urbanMSP

CPM is proposing a 16-story student housing tower in Dinkytown. Unfortunately, the Daily got precious few details, but it would apparently save the façades of the Mesa and Chatime buildings and build directly behind the façades. (Why you would bother saving the Chatime façade is beyond me.)

The usual suspects are, of course, protesting that this will be the end of Dinkytown, and that none of the remaining businesses will possibly be able to survive if those 50 parking spots for people to occasionally come to visit are replaced with several hundred undergrads that live there all the time.

50 spots that are rarely used. 23 stories would be better since it would potentially de-thrown Chateau as the tallest building in Dinkytown. Exciting times ahead for my neighborhood

Also, highly doubtful that the businesses would close immediately. There's a great way to integrate them as existing retail while adding one more space where the current curb cut is. Making the new CPM offices the entrance, and having a leasing office behind the retail space. That's how the Station does it, and it can be done here.

With all of the new density in Dinkytown, it's amazing that the adjacent block is still 1/2 a parking lot.

How will this work with the new Dinkytown Historic District? The entire Mesa lot is within the district limits.

Good question. Maybe they're going to preserve the majority of the Mesa building and integrate it into the new structure, like the Montage is doing with the Nye's buildings?

Yeah, preserving just the facade ("facadism") usually isn't considered "enough." There are almost certainly height restrictions built into the Dinkytown district as well, so even if they wanted to build on top of the Mesa(/Camdi) building they wouldn't be able to do all that much. I don't get it.

I have no problem at all with building on the parking lot behind it, or even with tearing down the Chatime building. 16 stories is pretty gutsy though.

Yeah, preserving just the facade ("facadism") usually isn't considered "enough." There are almost certainly height restrictions built into the Dinkytown district as well, so even if they wanted to build on top of the Mesa(/Camdi) building they wouldn't be able to do all that much. I don't get it.

It doesn't look like there are yet any guidelines: http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/hpc/lan ... S1P-148307

Also, there should almost never be height restrictions. I've never understood how anyone thinks that historic properties are undermined by having something taller next to them or if there aren't enough short historic structures how "shortness" is a meaningful neighborhood characteristic.

But Dinkytown is the worst for these discussions. Sooo many people reflexively assume, "it's called Dinky because it's small."

Except for that 200' blind spot across the street.

Some historic districts would be changed by a tall building. Like Milwaukee Avenue. Though that street would be changed by almost anything. Agreed though that a 16 story building doesn't change Dinkytown anymore than a new 5 story building would.

Some historic districts would be changed by a tall building.

I said "almost never" for a reason, although to be honest, I'm not sure there are very many exceptions.

Like Milwaukee Avenue.

Maybe that's an exception, although if you're keeping all of the existing structures, I'm not sure that a taller one built on an empty lot (don't think there are any) next door would matter.

You have height restrictions not because you hate tall buildings, but because you want all buildings in a historic district to conform to a general historic form. Milwaukee Avenue is an obvious example; putting something like the Rocket House on one of those lots would fundamentally transform the experience of the district, which is created not just by the individual structures but by the cumulative effect of that consistent historic form. Often that uniformity isn't just an effect, but the point of the district. Stevens Square isn't historic because of any one building, but as an artifact of social and economic circumstances that created all those identical brick boxes. Besides, having a historic district which is too fragmented or has too many exceptions leaves it vulnerable to legal challenges on restrictions on the existing structures.

Having said that, it looks like the district won't have overall height restrictions (see this job posting, which says: "there is no interest in an overall height limit for new development in the design guidelines"). So it's probably fine if they're thinking of building on the parking lot (w/ appropriate setbacks). But the Mesa building's street facade pasted onto the first floor of a 16-story tower would be ridiculous. It would tell you absolutely nothing about the historic form of the building or of the neighborhood; it's just fetishism.

the experience of the district, which is created not just by the individual structures but by the cumulative effect of that consistent historic form.

Yeah, that's the part that's BS.

But the Mesa building's street facade pasted onto the first floor of a 16-story tower would be ridiculous. It would tell you absolutely nothing about the historic form of the building or of the neighborhood; it's just fetishism.

Depends on how it's done. This, for example, I think works pretty well: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8973421 ... 312!8i6656

This less so: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9003994 ... 312!8i6656

Yeah, that's the part that's BS.

Great. In what way?

But the Mesa building's street facade pasted onto the first floor of a 16-story tower would be ridiculous. It would tell you absolutely nothing about the historic form of the building or of the neighborhood; it's just fetishism.

I would think there's probably room to have like a 15' setback for the second floor and up of the new building. That way it would be obvious what was there, without constraining the building too much.

Basically what the Venue did on their 14th Ave side, but one story, not two.

15' is nothing. Venue's setback on 14th is ~30', which sounds more appropriate here. That's the depth of the Chatime building (Mesa is ~50').

Yeah, that's the part that's BS.

Great. In what way?

Either the structures make up the experience or the alleged experience does not exist and needn't be "preserved" beyond the structures.

Hypothetically if there was one open lot on the two historic blocks on Milwaukee Ave, perhaps a height restriction would be appropriate because it's such a small, uniform area.

Instead, as you said, it seems like we typically get height restrictions in any historic district. Because reasons.

I'm pretty certain that each of us can think of an experience that is "more than the sum of its parts." It's pretty silly to deny the possibility of that.

The bit of an experience that is not made up of its parts is called imagination, which is a slippery thing to attempt to preserve indeed.

Come with me and you'll be
In a world of pure imagination
Take a look and you'll see
Into your imagination

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence

"In philosophy, systems theory, science, and art, emergence is a process whereby larger entities arise through interactions among smaller or simpler entities such that the larger entities exhibit properties the smaller/simpler entities do not exhibit."