urbanMSP

I'm still waiting for the outcry from Save Dinkytown towards the 6-story, ground floor retail, no setbacks Maison.

The fact that there hasn't been an outcry may mean that there's actually some basis to their complaints, rather than pure unadulterated NIMBYism.

I don't know if I'd go that far. For whatever reason, they really only seem to care about the 4-block "core" of Dinkytown. Anything beyond it, even if it's just across the street, doesn't even rate a mention. See the Marshall lack of resistance. I know they say they couldn't get organized in time, but it's not like it's a time-consuming process to complain about things on Facebook.

I don't know if I'd go that far. For whatever reason, they really only seem to care about the 4-block "core" of Dinkytown. Anything beyond it, even if it's just across the street, doesn't even rate a mention. See the Marshall lack of resistance. I know they say they couldn't get organized in time, but it's not like it's a time-consuming process to complain about things on Facebook.

I've seen missed arguments on that. I think they realized they missed the boat on the Marshall, and that's what caused them to get up in arms. But then they claimed to only care about the 4 block area as to not seem like they wanted to hinder density around the U area. I feel like if you get rid of something they don't like (60's apartments) vs some old homes and retail stores they like... they'll cause a fuss. but they have no consistent basis for what they actually want in buildings, or the area.

I think Gina + Will is unique and certainly isn't at the same level as, say, Starbucks. But I have to quibble a bit with not calling it a chain. It's currently the first iteration, but Goodwill indicated in a few articles that they are very much interested in expanding this concept. Its nonprofit status is irrelevant, but wouldn't anything with 30 stores be a chain? It'll probably get a pass from most people since it's trendy in a different way than an Apple Store or North Face is trendy and not everyone will make the link to Goodwill.

http://ginapluswill.com/faq

Q: Will you be opening more stores soon?
A: We have no plans to open another Gina + Will store soon. Tell us how to make this one the best it can be!

I guess.. what's a chain? Mesa Pizza has 4 locations - are they a chain? I typically think of chains as having a franchise model, with at least a cross-state presence, and most of the time backed by a publicly traded corporation (or VC early on) with access to capital to afford expansion (and in particular in nice places). Goodwill doesn't really fit that in my mind, and when I think of deep-pocketed chains gentrifying (or milqu-toastifying) local businesses out of an area by driving rents up, they'd be toward the bottom of my list. But yeah, certainly not a Duffy's Pizza, Book House, or anything like that.

The fact that there hasn't been an outcry may mean that there's actually some basis to their complaints, rather than pure unadulterated NIMBYism.

Well, many of the arguments were against the scale, the cheap design, the destruction of existing structures, with fringe members complaining about added area traffic from new residents, etc. It's hard to say there isn't a little hypocrisy given the Riverton development embodies many of these elements found in other area apartments.

Thanks Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_store

Well, that's sort of my point. They may actually really care about the character of the historic core of Dinkytown (regardless of whether we think that's bogus or not), as opposed to just using that as an excuse to try to prevent any new development.

To them the character of the historic core is a parking lot.

To them the character of the historic core is a parking lot.

That's really not fair. Better to understand your opponents than belittle them.

http://ginapluswill.com/faq

Q: Will you be opening more stores soon?
A: We have no plans to open another Gina + Will store soon. Tell us how to make this one the best it can be!

I guess.. what's a chain? Mesa Pizza has 4 locations - are they a chain? I typically think of chains as having a franchise model, with at least a cross-state presence, and most of the time backed by a publicly traded corporation (or VC early on) with access to capital to afford expansion (and in particular in nice places). Goodwill doesn't really fit that in my mind, and when I think of deep-pocketed chains gentrifying (or milqu-toastifying) local businesses out of an area by driving rents up, they'd be toward the bottom of my list. But yeah, certainly not a Duffy's Pizza, Book House, or anything like that.

I'll have to find the article, but someone from Goodwill was quoted as saying they wanted to expand the concept (even though it might not be called Gina + Will).

The link Nathan provided is certainly prescriptive of what a chain is. I'd say I generally think chains don't start until at least 5+ locations (depending on how involved the original people/ownership is in day to day operations) and that there are different levels. Pizza Luce is what I think of as a "local chain". Gina + Will is a unique twist, but I still think it falls under a corporate-y/chain sort of thing.

More my point was that there isn't a single store that is truly run by the "salt of the earth" small businessperson running any of these. And that provides fodder for Save Dinkytown's talking points, fair or not.

I'll be interested to see the reaction when the Pizza Hut building inevitably (I hope) comes up for redevelopment. As an inarguably non-historic building containing just chain restaurants and an interchangeable yoga studio, with a non-public parking lot, there should be no tears shed about its demise. Bet there will be, though.

To them the character of the historic core is a parking lot.

That's really not fair. Better to understand your opponents than belittle them.

I have a hard time categorizing it as anything else. The lot was 70% parking lot, plus a dumpy old single story brick building of no particular note, other than it was owned by a business that didn't want to be there anymore. It was "change" and change is scary so they fought to protect a parking lot.

After one of the planning meetings about this, a group of us were outside talking, and an old man came by and basically said "you'll regret this when Dinkytown is ruined" or something to that effect, and also flat out stated that he didn't care what happened outside the 4 block core, you could put million story buildings there for all he cared.

All in all, I find it hard to give much credence to the idea that limiting supply is going to keep prices low, despite there being basically no evidence to support that claim. So I'm not going to give a whole lot of respect to people who endlessly parrot that idea.

I also have no doubt that the people behind Save Dinkytown care about DInkytown, and I also care about Dinkytown, and I have enough respect to see that people I disagree with our passionate about something, but they are unable to afford Alex and I, and others, the same respect. Anyone who disagrees with them, no matter how respectfully, or even tries to engage in a discussion (hint: if your ideas are defensible you shouldn't have a problem discussing them) is regarded as a payed off pro-development troll.

So yeah, I'm gonna keep on belittling them.

I have enough respect to see that people I disagree with our passionate about something, but they are unable to afford Alex and I, and others, the same respect. Anyone who disagrees with them, no matter how respectfully, or even tries to engage in a discussion (hint: if your ideas are defensible you shouldn't have a problem discussing them) is regarded as a payed off pro-development troll.

So yeah, I'm gonna keep on belittling them.

I guess generalizing an entire group based on the actions of a few goes both ways, eh?

I don't think Save Dinkytown represents the views of every person opposed to development in Dinkytown, but the Facebook group itself has a fairly consistent message.

I don't think Save Dinkytown represents the views of every person opposed to development in Dinkytown, but the Facebook group itself has a fairly consistent message.

True - and I really can't stand the types either. Indianapolis faced a similar opponent when a section near the beloved Broad Ripple strip was up for redevelopment with a 4-story residential structure anchored with a Whole Foods. I think that project is just now moving forward, but they managed to stall it for a long time.

I have a hard time categorizing it as anything else. The lot was 70% parking lot, plus a dumpy old single story brick building of no particular note, other than it was owned by a business that didn't want to be there anymore. It was "change" and change is scary so they fought to protect a parking lot.

After one of the planning meetings about this, a group of us were outside talking, and an old man came by and basically said "you'll regret this when Dinkytown is ruined" or something to that effect, and also flat out stated that he didn't care what happened outside the 4 block core, you could put million story buildings there for all he cared.

All in all, I find it hard to give much credence to the idea that limiting supply is going to keep prices low, despite there being basically no evidence to support that claim. So I'm not going to give a whole lot of respect to people who endlessly parrot that idea.

I also have no doubt that the people behind Save Dinkytown care about DInkytown, and I also care about Dinkytown, and I have enough respect to see that people I disagree with our passionate about something, but they are unable to afford Alex and I, and others, the same respect. Anyone who disagrees with them, no matter how respectfully, or even tries to engage in a discussion (hint: if your ideas are defensible you shouldn't have a problem discussing them) is regarded as a payed off pro-development troll.

So yeah, I'm gonna keep on belittling them.

See, most of the stuff before your last sentence is good. The last one, though, is what'll make any of them (or anyone wavering on the border!) immediately stop listening to you. Even if you're sure you're right, it's always best not to be an ass about it.

To be honest I stay away because I know I won't be changing any minds there, and anything I do do will cause more harm than good (and also there's not a lot going on. I see Alex try and wring some sense into them, and their urge to disagree bends them into twisted positions like saying not only should we not demolish structures (I disagree, but I at least understand) to say that we shouldn't even renovate structures.

And I guess I'll say that you can't really expect to change anybody's mind on the internet by engaging them. If they're engaging they've made up their mind. I did it once, and I count my lucky stars I was able to. I don't expect to do it again. So the best you can do is hope people reading it but not engaging will be persuaded in some way. So in general I think antagonizing is bad, but at the point when someone gets so entrenched, you can either walk away, or trap them in their own silliness so that other people will see how unreasonable they are being.

A few days ago I went to see this building in completed form. It isn't horrible, but it is profoundly and incredibly bland. It is like somebody took the old '70s era House of Hanson building and turned it into a 6 story midrise. This sort of architecture will gain development fans no allies in this city and will do nothing but strengthen the hand of those who oppose development in Dinkytown. In many ways I would say it hurts more than the Marshall. The Marshall is hated here because it is poor in urban design terms, but it is a much more attractive building in pure architectural terms. At least it is attempting to have some style. The Venue is just a generic '80s to '90s suburban commercial building turned into urban form.

A picture I took:

mplssept201445 by afsmps, on Flickr

This is Opus at their worse. We can't expect Opus to produce and thing but duds now day. Their days of the 5th Street Towers are long gone. They are now bean counters and not developers. That have no civic pride left in them!! The bottom line is all they think about.

So how do we get the city to make them stop from developing?

We don't make them stop developing. We make them have to produce building of quality and not just the bottom of the barrel building. The City sent Kraus back to do a better building. They can do that with any developer they want if they really care about the city. There are now more options for the number of developers and option that they have to chose from. They can say we want to see a better building.

It is better to wait for a quality project than to get shit and have to look at it for 80 years. See City Center as an example!!