anchored by a bar. People who have been drinking are more prone to behave in unlawful and unsafe ways. I am supportive of the development, and would like the design of the large building to undergo a Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) review by professionals trained in CPTED.

This is fair point indeed, especially considering the ruckus that happens around the downtown Hennepin bars on the weekends. I am understanding of the worry about the safety.

Has there been any history of trouble around the Cardinal though? I live right near the Schooner Tavern on Lake and I've never seen any issues there even though it's a bar. Then again Schooner is all just street parking or people from the neighborhood walking in.

[MNdible]

Last time I was at the Cardinal, there was a child's birthday party happening. It's not really attracting the rough and tumble crowd.

[RailBaronYarr]

I think that's an easy thing to say as a (I'm making a potentially small leap here) white male. The Cardinal is still a bar, and places that don't serve liquor but with poor design are still places where women can be attacked, stalked, etc. I'm not sure I'm the right person to comment on the particular design elements of that parking lot, but I think if a woman (I'm assuming Sara identifies as such) states that a design like that is problematic, it's worthwhile to acknowledge that.

[John21]

I certainly think it's a valid concern, I'm just not sure it's that different than the Longfellow Grill building. Hopefully with it being a multi tenant building with a transit station next door, there will be plenty of eyes around to discourage any crime. Obviously anecdotal, I can see The Cardinal from my house and in the 7 years I've been here, I've never seen the cops there.

[kirby96]

I've spent WAAAY too much time at the Cardinal (they used to sponsor my softball team, so was there roughly once a week from April to October for about 8 years). Never saw any trouble there other than a teammates bike being stolen (and almost certainly not by a patron). Crowd skewed older as might be expected and was heavily 'regular' oriented, at least it was up until a couple years ago, they did a minor concept change in the past couple years to go (slightly) more upscale, which was kind of a bummer because I actually thought they did a better than expected job with regular ole burger baskets 1974 style.

I suppose you can always get some randoms that stop in and drink too much, though.

[seanrichardryan]

The at-grade parking is mostly under the apartments above and largely hidden from view from the street. The at-grade parking is intended for commercial users/customers, and is important for retail to succeed. The portion that is at-grade and open to the sky, not covered by apartments, will be landscaped. There will be a few pedestrian paths from parking to sidewalks, plaza and retail.

It is the "hidden from view from the street" that concerns me. Parking spaces beneath apartments and hidden from the street seems likely to increase the risks of physical/verbal victimization; it seems to create spaces where someone could easily hide/lurk, or where someone could be easily dragged.

This location (unlike the Longfellow Grill location), poses a distinct safety risk in that it is anchored by a bar. People who have been drinking are more prone to behave in unlawful and unsafe ways. I am supportive of the development, and would like the design of the large building to undergo a Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) review by professionals trained in CPTED.

Let it be written into the zoning code that all inside corners shall now be banished. And alleys too.

[Sara Bergen]

The at-grade parking is mostly under the apartments above and largely hidden from view from the street. The at-grade parking is intended for commercial users/customers, and is important for retail to succeed. The portion that is at-grade and open to the sky, not covered by apartments, will be landscaped. There will be a few pedestrian paths from parking to sidewalks, plaza and retail.

It is the "hidden from view from the street" that concerns me. Parking spaces beneath apartments and hidden from the street seems likely to increase the risks of physical/verbal victimization; it seems to create spaces where someone could easily hide/lurk, or where someone could be easily dragged.

This location (unlike the Longfellow Grill location), poses a distinct safety risk in that it is anchored by a bar. People who have been drinking are more prone to behave in unlawful and unsafe ways. I am supportive of the development, and would like the design of the large building to undergo a Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) review by professionals trained in CPTED.

Let it be written into the zoning code that all inside corners shall now be banished. And alleys too.

Place-making with safety in mind has nothing to do with banning inside corners and alleys. Your comment indicates it is insane and extreme to acknowledge that the built environment can encourage or discourage assault, and there is zero value to designing with safety in mind. Designing with pedestrian safety as one component of design does not mean neglecting other areas. Much like designing a building to one of the LEED standards does not neglect other key components; it is just another layer of consideration.

(In response to alleys...art of safety is having options in terms of ingress and egress. If you see something or someone that doesn't look or feel right, you can get to where you are going using a different route. That is one reason why I love alleys.)

[Jacobean]

This location (unlike the Longfellow Grill location), poses a distinct safety risk in that it is anchored by a bar. People who have been drinking are more prone to behave in unlawful and unsafe ways. I am supportive of the development, and would like the design of the large building to undergo a Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) review by professionals trained in CPTED.

Longfellow Grill serves hard liquor. Cardinal serves beer and wine. What exactly makes it pose more of a "distinct safety risk"? Your perception of the patrons? The fact that it has the word "bar" in its name instead of "grill"?

[David Greene]

I hate to break up the 100% male fake outrage going on in the 38th street forum...

I completely understand Sara's concerns. Anyone who has talked to a woman about assault would. Safety is a big design issue and is often ignored.

Snarkiness is *not* appreciated.

[NickP]

Just jumping in, but want to add my support to Sara and David. Thank you for speaking up

[thatchio]

I can assure you that what Sara is suggesting, a CPTED review, is absolutely appropriate. We considered safety when designing buildings and the transit agency I work for also reviews station designs for safety. Hidden corners, lighting, location of activities....all play a role.

[kiliff75]

Does anyone have a sense of the timeline of this? I noticed a lot of the houses that need to be purchased and demolished are owner occupied and some are rentals. I assume that pushes back demolition at least a year or more...

[amiller92]

Just jumping in, but want to add my support to Sara and David. Thank you for speaking up

I agree that the snark re safety is weird and inappropriate.

I also agree that it's weird to view Longfellow Grill as not a safety problem but the Cardinal as one. They seem pretty similar to me, which probably makes them both safety problems.

[exiled_antipodean]

Ideally the courtyard parking is pretty visible to the residents around the courtyard, so there are eyes on the place even if not from the street, but from the buildings. Lighting etc makes a big difference, as well as multiple ways in and out. Benefits to the public realm of not having big parking lot out front are pretty high.

Lots of buildings in Europe have courtyard parking, so presumably these issues can be worked out.

The geometry of courtyard parking is also pretty space efficient, since essentially more of the access/turning space is shared and not exclusive to each car.

[John21]

Community meeting for this one is Wednesday at 6:30pm, Greater Friendship Missionary Baptist Church.

[minneboom]

How did the meeting go?

[Sara Bergen]

I attended the entire meeting and I thought it went well. This is written from memory and from my perspective which is very much in favor of this development, so take my recap with several grains of salt. Basics:
1) Goal is to start construction spring of 2017, end fall of 2019
2) 179 total parking spots, 90 underground
3) Two means of ingress to parking--off of 38th and 29th avenue. One parking egress, onto 29th avenue
4) They are negotiating with metrotransit to lease the land metrotransit owns. I believe the 9,000 retail building and outdoor community space will be on metrotransit land.
5) Buses will egress onto 29th avenue, take a left, and proceed east or west on 38th at the 29th ave/38th street stoplight. So the southern half to 1/3 part of the 3700 block of 29th avenue will experience new bus traffic. Lander has a standing offer to purchase the affected homes (the ones on the west side of the southern portion of the 3700 block of 29th ave) from current owners at above market value. They are doing this as one way to mitigate the disruption of increased bus traffic, and because if they purchase enough of the houses on the southern portion of the westside of the 3700 block of 29th ave, they see a future infill development opportunity. They already own or have purchase agreements for all of the houses on the east side of the 3700 block of 29th ave.
6) There is no affordable housing funding or restrictions. However, the current pro-forma allows the development to successfully cash flow with 27 of the units renting at 60% ami (affordable to those making 60% or more of area median income), and 24 additional units renting at 80% ami.
7) Lander plans on relocating its offices to the top floor of the 9,000 square foot retail/commercial building.
8) Several people who are directly affected brought up concerns about the height of the back wall of the property on the south side of 38th street.
9) Some other people (or maybe the same people) were also concerned about the (perceived?--I don't say perceived to minimize crime concerns, I just don't know if crime has actually increased in that area) uptick in crime along 38th street between 28th ave. and the light rail. CM Johnson pointed out that this development includes streetscape (sidewalk, lighting) improvements that likely would not be done but for this development.
10) There was a lot of discussion focused on parking. There was concern that there was not enough parking and that it would overflow into the neighborhood. None of the parking is intended as park and ride or kiss and ride. I asked how that was going to be enforced and lander responded that they really could not enforce it. I thought that was a strange response, because there are tools to enforce parking restrictions. One person expressed concern that this area was not devoted to parking for park and ride as there would be more light rail riders if they could park at the light rail. There was not an opportunity to explain to him why filling urban light rail stops with park and rides is poor land use practice.
11) Lander has been working with the City of Mpls regarding road construction, and said that Mpls taxpayers are getting high-quality, thoughtful, professional service from the Mpls planning (not sure if that is the right dept) employees. Lander (Michael Pink was the representative) said the City has been good to work with and have a tremendous attention to detail.
12) The Cardinal Bar owner was there. He said they are staying put and have been working with lander to ensure a successful integration of the Cardinal into the development.
11) Overall the tone was amicable. The architect, lander, and the landscape designer responded to questions respectfully.

My opinion:
This site is incredibly complicated due to the close proximity to the lightrail and the various municipalities involved: Mpls. with creating new streets etc., and the met council re land lease and negotiating improved transit service. Not many developers would be willing to work within these constraints. I am impressed with Lander's vision and their willingness and patience to work within the confines of public process to get this thing shovel ready. Negotiating land leases and building new city streets are complex tasks that take years of planning/negotiations. Sharing site control (with met council) also makes it difficult (or more expensive) to get financing. I think the parking design needs to be tweaked. (I am not sure how--it just seems that one form of egress is going to create bottlenecks, and again the parking courtyard seems odd. If there were drawings that were more clear maybe that would help. I am not a particularly visual person and it was difficult for me to understand the plan without more specific drawings.) I give kudos to Lander for its steadfast commitment to this project. I really am hoping it gets built.
Part of my enthusiasm for this project is that I think it will contribute positively to the neighborhood in the long-term because it is well-positioned to maintain high residential occupancy because the residential portion is not flush with expensive (to the owner), amenities. Many new construction multifamily buildings include amenities that are expensive to build and maintain: pools, luxury party areas, fitness areas with classes, rooftop decks/party area, pet daycare/grooming, etc. These amenities add a lot of expenses, and the % of sq. feet devoted to revenue-generating uses is decreased. For these reasons, I think the high-amenity projects are at increased risk of cash-flowing during economic downturns or a decrease in market demand for high-amenity buildings. In contrast, this development does not include many of these amenities--that is why (I am guessing) the project cash-flows with some of the rents at 60% AMI. Because the common-space expenses are lower, rents remain lower. This decreases costs to the tenants, and being on the lightrail further decreases costs to tenants because it is more likely tenants can get by with one or zero cars. The lower expenses, and hence lower rents, will encourage higher-occupancy for the long term. The main caveat is the retail/commercial. If that is not able to successfully lease up, that could cause serious financial problems. It would be interesting to see how the retail will be priced, and at what vacancy it is being underwritten.

[Anondson]

Fantastic summary. Really get into details journalists never bother with!

[kiliff75]

Great summary and I thank you for your time and effort bringing clarity to the members of this site and to the neighborhood (I live nearby at 41st and 21st). I have a quick question, do they aim to start this spring or is this supposed to say spring of 2018?

1) Goal is to start construction spring of 2017, end fall of 2019

Thanks again for covering this so thoroughly!

[Sara Bergen]

Oh duh thanks for finding that. Yes, I meant to type spring of 2018.