Downtown East Commons is a Blank Slate, Except for the Vikings. And the Traffic.

On Tuesday night, a healthy crowd of local downtown residents and other interested parties gathered in the rustic lobby of the Mill City Museum for the first of several public meetings about the forthcoming Downtown East Commons park. It was a fun atmosphere, with the palpable enthusiasm that comes with the chance to shape big changes in the place where you live. There were also cookies.

There were two purposes to the meeting. The first was to give locals the chance to hear from the landscape architecture firm chosen by the city, Hargreaves Associates. The presentation given by Hargreaves’ President Mary Margaret Jones was well received, and it’s clear that the city has made an able hire. Hargreaves has a huge amount of experience in planning parks all around the world for drastically different functions, and their perspective on the Commons was fairly comprehensive in scope, even if few details were at hand this early in the process.

A video of the presentation is already up on YouTube (start watching four minutes in), and the full presentation is also online. The project now has a website with an appallingly long URL.

The second purpose of the meeting was to gather community ideas. As is always the case at these meetings, some ideas are great and many are awful, but the real use lies in recognizing the community needs under the surface. Most of the values stated were fairly obvious (this just in: Citizens Call For Park To Be Safe), some were revealing (there was broad consensus that the park should have as little hardscape as possible, and also that it be aggressively programmed), and some niche concerns appeared (a group of climbers advocated for a climbing feature). The planners will now take this information, as well as the results of this online survey (which, no joke, they will make into a word cloud) and probably ignore all but the most high concept ideas. On April 8th, the second community meeting will be held, and the planners will present three distinct directions in which the park could be taken, leaving the community to make their preference clear.

Likely the most useful bit of information to come from the meeting was the establishment of the park’s timeline, which to my knowledge has not been well communicated. The idea is to complete the park in two stages. The first will be completed by Ryan Companies and will be largely a bare-bones green space. It will open in late summer of 2016 so that the Vikings can use it during their season. It will close after the Vikings season is complete, and a second phase of construction will begin, in which the Hargreaves design will be implemented in full (it’s unclear how much of a say Hargreaves will have in the “interim park”). This will be completed in time for yet another Vikings season, with the park totally done before the 2018 Super Bowl.

commonsscheduleBy far the most ugly slide in the presentation

The park’s schedule reflects the fraught nature of “The Commons” as being in large part a private space under the sway of the Minnesota Sports Facilities Authority and the Vikings. The latest plans for the park reported in the Star Tribune indicate that “The Commons” could be gobbled up by football interests for up to 60 days a year, plus time for event set-up and strike. Whatever was said on Tuesday’s meeting, it will probably have less bearing on the design of the park than whatever is required by the MSFA and the Vikings organization.

A River of Cars Runs Through It

The meeting also highlighted in stark terms the single biggest problem of the park; it will be bisected by Portland Avenue. Early in the process, Ryan Companies retreated from their proposal to close Portland and Park Avenues, due to opposition from Hennepin County, which didn’t want to limit access to the Hennepin County Medical Center, and which also feared more congestion on neighboring streets. Interestingly, during Viking game-days, the streets will be closed, as apparently people do not drive or need medical attention on Sunday afternoons.

There’s no way around it: these roads drastically limit the potential of the Downtown East Commons. Before withdrawing their street-closing proposal, Ryan Companies produced a pair of renderings that have usually been used by the media in talking about the park. These renderings give a highly inaccurate idea of what is possible. In reality, the park is split into two blocks, which will be separated by a street that is currently five lanes wide (three with traffic, two for parking, and one bike lane) and may not be shrunk. At the meeting, nearly every group addressed the road in some way. Some suggested the road become a tunnel. Other suggested there be a bridge built over the road. Maybe an artificial hill could be built on either side of the road, with a fancy glass bridge connecting the two halves. Whatever. Regardless of what steps are taken, it’s obvious that pedestrians will play second fiddle in their own park to cars. Given the fealty of elected officials to preserving traffic flow on Portland, would the county even accept traffic calming measures on the street? You’d hope they’d at least do that, but until we know for sure, it might be better to think of the park as two separate spaces with little connection to each other.

commonsseparate Five lane streets and new skyways! What could possibly go wrong?

Oh, and there’s no plan to expand the sidewalks on 4th Street, which means crossing it to reach whatever coffee and sandwich shops end up in the Wells Fargo towers will be hazardous.

I came away from the meeting feeling conflicted. On one hand, I felt as though the wishes of the community were clearly expressed, and that the architects would do a good job with what they were given. But all the talk of making the Commons a signature space in downtown has plainly been betrayed by the limits that have been placed on the park by the city and county. The use of the park for Vikings game-day was inevitable, and not necessarily a bad thing. The additional dates reserved for the MSFA and the Vikings could be a boon if both organizations take their programing responsibilities seriously. But the combination of these with the municipal resolve to maroon the park on an asphalt island is dispiriting.

Perhaps it’s too much to expect our outlook as a city to change all at once. As I left, I spoke with a woman about the street problem, and she asked me in reply, “They’re calming all the other streets throughout the city, where else are cars supposed to go?”

There’s a lot of work left to be done. I’m eagerly awaiting the design concepts that Hargreaves returns with in early April. Every site has challenges, and I hope they can overcome ours.

(Editor’s Note: There’s another streets.mn post today about the Downtown East Commons park that covers the potential closure of Portland Avenue, and you could probably consider it to be a wacky spin on the above post. We’re going to publish both at the same time.)

Streets.mn is a non-profit and is volunteer run. We rely on your support to keep the servers running. If you value what you read, please consider becoming a member.

, , ,

10 Responses to Downtown East Commons is a Blank Slate, Except for the Vikings. And the Traffic.

  1. Adam Miller
    Adam Miller February 27, 2015 at 12:06 pm #

    So the streets are going to be closed when they otherwise would be busiest? Um, okay.

    Park and Portland are a one way pair. Why is it a nonstarter to at least make part of Park two way so all of the important ambulances and cars can get still get through and close this one block of Portland?

    Park could be two way from 2nd to 5th without too much trouble, I’d think. Or we could make it even more convenient for HCMC and make it two way all the way to 10th.

  2. Matty Lang
    Matty Lang February 27, 2015 at 12:13 pm #

    “They’re calming all the other streets throughout the city, where else are cars supposed to go?” Heh. I lol’ed. #waroncars

  3. Brendon Slotterback
    Brendon Slotterback February 27, 2015 at 5:17 pm #

    Is anyone asking we why need a two-block park (besides Max Musicant)? Limiting it to one block solves the road closure problem, and part of the funding problem. Have we figured out how we’re going to pay for maintenance yet?

    • Sam Newberg
      Sam Newberg February 28, 2015 at 11:03 am #

      Spot on, Brendon. I think Max and I have both been asking this question repeatedly for more than one year. It is a very fair question, and I’m still of the opinion that the full cost and maintenance of a really great park are being underestimated. Two possible outcomes will be revised cost estimates that keep creeping up, or disappointment with what does get built.

      Trust for Public Land just released a report about parks conservancies: https://www.tpl.org/public-spacesprivate-money

  4. Rosa February 27, 2015 at 9:18 pm #

    To be fair, closing those streets during games is not any different than letting football fans drive on or walk across them on game days.

    One time, I tried to drive from Park & 5th to Cedar Avenue on an afternoon I had foolishly forgotten there was a game at the Metrodome. After 30 minutes to go one and a half blocks because football fans don’t understand that green only means go if there aren’t cars already filling the street in front of you, we parked & walked to a West Bank restaurant. After dinner it was again possible to drive on Park & Portland.

  5. Sam Newberg
    Sam Newberg February 28, 2015 at 11:26 am #

    A really great downtown, urban park and a road running through it are not mutually exclusive. Look at the emerging plans (or the Ryan Co. placeholder plans) for Downtown East Commons or any number of downtown parks (Discovery Green in Houston comes to mind) and you’ll see not one monolithic use but many different pieces of the park. Thus, Downtown East Commons can certainly be designed in a way that can coexist with Portland.

    That said, Portland should at a minimum be calmed significantly, narrowed, tree-lined and with an enhanced bicycle connection.

    • Alex Schieferdecker
      Alex Schieferdecker February 28, 2015 at 12:35 pm #

      I certainly agree that they can co-exist (as you say, with some changes to the street). In a reply to Nick’s piece on the meeting I pointed out this slide (http://imgur.com/FbZ6lUF) from the architects, which shows what seems like a very well designed shared space. Something like that would be very welcome here.

      But I continue to feel that Portland does really limit the potential of the space. It’s not a fatal flaw, (I worry that the size of the surrounding roads may be just as bad) but it is a limitation.

    • Ron March 2, 2015 at 6:22 pm #

      There’s not really a road going through Discovery Green in Houston. White Promenade is basically closed for traffic. Sometimes they park the Art Cars on, that’s about it.
      It’s still a good point, I just got excited because I’ve been there many times.

  6. Sam Newberg
    Sam Newberg February 28, 2015 at 11:28 am #

    As well, the Vikings should be willing to pay a proportionate amount for upfront and ongoing costs for the park relative to the number of days they will occupy it.

    • wayne March 2, 2015 at 11:19 am #

      But that would defeat the purpose of robbing the city and state blind for personal profit!

Note on Comments

streets.mn welcomes opinions from many perspectives. Please refrain from attacking or disparaging others in your comments. streets.mn sees debate as a learning opportunity. Please share your perspective in a respectful manner. View our full comment policy to learn more.

Thanks for commenting on streets.mn!