Secrets of the City

Like when the coverage of political events by the STrib is called “reporting”?

look, I’m all for historic preservation, but you can’t turn the entire riverfront into a bunch of industrial ruins from the late 19th century. I mean, I can understand a little bit of it for nostalgia, which we have, but it’s not the fucking parthenon! they already tore down and paved over the ruins, nobody’s missed them and they really wouldn’t add much to the area, so who cares? They’ve torn down much older buildings that were still completely intact in eastern cities for worse reasons, so just reusing a site that (OMG!) over a hundred (wow, cough) years ago had some industrial buildings on it shouldn’t really bother anyone too much. The buildings are already gone, and I have a feeling the ruins wouldn’t be too spectacular if they dug them up and put them on display anyway. It would just be like “oh, more crumbly buildings from the 1880s, great.”

I love old buildings, but that’s when they’re intact. A foundation and a few tunnels/walls is not enough to go apeshit over preservation. This is really just a case of people who couldn’t afford condos on the upper levels of riverwest throwing a fit because they’re losing their views. Boo-hoo-hoo! Talk to people who live/work in Manhattan, they’re used to losing views on a regular basis. It’s part of living in a healthy, growing city. Asshats.

Word to tmayhem. I finally agree with him on a planning issue.

Ditto that! You don’t own your view of the river, folks. Sorry. Talk to the people in the Warehouse District who buy condos with skyline views, only to see another building pop up right in front of them. Such is life.

And buried mills are not significant architecture. Good Lord. We have the Mill City Museum, it’s great, it’s enough.

There has been some talk of ’sight corridors’ in planning and land-use law in recent years, but that’s more in the sense of ‘there was a street here and an open view along it so you can’t plop something in the middle of that.’ Not so much in the ‘vista of the riverfront in all directions’ sense. They can still get stuffed. Plus I don’t think there’s any legal precident (yet) guaranteeing sight lines anyway. I don’t have access to lexisnexis anymore so I can’t look it up.

If Riverwest was still apartments instead of condos, this wouldn’t be an issue. Now that its gone condo, the view from it is part of the property value for the units. I can understand why residents are upset, as this could cause their property values to drop.

I’m sure some Riverwest residents were sold on the fact that there was park land between them and the river and it couldn’t be developed. Now that doesn’t seem to be the case.

I think the building looks cool and should be built, but I can also understand why there’s objection.

This is ultimately an argument between the rich who can afford the existing condos with sightlines under threat, and the richer-still developers of condos (in an already saturated market) for the wealthy. Am I alone in not giving two shits about any of them?

I agree with you Elizabeth, but that’s the downside of buying a place based on a view. It may be part of the property value, but you don’t own it. I would be bummed if I lost my view. But a new building becomes part of the new view.

Here’s a tip: lakeshore property.
heh

If the people really want to maintain their riverview, they could attempt to purchase the development rights to the parcel of land. If they can’t afford it, then they lose the sightlines. In NYC they actually have TDRs for the airspace above buildings in the name of historical and/or site-line preservation.

there seems to be some parallels between this and the nicollet island/delasalle dust up. the moral i would take from all this is that when you’re living in a society, well…sometimes you’re not gonna like what yer neighbors do.

hey, maybe those association controlled communities (whatever they’re called) out in the burbs aren’t looking so bad after all.

It’s too bad they’re going to lose their view. I have a friend who lives in Summit House and the downtown views from there are incredible. But that’s life in the city. Sorry, y’all.

I’m sure some Riverwest residents were sold on the fact that there was park land between them and the river and it couldn’t be developed.

you mean a park-ing lot, right?

From the linked article, “The land is owned by the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. The board acquired the property in the mid-1980s to expand West River Parkway.” I was under the impression that part of it was parkland along the river, but I could be mistaken.

The Wave is going to be built on the strip of land between the W River Road and 1st St S. It might technically be park-board-owned, but it’s not a park in any conventional sense. Some run-down disused parking lots, cruddy unkempt trees and a pretty steep cliff down to the river (with no pedestrian access, mind you … though it looks like there were some steps at one point in the past?). Yeah, what a pristine park they must be very sad about losing.

Some people might have felt some security in knowing that park-owned (not necessarily park-like) land was between them and the river, perhaps preventing development. Should The Wave get built, the residents of that building would feel rather secure that another building won’t go up between them and the river.

I’m not arguing that it is a beautiful park (I said I thought the development should go through). But I can understand where the opponents are coming from.

Well, they should also be aware of the way the park board likes to sell off land to developers around here if they were counting on them ‘protecting’ their valuable sight lines. I know where they’re coming from, but they’re still being babies about it.

Jesus, those crybabies over at Riverwest!!! Anyone who buys a condo or townhouse here in downtown has got to have enough common sense to know that the landscape down here is constantly changing due to all of the construction going and that what you see out your windows may change over time…..get used to it! I’ve got a condo in the Warehouse District and since I bought it 8 years ago, I’ve had new construction go up across the streets where my windows face and I’m not pissing and moaning about it. If it’s such a big deal, go buy a huge lot out in Lakeville away from any close neighbors or development.