Housing innovation in Eden Prairie deserves backing

  • Article by: Editorial Board , Star Tribune
  • Updated: September 27, 2013 - 6:34 PM

Eden Prairie’s healthy tilt toward green deserves support.

  • 8
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 8 of 8
texas_technomanSep. 28, 13 8:31 AM

Everyone seems to miss the other potential customer for these houses. What about the empty nester that wants to downsize out of his/her McMansion and stay in the area...these houses would be ideal for that as well.

2
0
elind56Sep. 28, 1310:35 AM

"Eden Prairie’s healthy tilt toward green deserves support."-------------------------Then I suggest all who feel this way send some of your money their way (leave me out of it) because "green" sounds really compelling but the unsubsidized price tag attached to it is quite shocking and potential buyers will just shake their heads and laugh.

8
1
mn2niceSep. 28, 1311:18 AM

Well being one who has lived in Eden Prairie in a large apartment complex, which Eden Prairie seems to have more than its fair share of, the city as a whole is not pedestrian-friendly, and the transit stop alluded to in the article will already assuredly be for one of Southwest Transit's commuter buses to downtown Minneapolis and the U of M, not to a local transit bus (there is no local transit, bye the way), because Eden Prairie, unlike other communities, was designed to fit around the automobile. So building midlevel houses out there just perpetuates the suburban mystique. It will do little to solve the housing crunch in the city.

2
4
workforit1Sep. 28, 1312:40 PM

I find it amazing that the liberal voice of the startribune and the Minneapolis political figures, think they now know what is best for the surrounding area. There is a reason we don't live in Minneapolis, and you are looking at it. You don't know better, you are not smarter, and you have no clue what works and what does not. People do NOT want to subsidize your moronic ideas. The market is the solution, if there is demand and people willing to pay, it will be built.

4
1
supervon2Sep. 28, 13 4:50 PM

Eco-Friendly is just another term for small and cramped. Why can't you just say living spaces that people don't really like but are forced to live in by Liberals?

3
1
ddellwoSep. 28, 13 5:28 PM

If you're young and looking for an "urban" lifestyle, you're not going to be happy living in EP. If you can't afford to pay the market price in EP, then move to Richfield instead of looking to government for a subsidy!

3
0
FrankLSep. 28, 13 9:59 PM

The point that is missing is that 36 houses is not going to make much of a village. 360 houses might start to be a critical mass, but more likely you 3600 to get the benefits this article desires.

2
0
garagewineSep. 29, 13 1:26 AM

You can't have it both ways. You cannot argue that projects like this are necessitated by shifts in the market, while at the same time arguing that they still are in need of public promotion and subsidization. It's either one or the other. It isn't both.

3
0
  • 1 - 8 of 8

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