Minneapolandia: A $100 million, taxpayer-supported development of "affordable housing" for artists
This story is not a joke, and there are some real trade-offs at stake related to a genuinely historic site that should be preserved. But the writer seems not to even vaguely understand the irony here.
Art is good and enriching, historic preservation is A Good Thing. But the thought that, even if there were not a budget crash on the horizon in a city that has been financially mismanaged for decades (the "weak mayor" system includes a city council that has more Green Party representatives than Democrats, and zero Republicans), any available local funds or tax credits has a better use is not much of an issue.
The Mississippi River runs right through the center of downtown Minneapolis. The industrial origins were flour mills built in the 19th century, powered by the flowing water and then the grain products were shipped South on barges. Both Pillsbury and General Mills got their starts that way. All of the historic old flour mills are now closed down, and the old industrial riverfront has gradually been gentrified as the waterfront property becomes more and more desirable for its aesthetic, rather than industrial, value. The same new generation phenomenon has renewed Baltimore's Inner Harbor and Pittsburgh's Riverfront.
The Tyrone Guthrie Theater and Mill City Museum, two lovely tax money-suckers, as well as a luxury hotel, are already in place on the opposite (South side) river bank, linked to the North & East riverbank (the river path curves) by a beautiful old stone arch pedestrian bridge and there are restaurant-condo developments all through the area on the North & East bank. The Wilde Roast Cafe, named after Oscar, has a natural clientele and is quite popular.
Luxury condos, restaurants, retail, scenic areas, we can understand. "Affordable housing"? For "artists"? Where is Lorenzo de Medici when we need him? Now instead we get some local chairperson of an NGO standing with her hand out.
I am chary of posting photos because of copyright issues these days, perhaps Dr. Lileks has a few in his portfolio, since this is a few blocks from his newspaper office.
"About 65 percent of the project is being financed with affordable housing and state and federal historic tax credits, Metz said. About 1 percent of the project is being paid for with a public subsidy to clean up the site, and the financing package will also include housing revenue bonds."
If we are talking art here, maybe we could lure EJ Hill with a subsidized apartment.
- Comment (13)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments:
Jun '10
Re: Minneapolandia: A $100 million, taxpayer-supported development of "affordable housing" for artists
There is nothing better than subsidized art. The Soviets created a whole new art form: like most art, however, it bore no relation to actual truth.
Edited on March 24, 2012 at 4:42pmJan '11
Re: Minneapolandia: A $100 million, taxpayer-supported development of "affordable housing" for artists
Ah the good old days. We would change the course of a river if we needed the energy.
May '10
Re: Minneapolandia: A $100 million, taxpayer-supported development of "affordable housing" for artists
Could be a blessing in disguise. If affordable housing does for the artists what it's done for previous beneficiaries, we'll have more artists in jail.
Re: Minneapolandia: A $100 million, taxpayer-supported development of "affordable housing" for artists
I'd weigh in, but I already did, here in my newspaper column.
Sep '10
Re: Minneapolandia: A $100 million, taxpayer-supported development of "affordable housing" for artists
Now I understand. This is just a cover story for a secret project to build a giant Pillsbury Doughboy Terminator Robot. From the future. Which will be the present when it's built, of course.
Re: Minneapolandia: A $100 million, taxpayer-supported development of "affordable housing" for artists
Exactly, Dogsbody. Exactly.
(I'd forgotten all about that! What a great call-back.)
Sep '10
Re: Minneapolandia: A $100 million, taxpayer-supported development of "affordable housing" for artists
James, some of us actually have those great Diners saved on our hard drives, from all the way back in 2006....
Aug '10
Re: Minneapolandia: A $100 million, taxpayer-supported development of "affordable housing" for artists
Some of us can never forget, James. (Count me among the Diner archivists.)
Dec '10
Re: Minneapolandia: A $100 million, taxpayer-supported development of "affordable housing" for artists
Hmmm. I tend to be a skeptic about these endeavors, but notice there is an aspect that includes "cleaning the site up". Many former commercial and industrial structures now sit on municipal books and will stay there, until somebody figures out a scheme to redevelop them that includes cleaning them up. The redevelopments are often subsidiary.
For example, there is a reason that the Tampa Bay Rays play in an awful dome in the worst part of St. Petersburg. It was never really about baseball and now they need a new stadium, but the original bond issue actually addressed an environmental liability on the city's books.
I suspect there is a good reason that even this hare-brained proposal is being put forward, as the city may already be on the hook for something it is trying to contend with. Might bear looking into why this might be being proposed in tight budgetary times and what the liability exposure may be for continuting to delay something that may have been put off for a loooong time.
Sep '11
Re: Minneapolandia: A $100 million, taxpayer-supported development of "affordable housing" for artists
Let's do the math, shall we?
The developer projects the final cost to be $225 million. Assume that the developer is underestimating (developers are always optimists) by 15%. That puts the finished cost, per artist studio, at just over $511,000 apiece.
Why am I sure that a big chunk of this funding is federal tax dollars?
Jan '11
Re: Minneapolandia: A $100 million, taxpayer-supported development of "affordable housing" for artists
Great column.
Now I'm bummed. Tell me that column only yielded 3 comments because all your local fans read the dead tree edition.
Re: Minneapolandia: A $100 million, taxpayer-supported development of "affordable housing" for artists
Yeah ....ok: it's the damnedest thing. My local audience is almost completely different than my web audience. I meet people at the grocery store or coffee shop who say they love the column, and I tell them hey, you might like my website! They're usually surprised to learn I have one. Then there are the people who regularly check out my website and have no idea it has a blog, or people who know me only from the radio.
May '10
Re: Minneapolandia: A $100 million, taxpayer-supported development of "affordable housing" for artists
I missed that column- I see the Sunday dead tree edition, often miss the weekdays. James' take is fare better than mine, of course.
I not only listened to the original Diner, I even called the show occasionally way back in the '90's. Saturday mid-day on KSTP AM. Eventually, Norm Coleman had that sp0t after The Diner had exhausted the Lileks time availability.