Plan Commission on Comprehensive Plan Changes (Part 1, Mostly Grandview)

This is one of the first discussions on the controversial items in the Comprehensive Plan. This caused a few more people to show up. This is the list of items that will be prepared to be considered, so just being on the list says that it will be considered, not that it is supported, it will just be evaluated and considered.

PUBLIC INPUT
Satya Rhodes-Conway says she spent the day today canoeing on the lower Wisconsin River with Spencer Black so the importance of good planning and land use control is on her mind, the scenic river has a good story. She’s here to talk about the process. Staff and you have struggled with how to amend the plan, its good to have a process to amend it, it should evolve over time. But it has to pass a high bar. She wasn’t involved when it was written, but she understands there was a thorough process. She thinks that the same should happen for amendments. The neighborhood planning process changes have had their public vetting and went through a process. It’s appropriate for them to be folded in. These items before you are the ones that did not go through that process and tonight is not a sufficient process. These items are not considered in context or with a specific proposal. They should be considered with a plan, like the Special Area Plan for Cherokee that people spent a lot of time on, or you should be considering it with a specific development proposal before you so you know why you are amending a plan. Instead you are in the mushy middle, you don’t have a project and you’re not having a neighborhood meeting to talk about a plan. If you make the amendment you don’t know what you are going to get, and you don’t know if it rises to a high level. Yes, the comprehensive plan is at a high level and there is specifics to deal with later. But its not ok to make a general change without a rigorous neighborhood plan or a project that is so good that it rises to the level for us to amend our comprehensive plan. She is asking them to not do any of it, these items should not be considered. They should say that they should wait until there is a specific plan and then decide if they want to amend the plan. She understands staff would like to only open up the plan once a year at most and not do it more than that and not do it on an ad hoc basis, but she respectfully disagrees with that. She says that the changes in phase one were ok, but changes outside a neighborhood planning process, where they are just requested is not ok. She encourages them to send that message to staff and the council, they should come one by one when there is a project proposal.

Nan Fey, the chair, announces that they do public hearings at 6:00 and they might need to break in the middle of this. She says they will go in order of the items on the list. She also asks if they are speaking to something that someone already spoke to not to repeat it but just indicate that you agree with them and they will note your registration.

Michael Heifitz had a question for Rhodes-Conway

T WALL PROPERTY PROPOSAL – HIGH CROSSING
Andy Inman – available to answer questions.
Steven Murphy – here on behalf of T Wall, available to answer questions.
They are in support.
No questions.

UNIVERSITY RESEARCH PARK PROPOSAL
Mark Bugher – in support, available to answer questions. Representing Research Park.
No questions.

VERIDIAN HOMES/VANDEWALLE PROPOSAL ON GRANDVIEW COMMONS
Brian Munson, representing Veridian Homes in support of the process to identify the list to be discussed. Agrees there needs to be a public vetting, but this is the process to get to the public vetting. He’s been involved with Grandview as the principal designer, wrote the zoning code, sits on the architectural review committee since 1988 and before then worked for Glenn Hovde. What you will hear tonight is the lack of consensus on how to move forward, but that is why they need the process. This isn’t an adoption of the proposals, but an opportunity to have a full process and dialog. So, he wants it on the list so over the next few months they can begin that lengthy process. They need to go through the discussion on the comprehensive plan, a neighborhood process, and specific discussions about the project itself because absent any of htoe pieces it doesn’t make sense. This puts the pieces together to allow that discussion. In terms of the project, the age of the plans Specher Neighborhood Plan was adopted in 1998 and Grandview Commons in 1999. Both have gone through changes over the years, but the law on comprehensive plans says that the plans have to be updated every 10 years, that is the process we are starting tonight. This project has had 12 years of marketing, the market has tested itself, this site is not feasible as planned. If we don’t want vacant land, we need to decide what we want. This is not approval of the project that you have seen in the past, just an opportunity to discuss. The lack of consensus is telling, we need to have a discussion. They support keeping it on the list, so they can have a full public vetting for all sides.

Marsha Rummel says that you started out saying that you appreciated Rhodes-Conway’s comments, what if she were to prevail, how would you see this unfolding?

Munson says that this is a lengthy process if you start tonight or any time. This is the opportunity to get on the list. He says that he disagrees that being on the list is not inclusive of dialog, rather it sets the stage for dialog. He says he works with many cities and they all do it differently. Some do it case-by-case. Some are quarterly, some are annually. What you have is a way to structure applications, regardless of what level of controversy they have. And what they are asking is to avail themselves of that process. He says it will be a 6 to 8 month process.

Rummel asks if they would just bring a proposal forward otherwise?

Munson says they have had discussions with staff over the past year about how to go about doing it. He says all three changes to the comprehensive plan, the neighborhood plan and zoning process all have to happen together. He says if the list is not adopted, in theory they could all go together, but this process brings them all to council at the same time. This is a complex project, like many, and this proposal staff brought forward makes sense. That way you will not have continual discussions about the comp plan and it will all be treated equally in the process.

Judy Olson asks if we did not adopt this and insisted on the projects coming forward as applications to the council and plan commission, how would it be different than them coming together.

Munson says its a question of who’s up first. The strength of this proposal is that they are considered together. If you want to deal with them separately, there are also strengths to that. You would be discussing these projects at every plan commission meeting instead of looking at if they rise to the level to make the change. There would be opportunities to learn from the applications. But they are in support of the process as outlined, but there will need to be a lengthy process either way.

Lauren Cnare, says she has a sheet with long comments. She says they are now addressing two questions. Should they address these projects differently than the normal planning process? She is leaving that decision to you. She says these projects are on the list because they are extraordinarily different, they do not fit plans we have available. They have already risen to a different level of participation by the public and your part. She urges them to treat them different, they have come to you as unusually large beasts and you need to tame them in some way. She says this makes sense for a way to do it. She says if they do take these items up – with Grandview which requires a massive comprehensive plan change, one of the things we have to think about is what is the overarching goal, what was the point of the plan, what were we trying to do. In Grandview we were trying to replicate Willy St or Monroe St. We were trying to do new urbanism and we have done a fabulous job, we have condos, cute little houses and big houses, for anyone who wants to live there. Part of the purpose was to have a place for walkable services. Those things that people now get in a car to go do. We have done great with the houses but not the other side. The only place you can walk to is your neighbors, the park and the Great Dane, which is the third restaurant to open in that spot, despite the best view in the City of Madison. An insurance company and coffee shop have come and gone. Something is not catching flame. There is something wrong with the plan, if there was ever was a reason to look at the plan it is to figure out what is making this an abject failure. Come buy and visit the farmer’s market that opens June 1 and look at the activity there and at the Great Dane, and look at the property, it is a unmowed field with a broken tree. As you looked at this list, don’t look at if it is a 60K sq ft grocery that is ruining the neighborhood, or a 25K foot store, but what is the best plan to move the area forward. She encourages them to think bigger, what can make the plan a viable plan to show that new urbanism can work in suburban areas. This is on the other side of the interstate, it has poor bike and pedestrian access, no bus service, the only way to get anywhere it to brave your bike, walk for miles or jump in your car. If we want walkable neighborhoods we need plans to provide the services. What we need is your expertise to bring the neighborhood to be the jewel that we want in the City of Madison.

Heifitz says that her comments were similar to what Rhodes-Conway said, but she was arguing not to take up these issues. You are concluding differently. He was going to ask her how to balance how this is not about a particular project with the fact that it is about a particular project. He says that the question may be unfair and they will all need to decide as they go along. You made similar comments, but came to different conclusions.

Cnare says that she does agree this is an iterative process, these projects are big, lets be honest, its not that there isn’t a grocery store plan. The difference is in this case, this team will not move forward unless there is a willingness to change the comprehensive plan. It’s rare for her to stand up and defend developers, because usually they are in the middle of it, but she knows in this case nothing will happen. The developer will not go forward after a year of discussion already, and they need to know you will look at it. She also recognizes that if they do look at it, there is no guarantee that you will decide yes it should be community mixed use. This is the time for this to go forward as they are discussing the comprehensive plan. Should it turn left or right, be one story or three? All those discussions will emerge in this process.

Olson says this developed over a 12 year period and that lot has been unsuccessful and we’ve had opportunities that seem to have been unsuccessful. That is a sign that something is wrong with the plan. She asks if there is different way to do this, its a chicken and egg, to figure out what comes first. What if the proposal was not from the developer, but by an entity in the city itself? This new urbanism is not working out. Would it work to not have a developer inspired proposal to come forward by have the alder or staff or neighborhood bring it forward?

Cnare says they did change the process so that anyone could bring a proposal forward. She is not a planner or developer, but all she can say is it is not working. Its like when she knows when her cat is not eating, but she doesn’t know why. She says there is merit to find agreement, this is the forum to find that agreement. She suggests they ask, how old is the plan, how much has been implemented, etc. We hare here, this is the process that helps generates this. You don’t want me to plan, I don’t have the expertise, so I”m looking to you folks to do that for us.

Rummel asks about the market. One of her comments was that there is not market for the ideas in our plan. Isn’t the way to address this through a neighborhood plan. She says sometimes people want to do something that is not in our plan, pretty much all the time. The lack of no one wanting to do anything is an indication of something. Maybe its not that the cat is not eating, maybe its not a cat. Should we just revisit this neighborhood plan sooner than others.

Cnare says that we have a lot of neighborhoods that don’t have plans and she’d like to do them first. She says this could go either way. But, we told people months ago this was the process, and now we’re changing that. Remember all those letters and stuff that we sent. Her impression is that each of these items will be examined for further discussion, she says they could decide that not a one merits further attention. Some people might come back with another proposal or try to change a plan, but the horse is saddled and out of the barn. We said send us a letter by March 21st and we’ll do something with it. For the city to wholesale change our mind would be a big change. As an alder who is sitting in the world with a neighborhood plan that doesn’t work and neighbors torn apart over how to develop it, you can’t let it sit there. If you don’t take up this process you should take up another very quickly. She doesn’t envy them, but she says that their process gives such rigor and structure to the discussion about how to look at this. We are all used to looking at projects and some of us are used to looking at neighborhood plans, but this allows us to have an entire conversation that says there is a fresh look here that says this is not just a project, its not just a change to a neighborhood plan but it is a chance to look at the comprehensive plan, that we hold sacred. It doesn’t always work out. If she had been there that night to vote, she would have supported this process and she would say stick with it. What’s the worst that can happen? It takes us longer and we have more people who participate? Those are good things. Those are things we are can work with and learn from last time.

Janice ? in support and not wishing to speak and then are going to table it.

Tom McVary? – waives his speaking, opposition is noted.

Marla Eddy in opposition, she grew up in the neighborhood. Sentry Foods was her grocery store and she still goes there, it is two miles from her home. She believes there is a project in mind, which is a larger grocery store that did not meet the zoning and there is a project beyond what was planned for and that they are not in favor of. The grocery store is two miles away. A larger grocery store won’t allow her to go. The bus stop is just down the hill from the bridge. There is something in mind, she is concerned about what the specifics are. She heard it is Roundy’s, they are not doing that well. So she is concerned. They have other amenities down the road, don’t change the comprehensive plan.

Barbara Davis says in all due respect to Munson’s comments about the process starting tonight, this isn’t new, for the past 14 months she has been participating in the movement to prevent a big box from going in there. There are so many reasons to oppose this project, but the most important reasons is that it will set a precedent. Allowing this to happens tells developers all over the city that it is not necessary to file a formal application, especially if you don’t think it will happen. We saw the proposal for the grocery at the 4/20 plan commission meeting last year and there were follow up meetings with staff where concerns were presented and the developer is unwilling to compromise. This is a new channel to change the plan first to facilitate the project. The staff already presented changes and this says those don’t matter. This will change the way it is done all over the City of Madison. People purchased their houses in Grandview based on promises from Veridian for walkable retail and residents daily needs with a 25K sq ft store. Sprecher Neighborhood Plan and the comp plan are there to ensure responsible development and protect us from plans that are not consistent with the community. Why are amendments being considered when no application is being considered, please remove, not just for Grandview Commons but for people all over Madison.

David Sebald, he’s a member of the Richmond Hill Neighborhood an supports the Sprecher plan as it is. He wants the city to respect that plan and support it as they did in 1999, and the amendment in 2005. Yields the rest of his time.

Nancy McVery – she says she agrees with ? – in opposition.

Judy Compton says she is appalled that she is living in a abject failure, she is angry about that coming from someone who represents the district. She believes in aldermanic courtesy, she has a problem. She was part of comprehensive plan approval, it was vetted thoroughly. MIke Waidelich is a very talented planner, it was thoughtfully done and went through they system for approval, it went through multiple meetings. The state required us to have a plan by 2010. This plan is not an 8 x 11 piece of paper, its not a neighborhood plan, its a very serious document. It cannot be changed because someone decides they think they are failing. The restaurants that failed were due to lack of leadership. The issue is what comes first, the rooftops or the commercial? If the city asked David Simon for a new urbanistic development, not to mirror Williamson St. – David flew all over the country to see areas with allies. This was a stretch for him, he owned a hill in the City of Madison with views of three lakes. And what he did was create, with Vandewalle’s help and staff’s help and plan commission’s help the cookie cutter for all new urbanism in Madison. (Ringer goes off, she asks for more time) During that time the plan called for curb cuts on Cottage Grove Rd, the plan commission with strong people said no, we have to have commercial in the neighborhood, people have to be able to walk. What this plan calls for is regional big box and in the future these will be warehouses where you order your groceries and you drive up and bag boys will come and put your groceries in the car. (AWESOME! I want that!) That is the future, that is already happening. They are already doing that in S. Carolina. If you want to go in and touch your vegetables and meat you can do that, and they will have all your groceries ready to go. We need to think ahead, not behind. Regional commercial development is in the Milwaukee St. area. Don’t move forward until you have a proposal from someone who is not going bankrupt, Roundy’s not Veridian. She says she’ll shut up now and answer questions if anyone is brave enough to take her on.

Fey asks if anyone is going to take her on, people laugh.

Tiffany Taha ? – She says it is interesting that there are two people, the alder and the developer. The developer wants us to discuss but, anyone who is new now needs to sign a waiver saying they won’t oppose the changes to the comprehensive plan. The rest are opposed and they have a good plan and don’t want to make changes to it. Cnare mentioned three restaurants, and there was one owner with two restaurants and that might have been his management. This store is too big to walk to for milk and eggs which is what we wanted. This is going to be one big box and you will need a car to bring everything home. Even Walmart is deciding to build smaller stores. She doesn’t want to make a change for a company that wants to build here, especially one that is up for sale.

Paul Riley – Many of his points covered. For more than a year they have been living into a cloud, the threat of a big box store. There is no need to change the comprehensive plan, the developer is trying to take advantage of the current economic climate. In the same neighborhood, there are vacant residential lots, are we to believe that residential doesn’t work here. People do not walk to big box stores. Go to any big box store and stand there and see how many people walk. They walk for a bottle of milk and a loaf of bread, not a week’s worth of groceries. Woodman’s is building near here now too. Remove it from the list and when done take a wooden stake and drive it through its heart and let us get some sleep at night.

There are about 25 others in opposition.

OK – I gotta go. They table it and go to public hearing and I”ll have to watch the rest later.