What the NYT got wrong about Minneapolis

Isn't it great that Downtown East is providing a ray of hope for our tired, shuttered, depopulated, aging, tumbledown urban core? The New York Times thinks so. Downtown East is placed in Context straight away, one of those big projects the little cities out in provinces hope will turn around their fortunes.

The status quo for where, exactly? I've rarely seen a parking lot that could be described as crumbling. Tired buildings? You mean the refurbished low-income transitional housing here, or the rehabbed warehouse that's now residential here, or the adjacent office building that looks as good as it's ever looked? StarTribune World HQ may be tired on the inside here and there, but outside it's still stark and clean, and the Armory, while in need of an overhaul, isn't exactly a weary pile awaiting the sweet release of the wrecking ball. The Juvie center and the adjacent office structure are hardly old. There's one Tired Building in the area, and it's a nondescript old industrial building. The Haaf Ramp? Not tired. The jail? Not tired. The Freeman Building? Not tired; dead and gone, and hooray for that.

Limited housing? I'll admit you have to walk an entire block to get to the rows and rows of condos on Washington, and the journey may deplete one so much the rest of the residential renaissance of downtown must wait for another day. If you knew nothing of Minneapolis, you'd conclude it was a barren expanse where the only residents were rummies in SROs working on a pint of Sno-Shoe.

Next:

Because there's nothing to do downtown. If only it had restaurants and bars.

Note that the person quoted "welcomes the redevelopment," which has nothing in the way of an entertainment quotient.

Which is not the point of the project. At all. I don't remember the part where they unveiled the twin towers of the Wells Fargo project and said "this, and the hotel, will be the spur that brings people to live downtown. We anticipate demand so strong armed guards will be required to restore order after the announcement that the units have been sold." Downtown East is not meant to revitalize downtown. It is meant to revitalize the few blocks known as Downtown East, thereby complimenting the substantial development that's taken place nearby.

Then there's some recaps about the nature of the deal and some rah-rah booster quotes, and this:

Fifty-nine documents! People stop me on the street and ask how many documents were involved in the sale, and which soft drink infused the proceedings. Always felt bad I had to shrug and plead ignorance.

I hate it when optimism of the cautious variety is subjected to dimming, but I really don't think anyone watching the project arise finds their heart snag on the Protruding Nail of Recollected Financing Battles. No one who looks at the renderings of the park puts a hand on their sternum, and thinks oh what unalloyed joy I would feel had not the process been so lengthy or contentious.

It's in the cutline of the photo, too: "Battles over its financing have dimmed many residents' optimism about the redevelopment project." They may have affected how people view the project, inasmuch as some people were opposed to any public participation, but this was baked into the project, and it's not as if a great blaring blast of optimism has been sullied because people remember the financing battles they had willed themselves to forget.

It's almost as if a narrative is being imposed on the situation, but c'mon, how likely is that.