So, last Wednesday, the day before Thanksgiving, I attended the meeting of the Urban Design Commission to hear the latest on the 700 E Washington/Gebhardt project. I showed up at 5:20 at the same time as 2 of the 4 members of the public that showed up – and the item scheduled for 5:25 had already finished the presentation and taken public comment. I’d be surprised, but it was, as the say, par for the course.
To add insult to injury, the staff and chair argued that they had to meet otherwise they would have to meet two weeks in a row and they’re all volunteers and they were there, so why couldn’t the public show up at this time. (See below) They did, in their defense, allow the three of the four public members to show up late speak, but speak to what? We missed the presentation by the developer.
This is, by the way, the same project that they rammed through in the last two weeks – they are voting to accept the offer to purchase the property at the council meeting tonight. This is the project that they had three meetings at the same time on last Monday – which I successfully missed all three by showing up downtown at 5:10. Someone from the development team told me that they also missed the Plan Commission meeting that night because it had been moved and this was item 1.
This is also the same project they held illegal/secret meetings on – excluding the neighborhood representatives, but including the business community members.
For more information on the 700 E Washington Project, the neighborhood information page is here.
Here’s the UDC meeting, thanks to a neighborhood person who audio taped it.
The audio starts with Bridget Maniaci explaining why the project is at Urban Design Commission and telling them that there are laws that will need to be changed to have the project move forward. (Sound familiar? The laws in this case are the Urban Design District 8, and there are multiple issues including height, set backs, tree planting, etc. There may be some argument to change some items, but not others.)
Al Martin, staff, explains that there are many items besides height. That is why they are having an informational instead of looking at changes to the law right now – and he hands out the ordinance.
Maniaci says that they are operating under time constraints, and have a tight timeline.
Dick Wagner, the chair, says that they all would like to get out of there as soon as possible, but they will take the time they need to hear the project. He says there are one or two people in the audience that also want to speak.
Developer staff explains the site to the committee, they have a parking structure, commercial, lower density residential and a higher density tower. The parking is surrounded on three sides by that development, they are looking for ways to treat the side facing the Reynolds property. On the Urban Design District 8, he says they comply with everything, but they are requesting 17 feet of height for 2 stories that exceeds the ordinance. He says they do meet the set back line from E Mifflin (30 degrees), but not the set back line from E Washington (45 degrees). They wanted to activate the street scape on E Washington and Livingston.
Another development staff person explains how they want cafe seating and that they want people to not just flow through but interact. They show a graphic that shows the theme of “constellation” and show some paving patterns of constellations. Idea is to create excitement, pattern changes and opportunities to sit by yourself or in a group. They also want to have community gardens, but they are still working on that. They also have a walk up terraced garden leading up to residential on E Mifflin. They have more diversity, more elevations, they want the restaurant to walk out and pick herbs from the planters.
Developer staff (sorry, I don’t know the voices that well yet!), say that they also have a set back on the 4th floor, so they have areas for green roof above the parking deck. They say its informational and they are still working through issues, they are dealing with “back of house”, contamination and unit studies to determine privacy requirements, but they show a sketch of the “program” and where they are on UDD 8. They are working with the staff.
One registration from David Waugh – lives on Mifflin St, he is the development chair for the organization. We are working with these folks early on. In August there was a meeting where all the proposals were revealed. Then there was a neighborhood council meeting where they presented and they came to the neighborhood spaghetti dinner. Since then there was a steering committee that was formed to work with them more interactive on a regular basis. They are wonderful to work with. Feedback is positive. Neighborhood likes redevelopment of the site, mixed use which is in the neighborhood plan, sustainability (passive solar, open space, low water fixtures, etc), hiding the parking structure. They are also aware first development in the BUILD area and are happy they came to the neighborhood early. Concerns raised, building heights, many people for it and those who have problems are more concerns about the recent plans and think the plans should be changed. Traffic circulation concerns with E Mifflin being a bike boulevard and conflicts with delivery trucks. They want a full intersection opened up (on E Wash I believe but can’t see what he is pointing at), not too concerned about Capitol views, but want to see what happens from Breese Stevens Field. Mostly want info. Not much discussion on materials and design. The timeframe is tight, we will work to work with that, but its and issue.
Marsha Rummel asks if David was on the BUILD committee, any thoughts on this first project.
Waugh says that amending the plan is not desired, would like to see it comply, would like more employment, but recognize this is the first project, the riskiest, so we need momentum, maybe we should make the changes to get the momentum to get something going.
Al Martin says staff is reviewing the plans, he says there is supposed to be a green setback, there is a lot fo hardscape, they encourage more green and trees at the setback, they want trees behind the sidewalk.
A committee member comments that htey remember a lot of discussion about that.
Dawn O’Kroley asks about the pedestrian goals, she says you can’t form a relationship across E Washington, but talk more about Livingston and E Mifflin. This appears to treat all street equally.
Developer staff says they need to respond to 800 N block and that will inform their next iteration on Livingston, they have only seen preliminary drawings.
They also say that they appreciate the green, he says think about Chicago, if you had shrubs you wouldn’t have the same feel, unles we let people sit on the lawn.
Wagner says think of Michigan Ave, they have trees there to create a boulevard.
Maniaci says that staff is pointing out that you have to balance the structured space with the landscaping plan, you have to do more substantial plantings.
Al Martin says its a requirement.
Maniaci says planters aren’t going to get you there.
Development staff talks about a vertical green element on the side of the building. They can play with more trees, they would love to have a great integration with Livingston and would love to block off the street and have a festival space, but they don’t know what is happening.
Martin says they won’t because they are first out of the shoot.
Development staff says that they are trying to stay in the right of way so that costs don’t go up.
Maniaci keeps talking. Rummel interrupts and asks if a commissioner can finish.
O’Kroley then comments that she is concerned about three entries off E Washington to commercial space and on Livingston they have entry to office and residential and that is where she thinks people will want to sit. That the green space on Livingston should be wider, and you’d have a different feeling on E Washington. You buzz down E Wash and its uncomfortable but on Livingston you can park your bike safely.
Rummel says that she is concerned about the 4 criteria in the design district is to create a boulevard and you’re the first one and will set the standards. She likes what O’Kroley has said, look at how the mass treats the street, doesn’t think pedestrian life will be on Livingston and across the street will have to respond to what you do.
Developer staff says they are working on the tenants and that will inform the entries. They agree that treating them as identical is an issue to be worked on.
Todd Barnett agrees, he likes the constellation idea, the hardscape of 22 feet is too wide, working on the boulevard and the canopy trees with tie in with the constellation theme.
They ask if there is street parking there.
Yes.
Will the address be E Washington.
No, it will be Livingston.
Barnett asks why the front door of the building is on the side street.
Developer staff says that is for the residential uses. The foot traffic they expect in the street fronts on E Washington, they thought the residential entry was nicer on Livingston
Maniaci asks if they are doing this for the fire department – that is why they put the main entry there.
Didn’t understand the response.
Developer staff says they are working with staff on the corner element. Barnett asks some questions, says the building is transparent and how they break it up is important, glad they are thinking about signage now, he says it is early but asks about cladding, what materials are you considering.
Masonry is on the table and based on the last staff meeting, everything else is off.
Maniaci says she has seen the drawing and she doesn’t like it, its heavy. We have some many background brick buildings and she is concerned, she likes this better.
Barnett asks about masonry, stone, burnished block, brick?
Brick.
Barnett says glad no precast masonry.
They say they would like to continue to discuss this.
Barnett asks about metal panels, was it not warmly received?
Developers says they have to work it out.
Barnett continues to argue for metal.
Maniaci interrupts, says she isn’t going to interrupt, says totally disagrees with staff.
Developer staff say they are working on it.
Barnett says that they want the building to be light and transparent. He is concerned about the height and the plan being so new.
They argue how old the plan is. Maniaci says 2006, Rummel says 2009 (its closer to 2009 than 2006).
They talk about the housing units. They say they would be market rate apartments with option to convert in the future.
Todd doesn’t like the proportion of the top three stories. I understand you are addressing angles from the street, but it look funny on top. The rapping the building is good. They are on the right track scaling down to Mifflin. The egress to the parking garage on Livingston ok?
Maniaci says they want it off Mifflin.
Barnett asks if there is a basement. They say no.
Maniaci says its the water table.
The developer asks what the concern is.
Barnett explains why the entry would be better in some place, thinks it is fine, just wanted to know more, concerned about something he points to that I can’t see.
This is where the three members of the public come in. Dick Wagner, the chair says that the members can register. Richard Linster asks if David Waugh registered and David inciates yes and Linster says David can speak for him. Dick Freihoffer says that he wants to speak for himself. I indicate that its hard to comment when you missed everything. One of the guys says he thought the meeting started at 5:25.
Richard Slayton encourages them not to use concrete, but timber could be interesting, but I missed part of it. He asks about overhang. He says is talking about a band on the building. Back and forth about planters and band and I can’t really understand from the audio and I was still filling out my form. He asks about bike parking, developer says they were trying to isolate the sitting space from the flow space. Slayton continues to talk about the band.
Rummel asks about the band.
They says got to C1 – I still don’t know what they are talking about.
Slayton says they need more green, some trees, the developer says they have some ideas, Slayton says the community gardens need to be raised for people in wheel chairs, talks about their ornamental and native grasses and trees. They say they are trying to be indigenous.
Slayton is worried about herbs and people walking with dogs.
They says it is a concept they are still playing with, maybe a vertical green element. Maybe some water integrated with green, they think they can hold people there and they want people to watch people there – they are changing their minds about where the gathering area is based on the input.
Wagner asks for the public to speak.
Richard Freihoffer explains experience with neighborhood associations, talks about steering committee meeting, 12 people there, never seen it happen, pretty much everyone agreed, even past president said this would be a real positive, we have to get something done, I’m hoping for a job number one and I’m thinking this will be great.
Brenda Konkel says that she agrees (wow, this is odd), there are issues with agreements with plans, there weren’t enough details at the meeting to indicate support, I wait for the staff report to indicate support or opposition becasue there is a wealth of information in there. The real issue isn’t the project but the process. Holding this meeting tonight the day before Thanksgiving at 5:30 isn’t good, and to walk in at 5:20 and the presentation is done, even tho those are estimates, is still a crappy process.
Staff interrupts and says they had to do it because of budget meetings.
I say I know, but earlier this week they scheduled three meetings on this project at the same time. Plan Commission, Board of Estimates and a special meeting at Economic Development Commission. The process on this has sucked from the beginning with the illegal meetings, committee that was set up and not publicly noticed, its just that the process has gotten worse instead of better. And I’m afraid this is a result of the development process review and improving the process for the business community, its bad for the neighborhoods and the public participation. Its not good to rush this through, we brought it up at the steering committee and they went forward anyways. And its nothing to do with the developer or the project. This is just when the meeting was scheduled. How is the public supposed to participate when there were three meetings at the same time earlier this week and this meeting at 5:30 the night before thanksgiving, how is the public supposed to participate.
Martin interrupts again, says that staff had no choice because of budget otherwise they would have had two meetings in a row.
He starts talking and I interrupt and say, who does that inconvenience, the public or the staff.
Martin is clearly offended and says no, to have two UDC meetings one after another, that is how it would have been, he says he discouraged every applicant from being on this agenda. That is why they had the consent agenda items and are early.
I say I should have known, those are estimates on the agenda, but you guys are never early.
They disagree and say they are.
Wagner says they haven’t changed their procedures at all.
I say I understand that, but the general public doesn’t know that. The agenda says 5:25.
It still sucks.
Wagner says that they are all working on the day before Thanksgiving and its not a city holiday and they are volunteers.
Jokes about working on Thanksgiving.
Rummel says that the bike parking at the corner, when she thinks of how important corners are and hopes they will look at that. Distribute more? Rummel says that they should distribute based on where the bicyclist are going. She says that the 30 degree angle and plans are important, that 30 degree thing is important. She also says that nothing in the renderings of the buildings lead her to brick so can they explain what they were thinking when they did the renderings. What was the inspiration instead of what you are hearing from staff.
They were thinking smooth metal and composite wood material, the owner wants some masonry on the 1st floor and the corner. That is what they are trying to coordinate. Until they can get that organized and go back to staff, they would like to keep a more diverse palate as an option. They say that carried to the planters.
Rummel says she is hearing the alder and neighbors say the height is ok. But do you have plan B is that is not changed.
O’Kroley says that she would like some context of tall buildings in the area like Das Kronenberg.
Wagner says there were photos, Barnett wants two dimensional.
O’Kroley asks about the townhouses, reminds her of ?? and she talks about courtyards. Tie in retail across Livingston and green. You can help make a collective effort.
Developer says have to determine if they can do it, now they can get to the details.
0’Kroley says to think about what you are setting someone up for. On E Wash I have a cup of coffee in my hand and am looking for a bus, on Livingston she would sit and eat a meal.
Maniaci is concerned about the brick, its very heavy and as far as a vision for the corridor being 21st century and future, instead of Metropolitan place being throwback, and she says you guys should be calling the shots on the design elements. She will hold off on the UDD changes, that is the next meeting, she wants direction, we didn’t talk about the back area, any comments on that, the tower has been the focus, but wants feedback on the MIfflin side, that is the human scale, its not horribly out of whack, you have made comments about positive things, on background, across the street, phase one has the building on other side of block and this will be a surface parking lot until the market is ready, that is a 10 year plan, if the ULI proposal is signed off on, it is a question of when that will see development, that is phase 3 as the market allows, she has way more concerns about that block than this. It is supposed to be a 4 story office building and a parking ramp entrance. There would a a marginal amount of townhouses on the outside. She is happy with what they brought up about the Livingston. E wash you are holding on for dear life as the cars go whizzing by and that will not change, but on Livingston, we have an opportunity. We talked about the bikes in the terrace strips, that is the bane of our neighborhood, no one has bike parking and we have bikes chained to everything, good catch on the bike parking on the corner. She likes the design direction, the modern nature of it and curious if you had anything else. Looking at the townhouse and wonders if there are details there because so many people are going to see that, its important to think about as well. She is looking at a neighborhood meeting firt or second week in December. Their submittal for UDC would be December 14th, and come back for initial in January.
BuZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ . . . . audio meltdown
Martin says something about when to have the height amendment, before or after the project? He thought project should come back. He says the height is just one issue, entrances and other issues are going to be a problem.
Wagner says that they need to address everything in the UDD. The trees are a requirement. There is more leeway on the brick and masonry and stone being “preferred” they are in the guidelines.
They say that if they want 10 feet setback they would need to change the nature of the street.
Martin says that was the intent.
Wagner says this is the law, the council has to change it, we can’t ignore it.
Rummel says would like to see the Mifflin side of the building so they have a better understanding. Rummel talks about how prescriptive the ordinance is, and they need to address it, they will try to hold them to the ordinance, you are the pioneer.
Developer says that this was done in response to thought, its not until they get up high enough that they get a product.
Wagner says its not about the height, its just that there is a process.
Rummel asks if they are going to change every piece of the ordinance and maybe the height is a big thing we can change, she hasn’t read it lately, but will and see what else there is.
Martin says that there are things like the main entrance being on the main street. There are all kinds of things in here.
Maniaci says they took the plan, they say its an ordinance, she says they took the plan and put it into code with nothing in the ground andno experience and their is the first one taking the ideas from the plan and putting them into reality. She will talk about that more when they get to the UDD, but realize that, this is the uncomfortable seat I have to sit in.
Wagner says he wasn’t a big fan of the ordinace.
Rummel says you helped work on it.
Wagner asks about the side facing Reynolds.
Developer says they don’t know, They think eventually it might be shared parking. They would like to treat the facade in an interesting way to allow light into the parking area.
They say thanks and look forward to future discussions.
