urbanMSP

One has to remember that the free parking still get taxed. While it is not taxed as high as land with a building.

True. Although this is why I hope we change state law to have a land value tax rather than a property tax.

A 'temporary' surface lot better than another soul-sucking half-block parking ramp.

A 'temporary' surface lot better than another soul-sucking half-block parking ramp.

There is plenty of parking within walking distance of K-A headquarters. A parking ramp would not have as high of a return on investment as the potential Office and residential that can be sold for a much higher profit.

Staff is recommending denial of all variances to exceed parking maximums: http://minneapolismn.gov/meetings/plann ... S1P-130760

This should be an interesting policy discussion/decision when it goes to Z&P Committee (assuming the Planning Commission sticks with staff recommendation and the applicant appeals that decision)

When does it go to Z&P? Is it during this council cycle? Was there any discussion at the Sept. 15 planning commission meeting- or did they just agree with the staff recommendation to deny?

The application was withdrawn this afternoon.

The building application or the variance application or both were withdrawn??

I think this is good news.

Kraus-Anderson pulls HQ plan to work out compromise with Minneapolis
Sep 16, 2014
http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/b ... omise.html

Kraus-Anderson Cos. pulled the plan for its new Minneapolis headquarters from the city's planning commission agenda Monday, but expects to return with a reworked proposal in the next week. [...]

I'd like to hope it is!

I'm wondering if they'll be upset about the parking thing, and just build a larger floor size building with less mixed use potential.

But maybe they will build something with more retail potential and better street presence. fingers crossed!

They received good feedback. Leaving the corner of 8th St and 5th Ave open for new high density was a smart suggestion and actually creates the potential for a more lucrative/high profile project for Kraus -Anderson in the future.

revised plan on agenda for next planning commission meeting.
http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/www/gro ... 132178.pdf

They received good feedback. Leaving the corner of 8th St and 5th Ave open for new high density was a smart suggestion and actually creates the potential for a more lucrative/high profile project for Kraus -Anderson in the future.

So the original proposal was at 5th and 8th and they have now moved it south to 9th and 5th. Trying to remember the original proposal with out hunting for it. I agree that the density should be on 8th and not 9th. Also then a future skyway would not intersect with the KA headquarters.

Is it just me, or is that still a LOT of parking?

One has to wonder if they are going to be more serious about housing along 8th sooner than later with this revised plan? It's so strange that they rotated the building to the SW corner. But me thinks there's a definite reason.

New Plan


Old Plan

I heard it has to do with what ward (or precinct?) it lies in. Or it is a different zoning... Something like that. The different corners of the block have different rules for development.

I thought it was zoning and/or accessibility/visibility.

It's not zoning or council ward, that's for sure. The whole block is zoned B4N, and lies entirely in Ward 7. They'll have to move a few blocks east if they want to escape Lisa Goodman

Holy LOL at the opposition letter attached on Page 37 of the PDF. Some doofus who lives at Skyscape thinks the building should be limited to 2 stories, because a 4 story building will "block out light" (i.e. he lives on a lower floor and thinks this is going to impact his skyline view)

That same doofus really isn't going to like it when the other parcel(s) on the lot get redeveloped to their "highest and best use"!!

It's not zoning or council ward, that's for sure. The whole block is zoned B4N, and lies entirely in Ward 7. They'll have to move a few blocks east if they want to escape Lisa Goodman

Holy LOL at the opposition letter attached on Page 37 of the PDF. Some doofus who lives at Skyscape thinks the building should be limited to 2 stories, because a 4 story building will "block out light" (i.e. he lives on a lower floor and thinks this is going to impact his skyline view)

Skyscape is blocks away from this project. They also need to learn that the sun shines from the south and this project is to the NW of Skyscape. There will be little if any sunshine blocked at Skyscape. Their whole letter is a joke and their premise should be laughed at in public to keep the crazies under control.

Edit: Some fools think that they get a free pass at a view. That is not the case and any relator that say differently is committing fraud. It is one of the issues you have when you are buying a lower floor condo. You are not guaranteed sunshine or a view. As was said, those north of Skyscape know this!!

He should ask the condo owners at The Rappahannock what happened to their sunshine when the 27 story Skyscape was built directly to the south on the same block...