Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

NorthStar

MPLS: 1010 Park

Recommended Posts

This project will be a great addition to downtown's Elliot Park neighborhood. The project will consist of four towers, an eight-, 16-, 21- and 31-story towers and 14,000 and 17,000 square feet of ground-level retail.

Here are a few renderings:

news02.jpg

3nealst0715.l.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Check this out.

img_panorama_view.jpg

1010 Park will be located right behind Skyscape (breaking ground in late July or early August) and to the left of the new Grant Park tower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although the idea behind this project is fantastic, and the architecture quite nice, I think the devil is in the details.

This is a lot of tall real estate on one small block! They are desinging public space between all the buildings, but it doesn't look like it will ever get any sun. Plus, the retail should be on the street -- retail hidden from street traffic is going to be difficult to market -- not to mention the fact that the courtyard is going to be shared with an existing low inclome apartment building (with serious drug dealing going on!) and a drug rehab center. Those buildings/uses are going to stay.

In addition, I think they need to respect the height of the existing buildings a bit more by building similar height buildings at the street level. Most tall buildings are built more in the center of the bock surrounding by a lower story foot print. Theses buildings sometimes come right to the sidewalk with no setback --they don't show it in the drawings they release --but this is the case on the portland side.

I would prefer to see a few more row houses added to this project instead of all the towers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'll get approved simply because they want to clean up Elliott Park.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Just out of curiosity, who is "they"? Also are you inferring that it would otherwise not get approved? I'm just trying to follow your logic on the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They, meaning the city. Grant Park..Skyscape...5th Avenue Gateway...1010 Park.....see a pattern here? Get the horns out of the 'hood and make it a better neighborhood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They, meaning the city. Grant Park..Skyscape...5th Avenue Gateway...1010 Park.....see a pattern here? Get the horns out of the 'hood and make it a better neighborhood.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

These are all private developments. The neighborhood association there has supported them. With the exception of Lisa Goodman promoting the Grant Park site I don't see these as resulting from some overall city directive or plan for the neighborhood. Afterall Schiff argued against Skyscape on the grounds that it would create a precedent for more highrises (ie projects that the city may not necesarily want)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they have to be approved by the city, right? Any Tom, Dick, and Harry can't just show up with a shovel and a bulldozer and start building something?

And, I think that precident is already true. Much to the chagrin of Schiff. 6 buildings at or above 20 story's on the table, built, or being built.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they have to be approved by the city, right? Any Tom, Dick, and Harry can't just show up with a shovel and a bulldozer and start building something?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I live in Elliot Park and sit on the neighborhood board. I'm just saying that there sure doesn't appear to be a particular interest by the city leaders to "clean up" the area via highrises. The developers respond to the market. The neighborhood supports them and on that basis they generally do get approved by the city as opposed to getting approved BECAUSE of some city plan/directive. In fact there is some concern that the zoning requirements, due to the complexity of the site, will make approval of 1010 Park very difficult even if the neighborhood supports it.

Besides look at how much resistance there is around the city to highrises by both politicians and residents. Do you really believe that the city leaders think that highrises are a redevelopment tool? Which CMs? I just don't see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in Elliot Park and sit on the neighborhood board.  I'm just saying that there sure doesn't appear to be a particular interest by the city leaders to "clean up" the area via highrises.  The developers respond to the market.  The neighborhood supports them and on that basis they generally do get approved by the city as opposed to getting approved BECAUSE of some city plan/directive.  In fact there is some concern that the zoning requirements, due to the complexity of the site, will make approval of 1010 Park very difficult even if the neighborhood supports it.

Besides look at how much resistance there is around the city to highrises by both politicians and residents.  Do you really believe that the city leaders think that highrises are a redevelopment tool?  Which CMs?  I just don't see it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's nice to know that you're on the neighborhood board. I along with several other college students, lived in the Elliot Park neighborhood while attending the UofM. I'm concerned that all these high-rise developments are going to chase the students out of the area being rent prices will definitely be rising. Maybe the board should encourage some of these developers to build affordable high-rise apartments. The UofM, Augsburg and North Central University are all close so, it would be nice to see something rise for the students. Speaking of North Central University, the empty lot south of the campus bookstore is screaming for development. Are there any plans for that site or does the university own it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the board should encourage some of these developers to build affordable high-rise apartments. 

Speaking of North Central University, the empty lot south of the campus bookstore is screaming for development.  Are there any plans for that site or does the university own it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually my understanding is that affordability was part of the plan for Skyscape (I wasn't on the board at that point)- notice the units start a lot lower than most downtown projects and there are a lot more of them. The developers had to agree to more affordable units in order to get the neighborhood approval for the height.

Originally it was supposed to be half the units under $130s or so but after Grant Park was finished the prices spiked. Raising the prices was really the only option for the developer since otherwise they'd be basically passing on the gains to speculative buyers buying at $130K and selling for $180K.

I think the board is very conscious of the gentrification issues. On the flip-side it is one of the poorest neighborhoods in the city and has a lot of affordable housing (subsidized and unsubsidized) and I'm sure that some people would oppose additional affordable housing (subsidized). If rents in unsubsidized properties move up do to market pressures there is little that can be done by the neighborhood. On the other hand, many of the rental units are very small and don't have parking so they may be less suceptable to price pressures. Ah the tensions of neighborhood revitalization!

I also think that the highrises will bring some needed retail to the neighborhood and the ownership component helps stabilize a fairly transient population.

I haven't heard of anything for the site you mention but it definitely would be great for development. There is a lot of potential for infill in the neighborhood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I lived in Elliot Park back in 1994, up until 1996. It was full of drug dealers back then, and crime was rampant. There was a liquor store in the area, but North Central (much to my relief) bought out that property and the liquor store eventually closed.

Affordable housing for low income people is a necessity for the area. The development along the river was supposed to consist of a lot of lower-income housing, but the speculators stepped in and drove the prices up for properties there. What was $130,000 at one time ended up being $1,500,000 for some units, while the rest went for $750,000. The condos shouldn't be built unless there is an agreement that at least a good percentage of the units will go to subsidized housing, with rents that are affordable to Section 8 tenants.

Before anybody knocks a Section 8 tenant, let me assure the reader that those people are very carefully screened before being placed in the program. The dealers usually generate their income from sales, but have jobs with wich they can launder their profits. They don't live on rent vouchers because they are able to pay market-rate rent with their own income. Section 8 tenants are generally honest people, and some are disabled. They work in low-income positions that most residents in the downtown area would never desire to have. Such jobs include janitorial, grounds keeping, food service, maid service, among others. It takes a good balance to keep a neighborhood functioning properly. I would never want to see Minneapolis/St. Paul get to be like California, but it can reach that level unless good planning is used.

For the most part, the Twin Cities appear to be doing well. I like the transit projects that are comming to fruition, as well as the higher denisty developments. I look forward to returning there some day.

MrCoffee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly Lisa Goodman fought to get Grant Park built because she felt it would bring much needed home ownership and stability to the neighborhhod. This was not her private mission, but a goal of the neighboorhood as well. And, in fact it has clearly encouraged other developers to move into the area.

I cetainly understand why the Elliot Park Neighborhood would want more owner occupied housing and more retail. However, I personally don't think they are being very selective about the types of developments they are approving.

The Grant Park Tower was built on a rather undesirable lot (from a housing standpoint) next to the highway and thus the height of the tower is what made it workable because you could sell the view. The setback of the tower and the addition of the brownstones help it fit nicely in the neighborhood. 3 sides of the block now look like they fit into the neighborhood.

Skyscape, however is just as tall as the Grant Park tower but comes all the way to the street. In addition, if skyscape promised affordable housing --they lied. They raised prices after just 2 days-- that's right in 2 days the price went up $10,000 for all units.

Now we have 1010 portland which has 4 buildings on one block while maintaining every other building on the block. As a result, there are almost no setbacks on the buildings. The tallest part of the building is going to be built on Portland directly accross from the Grant Park Brownstones --which ruins the transition into the neighborhood that Grant Park so successfully achieved.

Instead of making Elliot Park a better neighborhood, these new towers are acting as fortresses which separate themselves from the neighborhood. Brownstone type housing with decks and front doors will add much more vibrancy to the neighborhood then towers where people drive underground and go to the 27th floor.

Other neighborhoods such as Loring and the River area realize that they don't have to accept every tower that is proposed and as a result, they have some cool lower-rise building which have retail as well as fit better into the neighborhood. I really think Elliot Park needs to set some height and style guidelines to go with their master plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that post before this one had some good points, but living in the neighborhood for the past 5 years gives you a different perspective on all the projects going up. He mentioned the buildings being like fortresses and people driving in and out without stepping foot at street level. This will be true for some, but the main reason people buy these condo in downtown is for the commodaty of walking to work. As the neighborhood population increases, it will be able to support a larger grocery store which in essance is the heart of a neighborhood.

Someone had previously mentioned that the retail would be a ploblem since it was set back from the street. The whole idea is to get people walking throughout the area. The shops are for the people who live there or a few blocks away. I don't think there's looking to make it a huge commercial shopping center.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that post before this one had some good points, but living in the neighborhood for the past 5 years gives you a different perspective on all the projects going up.  He mentioned the buildings being like fortresses and people driving in and out without stepping foot at street level.  This will be true for some, but the main reason people buy these condo in downtown is for the commodaty of walking to work.  As the neighborhood population increases, it will be able to support a larger grocery store which in essance is the heart of a neighborhood.

Someone had previously mentioned that the retail would be a ploblem since it was set back from the street.  The whole idea is to get people walking throughout the area. The shops are for the people who live there or a few blocks away.  I don't think there's looking to make it a huge commercial shopping center.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly...people buy these condos for the DOWNTOWN amenities -- and people who live on Portland are going West to work every day and not walking through Elliot Park.

In order to really invigorate Elliot Park, developments are needed for several blocks East of Park Avenue and I don't bleieve any have been proposed. That would really get people into the neighborhood. The 4 buildings of 1010 Park would be so much better is they wer spread throughout the neighboorhood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of North Central University, the empty lot south of the campus bookstore is screaming for development.  Are there any plans for that site or does the university own it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

North Central University does own the site. I just graduated from there last spring. I believe they have plans for the site in the near future. The University is a bit slow when it comes to construction since they have a policy of raising all the funds necessary before any construction project is typically approved.

At the moment they are putting on an addition to the Chapel and adding a performance auditorium and workout room. I believe this project is scheduled to be complete by January. Any development for the vacant lot would not be till at least a year or so after that. Most probably addition to the site would be a mixed use classes and dormatory facility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have it on authority that 1010 Park wants to get city approval by the end of the year and start selling units in the Spring. They say they want to break ground a year from now, but I don't see how they can sell enough units that fast. Other projects have been taking 10 months from sales office opening to start of construction.

In addition, 1010 needs zoning changes to get the project built and this requires neighboring property owners to sign a petition --they need 2/3 of property owners to agree. Almost all structures nearest this development are only 4 stories -- so it is uncertain if they will get the need approval...which will just drag the process out longer. The 20+ and 31+ story building are going to negatively impact many of the property owners nearby in terms of sunlight and I've heard many are unhappy with the design of the project.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live 2 blocks away and go to the coffe shop thats there. I have not head from anyone that they don't like the project. The owner of the coffee show actually loves the project since the business would pick up a lot.

I also though I heard they were going to do construction in phases, building the two lower towers around the mansion first and upon completion, start construction on the others. I could be mistaken though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live 2 blocks away and go to the coffe shop thats there.  I have not head from anyone that they don't like the project.  The owner of the coffee show actually loves the project since the business would pick up a lot.

I also though I heard they were going to do construction in phases, building the two lower towers around the mansion first and upon completion, start construction on the others.  I could be mistaken though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Of course the owner of the coffee shop loves the building. In fact she got them to save her building Why wouldn't she love it? All she cares about is more business.

The people who like the development best are the people who live close enough to benefit from the development, but far enough away to not be affected by the negative aspects.

I've heard people in Grant Park brownstones are really angry because Elliot Park association requested the grant park brownstones be built in order to allow enough setback for the Grant Park tower. It was a way to make the tall tower blend with the neighborhood and not loom over the street.

However, the Elliot Park neighborhood is not requiring any setback on this new tower. In fact the tallest portion of the building has no setback at all from the sidewalk and rises 31 stories on portland --while being surrounded by 4 story buildings and while having the 4 story brownstowns accross the street.

Why did Elliot park require brownstones as a setback for Grant Park but then requires no setback on the taller, more massive development accross the street? This building is going to loom over the street and the brownstones in a way that is rarely seen. Almost all towers are set back 20-30 ft from the street after the first few floors --but not this building!

This complex will be built in phases --because it is so massive. To put it in perspective-- next time you walk by grank park imagine if they built two more towers right up to the street instead of the brownstones. That is basically what this project is doing. Retail is great and condos are great, but the scale of this project dwarfs both skyscape and Grant Park --even when combined, but it is built on less space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had not thought of the fact that the building does go all the way to the sidewalk. I remember this being a major issue when they first opprived grand park condos. But you have to keep in mind that Skyscape is the first to break this rule and not 1010 Park. True they have 4 storey brownstones on the sides, but the main highrise is not set back from Portland. I think that these two projects are similar in the fact the the thin side of the building is facing Portland and compared to Grand Park, the tallest town on 1010Park is about half the width, making it a lot less obstructive.

3nealst0715.l.jpg

Also, when the developers are willing to throw in retail and public access space between their buildings, it gives the neighborhood board more incentive to approve a project. We have to be thankful that Grank Park ever got built though. Without that project breaking the rules (I think the neighborhood master plan called for max height of eight stories) non of these other projects would have ever gotten aproval. I remember when North Central University proposed the construction of Phillipps Hall. Their original plan as to be 10 stories, but the neighborhood would not aprove the building to be 4 floors in the end. Things have really changed in the past 6 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the two projects really are not similar...

Yes Skyscape goes all the way to the street in one small portion (along portland).

Notice, that the portion to the street that rises straight up is actually very narrow.

skyscape_day.jpg

The image of 1010 in the above posting is misleading because it is showing only the 10th street side. Notice, however, that the building comes to the street on the 10th street side (right side of pic) --that is actually the narrowest part of the building. The building actually curves around the Balmoral and growns to 31 stories as it wraps around to the street again at portland. On the Portland Side it is going to take up 2/3 of the block!

What would make the project so much better would be for the tower to be set back about 20 feet after the fourth floor on both 10th and portland.

Just imagine walking by Skyscape and then imagine continuing down Portland past 1010 --the difference is going to be amazing -- the 1010 -20/31 story complex is so huge in mass and so completely flush to the street that it is actually going to feel uncomfortable to walk by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your popint here, but I thought that the 1010 Park project was 4 buildings, making the one on 10th seperate from the on on Portland. Also, were theyt not going to keep all the buildings on the block and build between them? Looking something like this?

1010.jpg

This is my rendering from what I've seen in pictures and read about.

The fact that it will be 30 stories tall will not make me uncomfortable to walk by it. The IDS, Wells Fargo Tower and 225 South 6th are 50+ stories and to be honest, you don't even notice it when you're walking by thos ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.