Round three, getting closer . . . I think . . .
GETTING STARTED
At about 6:45 the Plan Commission started receiving word that they were about to start the Edgewater upstairs. They finished their meeting, many went upstairs and then we waited til almost 7:10 for them to get started. 17 minutes later, the State Journal posted their article on the changes, they obviously weren’t at the meeting and reporting on it first hand. The Cardinal was tho.
[Holy Crap! That Wisconsin State Journal article is a completely different article than was originally posted, I should have taken a screen shot of the first article. The first article the first line was the one buried at the end saying the Council wouldn’t be taking it up on Tuesday.]
DEVELOPER PRESENTATION
They were given 20(?) minutes to do their presentation.
Dunn starts off by saying over the last several weeks, we have focused efforts on two fronts, one was to come back with a submission responding to storm water, plaza issues and items they requested and they spent considerable time on that. Separate from that they have undertaken an extensive effort working primarily with National Guardian Life (NGL) to explore ideas prompted by discussion with you, you gave us thoughts and ideas, as well as staff in staff report. We looked at ways to move the building, mitigate traffic on terrace and entry sequence to the building, parking, and spent time in last week, with design team and NGL exploring wide range of those ideas. We said a few weeks ago moving building to east would be difficult to achieve, and still feels that way, but having said that, good dialog with NGL, been willing to go as far as taking it to senior management board to address some of your concerns, came up with some ideas that directly address some of the thoughts. Much of what you will see and hear is new, respect fact that you want materials days if not a week in advance, but as recently as a day and half ago they did not have enough of a directive from NGL that we can begin to explore this in this setting. This is major redesign number 5. [Isn’t this number 3? There was the original proposal, the redesign when they took floors off the 70s building and now this one?]. In 3 of the previous designs, NGL come forward with us in response to your thoughts, first they moved it 60 feet [Yeah, because they were building in the right of way and they didn’t own the land.], then height and removed 70s and thought this got them on the path to a project, third time told that if just move the building to the east it would be better. Now on path to get a project, our sensitivity if strike out, what is issue number 4 that people will want now? Hard to dive into design number 5 without some direction. They have been responsive to staff concerns, and UDC questions and concerns. They have to get some positive feedback so can set it on course to solve final design details, not sure can continue until footprint and framework to design around is set. Happy to go into redesign number 5 and need some frame work and understanding of if this solves major concerns. Definitive to get on to detail design. He says he has to say that he makes no apologies with new information, as late as 1:15 last evening was getting design info and architect was on a plane this morning to get here and keep it flowing, would have loved to have submitted it a week ago, but he had no authority with NGL to discuss. He repeats himself, says they need direction, some guidance to set a framework to complete a design, if can get that, will have momentum with NGl to take it forward and satisfy your concerns. He says it will be a short presentation that reviews changes 1) Concept of bring upper floors of addition to the east, they looked at 1 foot to 30 feet and settle on tower moves 15 feet. [Didn’t he previously say that was impossible because of the column lines?] 2) Issue of how bring vehicles in to the site and how that impacts public space, to build parking structure between hotel and NGL building, primarily below grade for fully below grade. 3) Significantly changes the public terrace, now vast majority of traffic won’t be on the drive, how can we improve the public experience to make it an even more dramatic public space. He says what you will see is very conceptual, needs direction to carry forward. [That doesn’t square with his seeming desire to get initial approval.] Last point is submission addresses more technical issues at last meeting. Storm water, waterfront setback etc. Tonight’s efforts best focuses on the three issues.
Woods says they have 10 minutes left.
Manfredi says that he has two presentations, what you have, but also the the new one. He says there are two significant issues, guest room floors above the Langdon St elevation shifted 15 feet to the east. So what you have now, is that these floors sit on the center axis of the bigger footprint, at the lower plaza is the ballroom at 51 feet, at 61 feet is the hotel lobby and check in, and go down to ball room or up to restaurant and café at 71 feet on Langdon and guest room floors slid 15 feet east, was 66 feet from center of right of way, now 81 feet from center of Wisconsin Ave, will show in 3 dimension. 2nd big change is every bit as important, outline of new parking, the parking plate would be elevations below lawn of ngl, parking connects the exiting Edgewater parking to existing NGL parking with 2 plates of parking off extension of Langdon. Drop off is not just drop off, no parking entry – pedestrian connections to parking structures, this transforms the auto court, eliminates what has been described as the black hole, now a landscaped plane. Vehicular and pedestrian connections taken off – allows them to increase parking to approximately 365 spaces, 211 exist in the structure.
He re-explains in three dimension.
They did relook at the elevations and two weeks ago urging them there were too many steps to get to the top of the building, the element didn’t engage at the 51 level, push the massing back and make it more one element.
At this point, they start handing out copies to the public. [WOW! I might be more impressed with this than the changes to the building!]
He says the east elevation is more consistent with west elevation, asymmetry. He says 70s building were bay windows, already constrained waterfront walk and that pushed into that, removed those on lower three floors, balconies on fourth floor. Last piece view from east (on NGL property) shows a new rendering. He says lots of lessons learned, new massing diagram, some things changed that don’t apply, Hopefully will bring lessons forward.
Woods asks about where 15 feet on elevation would be. He points it out.
Ken Saiki says that southern half of the plaza changes (see photo above), no auto court and drive, still need fire access. This allows them to squeeze it and now more space, series of 10% slopes and terraced spaces step down with slope of the drive, still an overlook, level, not rise up. This part of site is gardenesque. They changed the paving pattern in response to Richard, tried to make it more symmetric, supports drainage for ice rink better.
They ask some questions, then hear from the public next, due to the new materials, it was hard for many to comment. After that, the committee discusses and basically decides most changes are for the better, but they are still grappling with if the height is correct and say they need to see the full submittal of the new project to determine if the 15 foot setback mitigates the height. They refer to the next meeting.
My apologies, but I have a monster headache and am going back to bed and taking the morning off. Will get his up hopefully later today.
