Well, kinda a discussion. It looks like there are only 6 – 8 alders there, but its hard to tell from the cameras who it is. Perhaps Ellingson, Schmidt, Resnick, King, Bidar-Sielaff, Johnson, Weier and Verveer and Rhodes-Conway. My TiVo gives me 7 minutes of chatter where I hear other voices of Maniaci and Subeck, but they disappear after the presentation starts I think. Hard to tell when you are not there. There’s a 3 minute introduction by Steve Cover who says people think Madison Downtown is great, including many people who attended the CNU conference last summer. But it can be better. We’re not hardened, we are moist clay that is still being formed. Bill Fruhling then does a 45 minutes presentation that you can watch here. They then “discuss” for about 20 minutes – which is mostly just questions.
Presentation Highlights
– There has been a long history behind this resulting from various other processes – this started in earnest in 2008. – The process was built on extensive public input.
– The vision is as follows:
Downtown Madison will be a flourishing and visually exciting center for the arts, commerce, government and education. It
will be a magnet for a diverse population working, living, visiting and enjoying an urban environment characterized by a sensitive blending of carefully preserved older structures, high quality new construction, architectural gems and engaging public spaces all working together and integrated with surround neighborhoods, parks and the transportation system to create a unique and sustainable environment for the community, the region and beyond.
– There are 9 keys he goes through.
– Key 1: Celebrate the Lakes – He talks about how this was the number one item that people talked about. He shows the plan to fill in the lake at the eastern end of Law Park for 2 acres to create a city waterfront park. They are planning for boats to be docked there. He says not to take these concepts too literally, they are concepts. On Lake Mendota he talks about the lakefront pedestrian/bike path and the two ends that already exist and the part that has yet to be built.
– Key 2: Strengthen the Region’s Economic Engine – This key deals with economic development and the economy of downtown, employment and downtown edge employment centers just outside the planning area such as University, hospitals, East Washington that need to be better integrated into downtown. It also talks about retail, visitors and tourists. He points out that the Economic Development Committee, the BID and the Downtown Coordinating Committee are working on this and have subcommittees working on this. He shows a map of where development has occurred and can occur on parcels that are a half acre or more where they could build 4,000 – 5,000 more dwelling units and $4 – 5M more square feet of commercial space in the next 20 years. That would be $2 – 2.5B in development.
– Key 3: Ensure a Quality Urban Environment – They want this to be an authentic and vibrant place people want to be. The views are really important, there are iconic views and a lot of people think about how they bring people into town. They talked quite a bit about how to protect the views – shows a bad example of Nolen Shores blocking the capitol. Even tho we may have made some bad decisions, we need to keep this in mind in the future. Another important thing is the unique characteristics of the downtown neighborhoods. He talks about the Johnson St. Bend area that doesn’t have an identity with the student highrises. One of the big issues here is the height map. He says staff think this map is good because it preserves views, makes the skyline more interesting instead of flat, it strengthens the desired character of the unique neighborhoods is and it is less ad hoc and parcel by parcel. Knew this would be controversial, but some areas of downtown have these in place and the staff thinks it works well. It stops a lot of that discussion about the height and makes for a richer dialog about the architecture and the rest of the building. Most committees are looking for more flexibility here. He shows a second map that allows for additional height to give an overall sense of what could happen.
– Key 4: Maintain Strong Neighborhoods and Districts – already talked about that. The Mifflin neighborhood is another big discussion. It has generated a lot of discussion about the appropriate future. Staff laid out various options for Urban Design Commission and the Plan Commission, status quo is probably not an option. The map he shows keeps the house pattern in many areas and then allows for new development around the perimeter of the area. W. Washington blocks are deeper and much of the middle of the blocks are surface parking. They proposed an urban lane to go through the middle of the block with new denser/taller development. This is not an alley, it has sidewalks and lighting and buildings with street presence. They also have a letter with the plan with an alternative that keeps some clusters of buildings in smaller areas and allows more different types of development to occur. With both scenarios they want to break down the scale of the buildings along the street with front doors to individual units, to have a pedestrian scale and they hear that this doesn’t go far enough.
– Key 5: Enhance Livability – this section has recommendations on diversity of living options and working to make downtown an even better place to live. Housing for families with children, students as they shift closer to campus and senior housing. Also recommendations about safety.
– Key 6: Increase Transportation Choices – Downtown’s constrained geography limits what can be done. They are trying to make it more efficient, this will be discussed more in the Transportation Plan. The transportation committees are all still working on this. He shows another map with transportation corridors to more efficiently get around downtown. It does include rail stops. Downtown is not intuitive or easy to get around in. Considers converting some one way streets into two way streets. There are more bicycle and pedestrian facilities. It includes an East Campus Mall to connect the lakes. Also there is a formalization of the informal pedestrian path through Langdon St.
– Key 7: Build on Historic Resources – Many of the cities historic resources are by default in the downtown area. Shows a map of historic buildings, potential landmarks and the historic districts. He talks about National Historic Districts and asks if they should be a local district. This is a more comprehensive approach to building up the historic districts. Landmarks has endorsed this, but the Economic Development Commission is also having great discussions on this.
– Key 8: Expand Recreational, Cultural, and Entertainment Offerings – He says that there is a recommendation for a new neighborhood park, he shows areas where you have to walk more than 5 minutes to get to the park, or 1/4 mile. He says the higher density housing is in the park deficient areas. He says if we are going to continue to grow like that, we need more parks. He talks about a vacant lot that is typically in use during warmer weather.
– Key 9: Become a Model of Sustainability – This is a short chapter, sustainability is an overarching concept in all the keys.
He doesn’t mention this, but here is another section of interest.A Call to Action: Priority Recommendations
He next moves on to process, the plan was introduced on Nov 15th, its been referred to 14 committees and half have taken action in the next month the rest will make recommendations and that will all go to the plan commission who will take some time working on it and then come to the council. The plan commission has scheduled some working sessions starting February 23rd.
Discussion
Satya Rhodes-Conway thanks staff. Her first question is a process question, how do they want to get feedback from alders, preferably not on the council floor but before plan commission takes it up. Will the plan commission look at all the feedback will be considered.
Fruhling says input is good now, sooner rather than later. Can meet with us or send us an email. He says when this goes to plan commission they will have all the recommendations from commissions and committees. There are some big issues and some easier ones. He says that they will have one document with all the comments and staff recommendations.
Rhodes-Conway says that she will send an email but the staff should send an email to all alders inviting them into the process because alders sometimes don’t know how to interact on things not in their districts.
Mike Verveer also thanks staff, and asks if the Plan Commission will meet regardless of if the other committees have wrapped up their work.
Fruhling says yes, Brad Murphy says that the work sessions will be sent out. The first two on the 9th and 14th will focuse on the zoning map and then they will work through the recommendations. They will devote as many meetings as it takes to work through it, after they do that they will look at the downtown zoning districts and maps. They have scheduled 10 meetings, February 9th through the first week in April. They don’t have firm agendas except for the first two meetings, on March 1st they will do a training on Robert’s Rules, Open Meeting and Records.
Verveer asks about the interrelationship with the Downtown Plan, the Downtown Map and the overall city mapping process and the work of ZCRAC (Zoning Code Review Advisory Committee) and the work in April last year on the new zoning code, that goes hand in hand with the lightening rod of the height map and the decision that the PUDs can’t be used to exceed the height limits.
Murphy says that on March 29th of 2011 the council adopted the zoning code with the exception of the downtown and since that time they have been mapping the city, this is a rewrite and this is the first time it has been done since 1965 and the new zoning code is meant to accommodate the new building on the edges and make the downtown conforming to the zoning code. When they started working on the map, and now they are starting to do the code for the downtown, but they council wanted to wait for the Downtown Plan to advise the zoning code. ZCRAC has forwarded a set of recommendations for the zoning map and the downtown districts, recognizing that they still have to adopt the downtown plan. So, in the next two months they hope to adopt the downtown plan and start working through the zoning districts and map. It will be somewhat concurrent and they hope to work quickly after the plan is adopted. You will see an ordinance introduced that will adopt the new map for the entire city and create downtown zoning districts. Not sure when, at the earliest the end of February but maybe not til March.
Verveer says the development interest groups like DMI and Smart Growth Madison are very concerned about the height limits and one of their recommendations is to go back and review the previous council decision to not allow the PUD to exceed the limits. Do you see that recommendation being contained in the plan but would require one or more alders to amend the new zoning code.
Murphy says he is sure that will be discussed. The Economic Development Committee is talking about it. He expects there to be a recommendation on how to deal with that. If approved as written, it would not happen, ultimately the council will have to make that decision. It would require an amendment to what was already adopted, it would be an amendment to the new zoning code that has yet to take affect.
Verveer asks about the staff recommendation on the height bonus areas.
Fruhling says the original draft from September 2010 had a similar but somewhat different map, and based on all the feedback we took the map out to get more input and continued to get comments about the heights and there are some areas where there could be a bonus. In some areas there could be extra height if other objectives are met.
Verveer says this is on page 127 in appendix C.
Fruhling says they tried to be specific about how you get the bonus area, that was a way to respond to the feedback about flexibility. He says the blocks with height bonus areas are large or unusually shaped or transition areas from higher height to lower heights. This was an attempt to try to respond to all that.
