 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||
|
||||||||||||
 |
||
 |
||
Topic one
How should central cities approach redevelopment within compact spaces? How can open spaces and natural areas be preserved? The future is unpredictable—or is it? Looking at current trends and the latest census and demographic data, will the future follow a similar course or bring something new? Landof.org presented this topic at the 15th Annual Minnesota Development Conference. Review our presentation slides and handouts and follow our blog for trends. Let us know what you think Minnesota will look like in 50 years..
How Does the Met Council Fit In?One side says the Met Council seems unwilling or unable to encourage the necessary growth shift back toward the center and instead, at the expense of central cities and developed suburbs, the council continues to emphasize development at the metro edge. This decentralized growth hollows the core and damages the metro region’s competitive edge. The other side says the Met Council lacks the authority to influence development patterns. Growth patterns are influenced by land prices, market forces and demographic patterns that are beyond the Met Council’s authority. The best that can be done is to encourage more compact nodes on the metro edge. As for the central cities and inner suburbs, they’re doing just fine. What’s the solution? Is the Met Council effective in leading Minnesota’s development? Should the council be redesigned? Or should it be eliminated completely? Follow the links for more information and opinions on the matter. Also check out the report, Planning to Succeed, from Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, Transit for Livable Communities and Surface Transportation Policy Partnership. The report looks at current conditions and gives recommendations for how to make the Met Council more effective. Leave your comments on our blog. We’d love to hear from you. Response from Will Schroeer »
Download
|
||
|
|||
|
|||
|