Seems the public has been shut out from meaningful input on the changes

  • Article by: M. PAUL FRIEDBERG and CHARLES A. BIRNBAUM
  • Updated: October 27, 2011 - 6:56 PM
  • 6
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 6 of 6
davehougOct. 28, 11 6:47 AM

Well if we ask the paying public, they probably won't want $50,000 water fountains, $45,000 afternoon with an author or a Billion dollar stadium either. ........... So we don't ask! ! ! (said with attempted humor)

4
1
lilkimmyOct. 28, 11 7:27 AM

How many elected officials in Minneapolis are Republican? Zero. None. You people deserve the government you keep electing thinking that someday things will get better instead of worse.

3
4
fickyfackOct. 28, 11 8:59 AM

Sounds like sour grapes to me. It's like having the architects of the Metrodome to weigh in on the stadium issue. Sorry, but I can't bring myself to call Peavey a prominent cultural urban space. It's a underutilized, uncomfortable hole to sit in. Just because it was built and it limped along for 40 years doesn't make it invaluable. There are plenty of other built mistakes that pockmark our cities.

6
3
quickeerOct. 28, 11 2:51 PM

The public was left out of the process of deciding the fate of their own public plaza. A great injustice was done to Mr. Friedberg - like being invited to share in the care of a sick child then being completely shut out while the kid is intentionally killed.

0
2
oldsterOct. 28, 11 4:03 PM

Sour grapes indeed. The authors were in on the process at the beginning and have had ample opportunity to voice their opinions. They have have had far more access to the process than any member of the public. Their contention is that since they did not get their way, the process was flawed-which is nonsense. Peavey Plaza was a terrible design in the first place--a redesign is long overdue. And both of these gentlemen have had plenty of opportunities to state their views.

1
1
quickeerOct. 29, 1111:41 AM

OK. I have "got that" now. The original author of the project and the Cultural Foundation rep voted against full restoration at the beginning. They were probably brought into the discussion for this opinion on full restoration. The City did the right thing to bring full restoration back to the table. It took a wrong turn from there. If you are the originator of the project and the cultural person, always vote for full restoration and go from there. Target is a great company - I have so much respect for the work that Target does. They may find the value of full restoration and have a way to make it happen.

0
0
  • 1 - 6 of 6

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT