urbanMSP

Interesting, I can actually see that being really nice there granted they can find somewhere other than next to it for the parking ramp. A couple of them have better roof details than the other

I would be more for saving the buildings if they had been maintained over the years, But at this point they have just become money pits. To try and fix them and bring them to a reasonable code would probably be more than they would be able to get back from rents unless you are going high end. I would hope that they would do two towers instead of a big Block long Latitude, Have a full two story podium with at least 5-7 store fronts like Walkway. Have the lobbies smaller and have the amenities shared on the second level in between the towers. I really want to see multiple store fronts along this block.

The CLPC has always been an influential group with development projects in Loring Park. I believe the neighborhood will want a building with good pedestrian oriented retail at the base, particularly since it would face Nicollet Ave. I doubt any proposal will get very far unless that's included with this parcel.

Sanity check: 1500 Nicollet is the SW corner of the intersection, right? So whatever is proposed for that spot would involve knocking down five little buildings? Can't we do something about the surface parking at 1501 on the NW corner instead?

Sanity check: who is "we" to decide what land owners own which corner. "We" can't just give the north west corner property to this developer because preservation. The time line of each blocks development is based on its owner not because of what's near by.

1501 Nicollet is not the most easily developable space either: http://gis.hennepin.us/property/map/def ... 2924420051

The City has some decisions to make there with regards to vacating streets, rebuilding 15th on a narrow ROW, etc. before anything can happen. It's kind of a mess. They essentially built a new street through the middle of the block (where 16th curves to meet 15th), but they never eliminated the old 15th and 16th on that block, both of which are now superfluous. "Old" 15th Street East could be reduced down to basically a sidewalk, to enlarge the potential development parcel. 16th should be vacated as well and filled in with buildings. It's a really complicated situation that the City and a developer (and the adjacent building owners) are going to have to work to resolve, but that could be years and millions of public dollars away. It's kind of an apples and oranges comparison between the two blockfaces.

The city really destroyed a lot of the street grid and periphery neighborhoods when they built and then expanded the convention center.

Sanity check: 1500 Nicollet is the SW corner of the intersection, right? So whatever is proposed for that spot would involve knocking down five little buildings? Can't we do something about the surface parking at 1501 on the NE corner instead?

Sanity check: who is "we" to decide what land owners own which corner. "We" can't just give the north west corner property to this developer because preservation. The time line of each blocks development is based on its owner not because of what's near by.

(note: just realized that I wrote "NW" instead of "NE" when referring to 1501)

I realize that "we" can't directly do anything about this. That was more of a societal "we," as in "why does an intersection with nothing/nothing interesting on two corners and old, small storefronts on the other two corners have to see the interesting parts redeveloped before the other two?" It's the same thing as the Sartori proposal in North where the shitty strip mall on one side is apparently off-limits, while the two-block long row of fabulous old buildings are targeted for removal. WUT?

Nathan: I realize that. I never claimed I didn't. I was ranting/groaning/whining.

FMP: Your ideas intrigue me and I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Tyler: Thank you.

* * * *

Here's something "we" actually *can* do, and by "we" I mean "the elected officials of the City of MPLS": make it clear to developers and property owners that priority #1 for the livability of this city is the urbane nature. At any given intersection in any given neighborhood, it is always preferable to upgrade/replace auto-centric development *before* touching old classically urban build forms.

I understand that there's a lot of nuance to this: such an argument could easily be co-opted by groups such as Save Dinkytown. But ultimately, the Venue at Dinkytown objectively upgraded the urban nature of the area *regardless* of any of the entirely subjective "look and feel of Dinkytown" arguments.

If properly written, reviewed, and supported by planning staff/city councilors (is that what we landed on?)/mayor/whomever, any time a proposal such as this one or Sartori came up, the developers could be told "hey, look at that parking lot/strip mall/gas station across the street. You talk with the owner over there; we'll do whatever we can to help you invest in this area and improve it wholesale rather than knocking down existing urbane building stock and leaving that crap how it is."

Pipe dream? Obviously. But there are many smarter people than I who could work with an idea like this and poke/patch holes in it to make for a workable policy.

<cynicism>And then the State of MN would pass a bill for some big development that overrides all local ordinances and prevents an old building from being saved/repurposed.</cynicism>

I understand that surface lots are more suitable, but when numerous people are vying for this particular project to be built on adjacent surface lots without even seeing renderings or knowing anything about it, it's a little ridiculous.

I totally agree with the idea of using underutilized parcels first, but that's a conversation for elsewhere.

So even if the proposal is gorgeous and urbane and spectacular, I can't wish it was across the street? So then this short stretch of Nicollet would have nice frontage on two sides instead of one?

I'm sure we've discussed this before, but it seems like this could be a good opportunity to extend Oak Grove Street back to Nicollet.

A better, more official connection for peds yes. For cars though? Probably not a great idea as a full intersection.

With streetcar on the way, I'd err on the side of fewer vehicular intersections with Nicollet, not more. I'm not sure you'd want cars pulling up to Nicollet and attempting to make a left from Oak Grove, across two streetcar tracks. And even if cars were restricted to right turn on Nicollet only, why not use Blaisdell>Groveland?

I could see a case for right turn only from Nicollet into an Oak Grove "alley" or access to the development. But I'd definitely make that a RIRO situation.

There were proposals for the "street meter farm" parking lot kitty corner to the 1500 Nicollet block quite a few years back. If they redevelop 1500 Nicollet that might create some interest in that parking lot again. Agree it would be nice to have both sides of Nicollet Ave rebuilt, but one block at time I guess. As for Oak Grove, I don't' think opening it up to more traffic would be appealing. If anything, it should somehow become more like a nicely landscaped pocket park/pedestrian walkway between LaSalle and Nicollet (with motor vehicle access to the apartments only).

This is also a good opportunity to build a land bridge along the west side of Nicollet across 94 and reintroduce some continuity to the streetscape, taxable parcels, etc. Especially if there is some street and bridge reconfiguration work going on with the streetcar project.

Many have stated that if there was ever an ideal location in Minneapolis to replicate Columbus' "Cap at Union Station", it would be when replacing the Nicollet Ave bridge over I-94. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone in power is talking about it yet. I (and urbanmsp'ers TheUrbanGopher and degersblogg) actually created this very proposal for an Urban Studies class back in 2012.

Many have stated that if there was ever an ideal location in Minneapolis to replicate Columbus' "Cap at Union Station", it would be when replacing the Nicollet Ave bridge over I-94. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone in power is talking about it yet. I (and urbanmsp'ers TheUrbanGopher and degersblogg) actually created this very proposal for an Urban Studies class back in 2012.

I myself was pretty surprised at how much simply redoing the bridge on Lasalle improved the bridge, taking out the chain fence and making it look as nice as Lasalle will go along way. Plus a nice up-kept public pathway next to the freeway connecting to Lasalle sure would be nice. Perhaps pushing the bus shelter back a touch to allow for more visibility while crossing the freeway pass may help. Heck maybe even a pocket park half way along the path (from Nicollet to Lasalle) could really make the area feel more inviting.

The existing buildings are neat and do add a lot to downtown, however they clearly are not being kept up with so I can understand the desire to tear them down. Heck even a 6 floor building here would greatly increase density in this area and improve downtown! I'd be hoping for 12-20 floors which would be wonderful IMO. Plus if they widen the ally then they could hide the parking entrance in the back making the 15th street and Nicollet street sides very walking friendly. Which could potentially remove 3 car entrances along Nicollet ave, seems like a great way to improve this area.

15th Street Market was looking pretty empty the other day I stopped by. Havn't been inside for a looong time! I asked the cashier if they were doing a remodel or closing he said remodel, somewhat suspiciously. I wouldn't rule out spraying for pests either as the site did look to have gone downhill even farther since I last visited the shop. Wondering if anybody knows anything more or has any opinions about the market store.

The 15th Street Market is a roach infested toilet!...IMO ( obviously)

While I don't think the current buildings are worthy of historic designation, etc. they do have their own charm - they just need to be cleaned up and get better tenants. A quality restaurant on that corner in the current 15th Street Market building could be a huge draw/improvement to the area. Huge windows overlooking the street, etc.

I think the price tag for the lots was sticker shock to most MN investors. After LPM I don't see that much interest from out state developers at this time. That was put on the market before LPM was finished and before they found out how slow the area would fill compared to other neighborhoods near the core.