Another 4 – 4 tie with the chair voting to break the tie in order to move the project along. Hardly a ringing endorsement of the project. Here’s a briefer than usual version of what happened. Part one is the developer presentation and public and alder testimony and some rather pointed questions and comments to the alder.
GETTING STARTED
It was to start at 7:45 at the earliest, but it started about an hour later.
Fred Mohs to the rescue! Mark Clear took the clock down off the wall to change the time during the break and couldn’t get it back on the wall, so Fred Mohs gave him a hand. It was kind of humorous to watch.
PRESENTATION BY DEVELOPER
Bruce Woods asked them to stick to new information.
Bob Dunn isn’t here tonight.
Amy Supple says they have David Manfredi, the architect, Mark Huber to talk about storm water, Ken Saiki on the landscaping plan and Dan Lund to answer questions about fire access. She says she won’t say much, excited about plan and where it has gone, found some good solutions thanks to your discussions.
David Manfredi, the architect
– Will stick to what is new
– All guest rooms of hotel have moved to the east
– They have detailed plans of what they presented last time
– Relocated the parking on NGL propertyeis the relocation of parking on National Guardian Life (NGL) property with separate access.
– The drive is for drop off only the rest access on private drive off Langdon
– Describes ADA access and the various elevations
– Describes the column line for the building with the shift of the hotel rooms to the east.
– Shows views from the lake side and how they tried to extend the element down further.
– Loading dock is pulled back and they can fit 2 35 foot trucks and 1 full size truck and a dumpster and have room for one more truck outside.
– He shows the views from various areas that the committee asked for.
– Shows the cafe on the corner
– He describes how the parking garage works, 355 spaces, 200 spaces in new area (shared with NGL), 150 spaces in old area (for hotel guests and condo owners) and they are connected at elevation 40 – all access is there.
– Says there will be all green lawn above the parking area on the NGL property with 2 to 5 feet of dirt on top of it.
– The have a little gate house for the elevator to/from garage which is glass on all 4 sides for safety reasons. He describes how to get to the lake.
– A portion of this land will be raised 5 feet to get the parking underneath it.
Ken Saiki, the landscape architect says:
– Also sticking to what is new
– Shows the green roof on the parking lot with walls and plants and walls.
– Auto court entry changed, no longer have garage entrance so changed it to a more robust garden experience.
– Small terraces with seating for eating cascade along the building for the cafe. No loner a long stair, they are chopped up along the hotel.
– He shows where the bike parking is, a half dozen at the top of the grand stair and 20 by the gatehouse plus 10 to 15 moped stalls.[I was surprised this was the first and last time bike parking was mentioned.]
– Says they changed some directions on the grand stair, he shows the snow shoots.
– Says the lakefront is more heavily developed with landscaping.
David Manfredi hands out a new parking scheme, but says what he said verbally is correct.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Julia Kerr, wanted to see presentation, appreciates street level views, having difficulty understanding previous presentation, this makes more sense, appreciates he effort.
38 people register in support not wanting to speak.
2 people register neither in support or against not wanting to speak. [What’s the point?]
Ed Kuharski
– Architect, long time resident, lived 25 years in Tenney area
– Likes the Quisling Buildings and Wissonsin Ave. It’s part of what made him go into architecture.
– He wants to like the project.
– Everything he likes about the old building is missing in the new building which is busy and fussy design.
– Massing doesn’t acknowledge beaux arts form, even Frank Lloyd Wright made things symmetrical.
– New building makes the 40s building look like a poor cousin instead of honoring it.
– Why are they using foreign materials for the area.
– Too much vericality, the building is not confident, too many bases, tiny cap on the top.
– Should come closer to the lake and have a shorter building.
– New building looks divorced from the rest of the project.
Kitty Rankin, former City Preservation Planner for 30 years
– 2 or 3 projects ago she heard you say that the important thing is to make sure this fits in with the neighborhood, her opinion is that it does not.
– Concerned about the mass.
– When looking at downtown design zones they did not put one on top of the Mansion Hill Neighborhood because they thought the historic district would limit the height to 50 feet, I guess that was a mistake.
– Design zone 4 is limited to 5 stories tall, and that character is nearly identical to Mansion Hill.
– These should lead the UDC to determine that this building is not compatible with the neighborhood.
– Gross volume is still a concern.
– Site is too small for the project, can’t provide proper access.
– Please tell Plan Commission this project is unacceptable.
Ledell Zellers
– She says the buildings in the packet that show the Edgewater as compatible with the neighborhood are misleading, 4 of 9 are not in the historic district and not as close as 2 and 3 story buildings. Says there are duplicate shots of NGL.
– She passes around her own photos to show better perspective of mass.
– Tower is out of scale with the character of the neighborhood, it is tall and massive.
– In the comprehensive plan, the buildings are supposed to step down from the capitol and instead this goes up.
– They talk about elevations in terms of how high it is above datum instead of talking about height of the building.
– NGL is type of building the historic district was created to prevent
– The building is now even more massive.
– The building still sits in the right of way, only 8 of the 10 stories were pushed back.
– Tower is only 11 feet off the right of way, you are not getting the movement that is implied. Set back won’t have a real impact at the ground level.
– 70s building was a mistake, this is a bigger building and bigger mistake.
John Sheehan
– Mass volume and height is inconsistent with the neighborhood.
– Moving building back and moving the parking doesn’t change the fact that building is still inappropriate and large.
– Building is not right for a historic district, wants laws and standards abided by.
– This is not a commercial neighborhood, there are no shops and other businesses, this is residential apartments and owner-occupied.
– It’s a slight of hand to use downtown and commercial interchangably.
– Downtown depends upon the residential neighborhood to stimulate business and keep downtown vibrant and exciting.
Cedric Price
– An architect
– Following the project on the internet, got data from city website.
– Concern is about accessibility, he did his own drawings to show ADA issues.
– If park in garage and want to get to water have to come 930 feet, through an elevator, down a corridor then around the ramp.
– Accessibility seems like an after thought.
– Says there are many disabled vets who come to Madison and we are known to be progressive on mobility issues.
– If you are in a room on the lower level, to get to restaurant you have to go 778 feet and through two elevators, you have to retrace your steps after you use the elevator.
– There is much to like in the project.
– Says he knows he used the extreme cases but they hope to be at full occupancy and these things will happen.
– He’s a veteran and he goes to the VA Hospital and talks to people and others share his concerns.
– Its not just an issue for people with disabilities but also for parents with strollers and little kids.
– His mom broke her leg and he would not bring her here because she could not get around.
Marsha Rummel asks how he would do it.
Price says he has not had enough time to look at it, but what he likes is the bike elevator at Monona Terrace, perhaps they could do something like that. It brings people directly to the waterfront.
They ask him to leave his drawing up there.
Richard Slayton asks how far it is from the parking garage.
Price says 930 feet.
Slayton asks some other questions about distances.
Fred Mohs
– The building is too big for the neighborhood
– Building should be moved back and 3 stories taken off.
– Top two stories are condos that cost $750K and will be sold for $750K so they are not a loss for the project and it would free up more parking.
– Lowering the deck is great.
– Cafe is in the way of the plaza.
– Likes the green he sees but hopes it is not trees that block the lake view.
– Big issue is still parking, he mentioned this before, there is no street parking or parking ramps as a back up.
– First project was 170 short on parking spaces. This is still 100 stalls short. And that doesn’t take into account that 200 spaces are shared with NGL.
– If the rotary meets there, 100 cars can’t park and they park in the driveway or they just give up and leave with the current situation.
– The new project will need enough parking or it will be a business disaster and they won’t be able to get financing.
– He says they can go down further and have more parking.
– Loading buses are still a problem.
Todd Barnett asks about top two stories, will they be condos or hotel rooms?
Supple says they could be either. Contemplated as condos, but could convert back to hotel rooms.
Gene Devitt
[He gets the award for the most entertaining presentation.]
– Fred to the rescue again!! He helps Gene set up a boom box and is going to start the music on cue.
– Devitt says he is here to talk about noise.
– This is a residential neighbohrood, there is very little commercial, it is a quiet neighborhood and they worked hard to keep it that way.
– He asks them to imagine sitting at their house looking at the lake on a Saturday morning and then . . . Fred, that’s your cue . . . but the boombox doesn’t work, there are some technical difficulties . . . but suddenly it comes on. It’s polka music [Michael Basford informs me via Facebook that it is The Pennsylvania Polka] Devitt continues talking loudly over the music but he’s hard to hear and the room is just cracking up. You really couldn’t help laughing because you couldn’t really hear them and the music was funny.
– He says residents are just 12 feet away.
– He apologizes for doing something so corny, but for many this is a life investment to restore downtown homes in a quiet neighborhood.
– They shouldn’t put the bike racks right next to the apartments.
– We’re spending $16M to put something in the neighborhood that will be noisy and they are trying to make sure they use it everyday and upset the neighborhood.
– We are trying to get people to live downtown and now you are putting weddings and conventions in our neighborhood.
– The solution to the noise issue is to make the plaza more of a sitting area not an event area.
– Building is still too talk.
– He runs out of time and says he is not the person who needs more time, the architects do to make it a building that complies with the laws.
– He apologizes again for doing something so corny and says that he didn’t mean to offend anyone, but felt it was effective to make his point.
James McFaddden
– Says he represents the intelligent developer, he says the project is inefficient, dysfunctional, and this causes the building to larger than is needed.
– If the building was efficient and apprpriate this would have been approved.
– It’s possible to accommodate every function plus accommodate 450 parking stalls which is what is required by ordinance and a necessity for operations.
– Can park buses inside in his plan.
– Can improve function for the visitor and the guest experience.
– Barrier to get to the front door of the hotel is unnecessarily large.
– They can stretch the building and accommodate their needs and lower the height of the building. By stretching 7 feet in length and width 8.4 feet.
– They can locate services in the center of the building and not the periphery and increase number of rooms from 22 to 32 per floor.
– They need to apply logic.
– Locate the parking under the hotel where guests will use it.
– They can have ADA accessibility if they ask the tough questions and think of visitors and the guest experience.
– He leaves his drawings with them.
Rummel asks about the condo residents obstacles.
McFadden asks how they would bring groceries home? They have to park in the garage and walk 600 feet with groceries, that is not luxury housing. If you have guests, would you ask them to park 2 blocks away, is that where you would put your garage? This is parking to privilege NGL, not users of the hotel. They did that time and time again, Banquet room pushes the elevator back and orphans the units below. They should locate the ballroom on the second floor and facing the capital to avoid having to go down long passages to get to your room and you could locate the elevator closer to the lake. The way this is designed unfairly burdens the city and the neighborhood and it doesn’t get the full benefit of removing the 70’s building floors. He says they should go through the plans and look at them with logic.
Ferm asks how many floors this is.
McFadden says it is 2 floors of function space and 4 floors of hotel rooms.
Pete Oslind
– There are improvements, but still some issues.
– Concerned about adequacy of parking, size of the project has increased and it now needs 500 parking stalls, no parking ramps near buy and they have said that in peak time employees have to park in ramps and that is not feasible or enforceable.
– 120 parking spaces reserved for NGL in the day time.
– Can’t load or park buses in the fire lane which is what it looks like they have planned.
– 1965 ordinance was there to protect the public, and it required a 10 foot set back, this project doesn’t honor the spirit of that law and they should respect that law.
– The floor area of the building is now 15,000 square feet more than before, not including the parking. That is the equivalent of one full floor.
– There are 5400 square feet more in guest rooms, that is half a floor of rooms.
– There is still a lot of missing information, just got parking information 2 days ago and no chance to review it adequately. The dimensions for setbacks are not there. If they don’t have the info they should refer and be consistent with what they would do with other projects.
John Martens
– He’s going to condense 3 days of study into 3 minutes.
– You should vote down because volume and mass of building has increased, its closer to the lake, taller and volume increased.
– There is an increase in the commercial impact on the residential neighborhood.
– Parking is increased but it is still too short and there are now more actiivities.
– The corner cafe is more prominent than before.
– If you don’t vote it down, you should defer because there are unresolved issues, no public agreement on the use of the plaza, don’t know the rules on seating, usage, alcohol, hours of operation, etc and you are counting on this being a public space.
– Public restrooms are inadequate.
– ADA path from parking to plaza is through the hotel.
– Entrance is too close to the Wisconsin Avenue.
– Key drawings are missing, no sections or details for planters and issues that affect visibility are missing, no handrails, guardrails and retaining walls.
– No rooftop tower demolition details.
– No indication of signage or lighting.
– On page 107 they show a 4 foot projection with 10 doors that if you went out you would fall 20 feet to terrace below.
– The landscaping in the plan does not match the landscaping in the elevations, and it is not shown at all in the perspectives.
– The “grand stairway” is different in the plans and in the elevations.
– Handrails and guardrails are sometimes shown in the plan, are mostly
shown in the elevations but are too small to see clearly, are incomplete and
deceptive in the perspectives, and are not consistent among all of them.
Barnett explains that some of the items are plan commission items and some are final approval decisions, some they can’t talk about.
Martens says that operation agreement and the degree of public access is part of what is in your purview, it is defined by that agreement, you should have an agreement outline.
Rummel asks about that gate house.
Martens says there is no detail on that, you have to look at minute plans magnified, have to blow drawings up to see it, he shows his best interpretation of what he could determine and he tried to give them the benefit of the doubt/
Barnett asks a question I did not hear.
Martens says there are no details on upper level work, but proportion of area above the sun shade is half of what is showing in drawing, all we have is sketchy drawings, doesn’t know if it is a mistake or intention who knows, compare it with elevations.
Barnett asks Manfredi a question that about a drawing they are referencing.
Manfredi says that he’s not sure. Martens argues his point.
Bridget Maniaci
– She is really excited
– Says Rummel did tons of work talking about what is possible
– They brought perspectives here that were very informative of what the changes have been
– Very happy with traffic management plan, hope you got it in full
– Satisfied with ADA accessibility it is very good[That’s just painful to hear – it might meet minimal requirements, but that shouldn’t be good enough]
– A lot of folks that are immediate in neighborhood are supportive but worried about what does it mean for parking, she thinks this solves the question of if it is enough, there is 1.7 parking stalls per room, with multi-tiered parking strategy.
– They moved mountains to get here.
– Thanks UDC for their suggestions, building is better because of it.[Funny how those who complain about the process usually come to this conclusion.]
– Hopes they will give initial approval this evening.
– There will a lot of details in terms of final plans that definitely need more feedback on
– Wondering if any questions for her.
Rummel asks about agreement with use of plaza.
Maniaci says that is moving along , she’d defer to city attorney’s office, she is not negotiating that. [That’s a pretty big piece of the project to just ignore it.]
Rummel asks if there are things she wants to see?
Maniaci says that they are following general parks rules, that is how the discussion has been framed. She has security concerns for the neighborhood and some of that is in the discussion of the stair and its usage.
Rummel asks about alcohol use.
Maniaci says she has not been involved in these conversations, but its starting to get to that point.
Jay Ferm tries to ask about a photo, it drops on the floor and they lose it.
Jay Ferm goes another direction and asks about concern for people who invested in the neighborhood and have looked at what was happening and it is clear the intention is that a building this massive would not be built, are we breaking a promise to people who invested, as a city?
Maniaci says no. [That produces several shocked looks on people’s faces.] She then explains it is partially cuz this is not a residential site to begin with and because of the usable open space. She says it was always envisioned for development [??], and in terms of investment in the neighborhood, post graduation she is determining where I want to set up root and make an investment, people who are drawn to living downtown especially in Mansion Hill are looking for a vibrant neighborhood with access to services and amenities closer than walking distance and this neighborhood is lacking in that, they have to walk a long ways to Capitol Square or State St. that is a real detriment to neighborhood, especially with rentals for undergraduates. Pinckney St is the end of her district and that is a 20 minute walk to campus, 10 minutes to State St, people want to move closer to amenities, that is the future of the neighborhood, its not going to be major commercial thoroughfare but some amenities and access in the neighborhood, like in her district where there is the Market Basket or other spots farther into the neighborhood, so having this commercial site within the neighboood will help to keep people interested in neighborhood and have the want to invest cuz close at hand, walkability vs drivability, it can’t be better to hop in car like she is tempted to do [ ]and get there vs walking 20 minutes.
Ferm says it is not clear about need to develop corridor, says height issue is the question, its part of the comprehensive plan, this proposal is more along the top not bottom level.
Maniaci says that its all relevant, she thinks that its not to the capitol height limit, this is the best use of the topography and for the economics of the site and they are not maxing out on height, they took three floors off, quite a lot of it is how they are working to move in that direction, there are limits to that, is it not as curvy of a line as I would want it but don’t know what else is possible, won’t get perfect bell curve, its a philosophical decision on setting heights, its a smart decision to try to keep it with topography of downtown.[Psst, you’re the Landmarks Alder and didn’t even mention the historic district?]
Slayton asks about the percentage of people who are in support or not in the district.
Maniaici says she talked to the fraternities and sororities a year ago, the fraternity next to the project is in support even tho it is right next to them, she can get you that letter. That was a constituent group she really wanted to hear from, that is Langdon St. Otherwise input is very limited, people ask questions, but aren’t being fired up one way or the other. When you move to Pinckney, especially the 500 block, they are really in support. Patrick Corcoran, the owner of Ambassador is in support, he has questions about the long term use of the vacant land, but he expressed he wanted it, a couple of residents in his building said they don’t have a problem with it and the condo owners are on record in support. Gene is not in favor, he has a house, the small bed and breakfast said they were in favor last year, she thought that was interesting cuz they are also a hotel, Trek individuals are in favor, Co-ops have not been too one way or the other, a lot of people not really looking in that direction, looking to Union and State St. They are directed other way down the block, people have been interested, to give you a sense of who hearing from, that is what she is hearing, everyone concerned about parking, that is when talked with developer about the next idea about expanding parking – overnight parking and snow emergencies are a concern, they need that parking utilized as much as possible which means over night, very little resources in neighborhood and no competition and lack of parking – she likes putting parking entrance down on private drive, then it was hard to hear what she was saying and I missed some. Parking focuses on Wisconsin Ave., from neighborhood that is a good thing.
Woods says there if there were three more floors, that would not float. We see this all the time, it a game everyone plays, let not talk about a straight line at capitol height, lets deal with what we got.
Rummel says they moved the building back and moved the driveway. Will you recommend it go back to landmarks.
Maniaci says yes. She says staff have been in conversations with city attorney, questions with application that council has before them, how is it functionally different, waiting to hear from city attorney, she says it would not hurt to go there.
And with that, I have to quit here . . . I may be able to get more done today, but I’m still not done with the Council meeting . . . and haven’t gotten to the library or done a round up . . . sigh . . .
