urbanMSP

I also wish it weren't so stout -- mainly because I am not a huge fan of shading over the Milwaukee Depot ice rink. If they built a more slender tower 2+ times as tall with no shadow over the rink I'd be 2+ times as happy with this project (which is to say, quite happy)!

Street scape plans, from the CoW agenda:
http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 113344.pdf

^^^It's clear the developer and architect are making a good effort to have the streetscape make a positive contribution to the community. The street level retail frontage is really strong along Washington. This is going to be an excellent project.

Saw the drawing at the IDS yesterday, Looks a bit better than I thought. But it still is a block long wall that will cast a shadow on the depot for much of the afternoon. Slender tower would have been a better fit here.

A slender tower in what direction? The parcel has its width along Washington.. Even though it will block direct sunlight, we have to keep in mind that the Depot itself has a roof and thus loses much of the direct sunlight it could have seen anyway. Ambient daylight will still flood in through the windows. Just for reference, here's a famous ice rink that has a bunch of towers shading it:

http://goo.gl/maps/fdaex

A slender tower cast a narrower shadow that changes during the day allowing the sun to reach those windows at the sun passes around the sky.. If you build a block long wall the sun will rarely ever get to an angle where the sun can cast much of any direct light into the trainshed. One of the reasons ice skaters like to skater there is the warm feeling of having sunlight in the building. I know in the winter we don't get enough sunshine and this is a place where you can enjoy an activity with the sunshine and the controlled temp of the environment.

My preference would be to have a room where the light floods in and not a north room where you just get ambient light. Yes there is a roof over it. But you also have a wall of windows along Washington that allows the suns light in to and on to those sections of ice nearest to the windows. If you wanted to skate without sunlight there are plenty of city facilities that would let you skate under fluorescent light. IMO

Any idea on project like this how many parking spaces are meant for employees, commercial tenants, and the general paying public? In total there are 153 spots, 47 of which are on ground level with a separate entrance from the basement. There are 413 total bedrooms, so even if all parking was devoted to residents that just over 1 spot per 3 bedrooms.

I honestly can't believe we have opposition to a building because it will limit sunlight to a covered ice rink that barely has any daytime use anyway. What are we talking about, three hours on weekend afternoons in the winter won't have sun on the southern edge of a skating rink?

Saw the project renderings at the IDS that have better detail than what's been posted on UrbanMSP. It's looks great and nicely fills one of our worst vacant lots downtown. Lots of effort is apparent to make this a good design and contribute to the urban beauty of our downtown. As far as shadowing in the winter, the tall buildings to the south already block the sun due to its low angle. It really won't have any impact on that. Let this be built!!

The rendering at IDS showed the little tower thing fleshed out a little more, looked pretty cool.

I honestly can't believe we have opposition to a building because it will limit sunlight to a covered ice rink that barely has any daytime use anyway. What are we talking about, three hours on weekend afternoons in the winter won't have sun on the southern edge of a skating rink?

AGREED!!! Finally! Someone speaks sense!! It's a city, at some point you are bound to lose a little sunlight by other building, all part of an authentic urban experience.

And it's Minnesota... if we don't all have a S.A.D. light by now...

I honestly can't believe we have opposition to a building because it will limit sunlight to a covered ice rink that barely has any daytime use anyway. What are we talking about, three hours on weekend afternoons in the winter won't have sun on the southern edge of a skating rink?

I'm saying that a slender 25 story tower at one end of the block would be better than a 14 story wall across the block. Would still allow up to 4 stories to front Washington and allow for more daylight during the day. Yes there will be some times when it will be in the towers shadow. But the current proposal is pretty much a continuous shadow all day long. I'm giving an logical option that provides sunlight to the Depot area. If someone can give me a really concrete reasons for the same number of units in a tower vs a wall not working then I'd like to hear it.

If someone can give me a really concrete reasons for the same number of units in a tower vs a wall not working then I'd like to hear it.

Because we're not the developers of the project. It's always cheaper to build a shorter tower with the same number of units. We can sit here and second guess (and I'd also prefer a slender tower), but the guys bringing the money to the table and making the pro-forma work have decided this is the building that works for them.

Why we bring this up so that the developer can look at different ideas. What types of rents could you get with tower floors that have river views which will not be seen from the 13 floors that will be behind Riverwest. Yes we already know that Atlas does things the cheapest way possible. They have already shown that they have little imagination, BLOCK E!

Why we bring this up so that the developer can look at different ideas. What types of rents could you get with tower floors that have river views which will not be seen from the 13 floors that will be behind Riverwest. Yes we already know that Atlas does things the cheapest way possible. They have already shown that they have little imagination, BLOCK E!

Dude, Alatus built The Carlyle, which is arguably the nicest looking thing added to the skyline in the new millennium. It's also the tallest building we got out of the condo boom. We already have three ~30 floor apartment towers further along than this project- building a fourth seems like it would be a pretty big gamble. If it were a safe bet financially, this would definitely have been a tower.

Long story short, easier to hold up something that is short and wide rather than tall and narrow...

"Hey, this dude on the internet said we should build a slender tower. Why didn't we think of that?"

IF they did that building then they already know how to do it and know the advantage of the higher you go up the higher the rents you get from the apartments. I see block E and what little imagination they seem to have to get anything complished there. They have owned it how many years now?

Why did LPM build up to 36 stories when they could easily have built 13 story wall by Loring? So they would have the views that they could offer for a price to prospective tenants. Here you are near the river and you are squandering a perfect location for tower and you want to build a long low shoe box that will not have anywhere near the views that a tower would offer. It is their money and they will have to market these against better buildings, Nic 5, Marq 4, and LPM when there are vacancies. I only see them not getting the money that they hope to get for these, as there will be better options closer to the amenities. There are really no concentration of restaurants near the building, like the north loop has. They will have a to work more to convince people that this is worth money when it is along a busy intersection and the farther up the less street noise is a problem for tenants.