H said:
I wish this was true.
Why do you want to develop the greenfeilds (ie pro-sprawl*)? Are you anti-city, anti-farm, just pro-more profit, what is your angle?
*greenfield new urbanism is just sprawl with a costume.
I have no problem with redeveloping older communities. However, it is not my job to encourage people/businesses to stay in Minneapolis, where they are not doing well for a variety of reasons. Since at least the mid-20th century, it has been the dream of MANY to move away from the city. When this happens, corporate headquarters and retail companies move with them. They want to maximize their profits and if they build a retail store in nearly every city, they have a high chance that the suburbanites will shop there.
Again, I think that it's important to invest SOME money into redeveloping older, inner ring suburbs, as well as the urban core/CBD. But I will certainly not put all of my energy (or tax money) into doing this. I have the right to live in a suburban community, and stay away from living in the less desirable city. That is my opinion (and the opinion of millions of Americans).
I am not anti-city, anti-farm, or whatever else was said. But I am pro-development. I think that new developments can reflect a different build quality from the 1970s-1990s, which I think represented a low build quality. It is my hope that throughout the next decades, build quality will continue to improve (as it already has in many neighborhoods).
As I said, I am pro-development. I firmly believe in the notion that even though someone gets a new development, some other development will move into its place. Unfortunately for Minneapolis, this has not happened to the right extent, and they have lost businesses. But whose fault is that? These companies like the demographics of the second-ring suburbs like Eden Prairie, Maple Grove, Plymouth, Woodbury, Lakeville, etc. The household incomes are much higher than average, the housing stock is also higher in price, and that generally means that more consumer goods will be purchased. That's why Maple Grove's Arbor Lakes project has been so successful.
I am looking forward to the development in Maple Grove over the next decade or two, when the gravel mining area is finally exhausted and a New Urbanist style of building will continue to occur.
Say what you'd like about New Urbanism being a "face" for sprawl, but the truth of the matter is that this is only your OPINION. Opus would not be building these developments if people didn't want them here. Believe me, they are very welcome. They are adding a lot of convenience to our already-busy lifestyles, and for me, that is great. If it means that someone else will lose a business to us, then so be it. If you haven't noticed, competition for retail/residential development can be aggressive and if we get, great. If we don't, oh well.
So my point is that while I do not disagree with reinvesting in the city, it really is not my job to do that. Minneapolis and St. Paul must be doing a pathetic job if they cannot keep commercial and residential in their cities. To be honest, I know that Minneapolis is the base of our Twin Cities area, but as long as they're afloat, I care only about the city I live in, because that is what is directly affecting me, and that is what I have a vote about.
City and suburban people rarely agree on issues whether it be transportation or development. City people are mad that everyone is leaving the urban area for a more spacious plot in the suburbs, and so they name-call and come up with nasty expressions like "urban sprawl" or "waste of land." Suburbanites want highways to be built so they don't have to sit in 2 hours of traffic, while city people tell us to take public transportation. Sorry, the only way that will happen is if the crap public transportation we currently have improves to a level where it would actually be DESIRABLE to ride on. In all, we seem to never agree on topics, which is why I see Minneapolis as its own entity, and its own problem. The people that live there need to figure out what they're doing wrong, and admit that suburbanites have the right to live the way they want to. Then maybe people in the suburbs will be less turned-off by city folk when they complain and rant that the suburbs are wasting money and land. Until that happens, there won't be a whole lot of harmony between suburb and city.