I was standing in the hallway for most of this . . . so . . . this will be a little bit briefer . . . It was hard to type and listen and have the noise in the hallway, but the room was crowded and HOT! Ridiculously HOT! And of course, people were talking to me. Comments in purple. Here’s the landmarks commission players.
SPEAKING OF STANDING IN THE HALLWAY . . .
So, the room was crowded, with a double row of chair on one side of the room, but the hope was that there would be a few people leaving after items 1 & 2 were done. There were about a dozen people in the hallway waiting for the room to clear. Of course, I’m standing in the hallway with Bob Dunn and staff. He happened to asked me why I was against the project. I told him I was against the process and it didn’t have to become so contentious and divisive. He asked me to sit down and talk with him about that. I told him I thought it was too late, that the damage was done, but . . . agreed to sit down and talk. And, he can buy me lunch and not have to fill out a lobbying report! 🙂 Sadly, I don’t think I’ll accept his offer of free lunch. It still just seems wrong.
BREAK AND RESUME
They have to take a break to get the meeting started as people shuffle around, but 5 of us are left standing in hallway, including a city staff person and others. Several people offered me a chair, but I opted for the electrical outlet and slightly cooler temperature.
The chair announced there were many registrants and asked how long the presentation would take. The Edgewater folks said they could do it in 15 minutes. Levitan stopped them and asked if they presentation would present an elevation as seen from capital and if it was in the room? And if they had information on the impact on the mansion hill historic district. Bob Dunn replied yes and yes.
PRESENTATION
I believe these were the only materials that the commission had.
Bob Dunn outlined has a presentation that:
– Outlined their vision, skipped the detail to put us out of our misery
– Shows a map on urban context, again, skips the details
– Outlines parts of the comprehensive plan he feels are reflected in the project
– Talks about draft of Mansion Hill plan, talks about how meets it the concepts in the plan
– Talks about the Mansion Hill plan saying the neighborhood is
— 55% parcels are non-residential
— 94% residential is rental
— 60% of residential are in building that have more than 10 units
— 56% of residents lived there for a year or less
– Shows the blight study picture from their submission.
– Shows current pictures of the Edgewater.
– Talks about the design overview parts of the presentation – building expansion, lakefront terrace, historic presentation [you’d think he’d be focusing here for the Landmarks Commission, but that didn’t happen], waterfront access and core building.
– Shows picture from the lake.
– 107 rooms today, total 228 guest suites in new project.
– Today 165 parking stalls, proposal more than doubles that to more than 400 with valet parking.
– Most significant change to project is expansion out of right of way.
– 11 story building from Langdon. [i.e. 18 story building with the other 7 floors]
– Building is 75 feet from the water.
– Talks about public space on the terrace.
– Shows original rendering of 1940’s building. [I wonder why the rendering and not the actual photos that I know they have?]
– Talks about reviving the 1940’s building by doing the grand stair and pulling back the 70’s addition and restore the building. [No renderings of what the remodel will look like?]
– Talks about waterfront access but only shows view from the terrace, nothing about the plans for the lakeshore.
– He didn’t show any of the “core building” elements.
– Talks about the process – says working on a daily basis to get as much input as they can. Met with neighborhood groups, business interests, surrounding neighborhoods, mayor, planning, economic development unit, ADA groups, Environmental Groups and flashes lists of others.
– Says trying to balance the interests in the comprehensive plan and urban infill to concerns from neighborhood and downtown.
– Project webpage, office hours (Tuesday and Thursday 4 – 6 if you believe their submittal to the city, Thursdays 4 – 6 if you believe their website), number of neighborhood meetings scheduled with a variety of neighborhood groups. Says worked hard and will continue to. [He didn’t give out the website, say when the office hours were or when the neighborhood meetings were, I filled that information in where I knew it. And the website did a little number on my computer, its heavy on the graphics or something, so click with caution.]
– Talks about changes they have made. His staff points out he’s only hitting the things he thinks are interesting to this group. [Obviously, they either don’t know their audience, or don’t care.]
— Shows where the new building was originally, and then the footprint of where it moved.
— Reduced gross volume of building area by 30%
— Says he has addressed the right of way issue, was 28 feet into it and now completely out of it.
— Mass and height, shows original, doesn’t show current.
— Lakefront terrace, 40,000 sq feet open and accessible to the public. [Again, nothing about the actualy lake front.]
— Says studied view corridor, pulling building back 30 feet.
– Skips through historic district slides. [??]
– Talks about “visually related area”, says they did a series of studies, but skips over it and has no detail. [UGH, know your audience! This is the key issue for the committee and he just blows by it.]
– Compares project to 2 Langdon and National Guardian Life Building. Shows elevation from the water side. Trying to scale the building to be like others in neighborhood.
-Formal PUD submission is still coming.
Levitan asks about a view from the capital. Dunn says this is it. Levitan says he doesn’t want to see a helicopter view, he wants to see what the human will see. Dunn tries to say that he is showing Levitan what he wants, clearly it isn’t.
Chair Stephans describes what the commission needs to see. Dunn says they have focused on the corridor views. Says they are doing a series of studies so that they can pick a point you want to see the project from. Says will do James Madison Park, Union Terrace etc. Also more positions from the Lake.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Fred Mohs – Talks about existing conditions. Commercial project in the heart of a residential neighborhood. If it weren’t for the current conditions, no one would consider doing this. [Seems off topic, doesn’t talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Harvey Wendel – from Pickney Place Condos, 6 members all supporters – wants their lake to become first class. 60% blighted neighborhood, including the Edgewater. Association supports it. [Seems off topic, doesn’t talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Mary Mohs – talks about how bad the neighborhood was, students have moved on and now have a permanent neighborhood core. This project will destroy the neighborhood. [Seems off topic, doesn’t talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Kennedy Manor resident – Faulkner family members, she says they worked hard, we know it needs what Bob Dunn has offered. You are being offered a good opportunity, it makes her proud. [Seems off topic, doesn’t talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Joe Lusson – concerned about the height of the tower since this is in a national and local historic district. As owner of home in a historic district, wants to be assured that he has predictability that the historic district will be protected. Says the Madison Trust has two very popular walking tours in the Mansion Hill area. He says that unmasking and fixing the historic building can and should be done without the 11 story building. Talks about Archipelago Village and how large it was and now it isn’t even a project. He says that reducing a huge project by 30% isn’t much when you start out 70% outrageous.
Scott Watson – Supports, long time resident of Madison. [Seems off topic, doesn’t talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Missed who this was – wants better architecture and for the developer to be more creative and show what he can do. They should show off the potential beauty without an edifice that isn’t incorporated in the neighborhood.
Susan Schmidt – left – in support on behalf of DMI.
Ledell Zellers – Talks about Mansion Hill being a concentration of historic buildings, but importance isn’t each building themselves, but the fabric itself. Says most of the area is R6H historic zoning and she is concerned about piercing the 50 ft height limit which would establish a precedent that would lead to more requests to have tall buildings elsewhere within the historic district. Talks about places in Mansion Hill area that would be appropriate places for infill, but none of them should have projects over the 50 ft limit. Says she recognizes that portions of the Edgewater property have another zoning, but part is R6H. She says that they need to look at the landmark ordinance. She says the visually related area cannot just look at a building like National Gaurdian Life that doesn’t meet the historic district requirements and use that to justify a building that is out of character with the historic district.
Tom Link – Doesn’t think the hotel fits the historic neighborhood.
Jim Skretny – Suggests that they request the views that the developer talked about, also during different seasons of the year. Wants to know what buses would look like in front of the building. Agrees with Lusson, has a home and rental property in historic district, thought ordinance was there to protect people like him who invest and restore buildings. Worries that if this is allowed, something like that could happen in his neighborhood. On another project he was told that “visually related area” meant that it was compared to buildings in the historic district, not outside, uses MG&E building as an example. He also notes that neighborhood meetings have not be advertised to the public, except one where he showed up and was asked to leave otherwise the developer would not present the project.
Cnare [Rebecca (staff) not Lauren (alder)] says didn’t do their visually related study yet.
Dan Burr – Labor 464 – building buildings for years. With these economic times, this project would push everything forward. 500 craftsman would be used throughout the project, and that would have a triple affect, once money comes in to the area, the employees spend it at grocery stores etc. [Seems off topic, doesn’t talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Maniaci asks the labor guy what projects this group has approved that they have worked on. He says the new project on the square (glass bank?) and Hyvee then struggles to think of any others. [and neither of those projects went to Landmarks Commission.]
Gib Dokken – Owns several properties in the area. Doesn’t consider this the heart of the mansion hill neighborhood, its State Langdon neighborhood. [He should probably look at a map.] Says should build it at 11 stories or more. He has all students in his buildings, it has changed the area. He says this isn’t about Mansion Hill, but will affect people all over the world. He lives across the lake and would like to travel across the water and come use their facilities. Thinks a marina would be a good addition to the city. [Seems off topic, doesn’t talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Erik Minton – here for purely self interested reasons – loves living downtown. Active and involved in many small businesses. Read about Cafe Montmartre and Cardinal closing while vacationing out of town. Asks how long can we kick people without giving them some substance. When he first saw the building he was excited about how he and friends would use the building. Says its a tragedy they lost project on Blair St. and the Gorman project loss set the E Wash corridor back 20 years. People of his generation struggle in the downtown to proactively change the downtown and this hotel could change much of that. [He, of course, said alot more but I missed it as someone was talking to me. Seems like karma since he was the reason I missed what others said. Seems off topic, doesn’t talk about landmarks commission issues.]
DISCUSSION, QUESTIONS, FEEDBACK
Several people have left and everyone finally everyone fits in the room. There are still about 19 people left.
Levitan asks if this is informational , when will this com back to the commission. Cnare says it will come back for a certificate of appropriateness and Landmarks will be the lead. She explains that for the PUD/Zoning discussion, Plan commission is the lead and Common Council will also vote on it. Levitan asks what happens if the certificate of appropriateness was denied, could it be appealed? He asks if PUD can be approved without the certificate of appropriateness? And Levitan reminds them to stay focused on their purview and jurisdiction. Cnare says she will get a flowchart of the various decisions to be made about the project. She lists off various issues and who is the lead on those issues:
– Lakefront access issue is a decision made solely by the Zoning Board of Appeals, unless appealed.
– Conditional Use for the elevator tower is a plan commission final decision, unless appealed.
– Certificate of Appropriateness – Landmarks final decision, unless appealed.
– Zoning/PUD submittal Plan Commission is the lead, but Common Council has final decision.
Maniaci says she wants to see various views. Stephans says he wants to see the views from eye level coming and going, to show context of neighborhood, from those points in the neighborhood and from development to those points.
Cnare says things are still changing, that they haven’t received a formal application for the certificate of appropriateness so they haven’t started their analysis.
Levitan asks if this is a corner parcel. Cnare says there is no formal submittal, so that hasn’t been determined by staff. Also don’t know what the parcel will be since part of it is being built on National Guardian Life property.
Stephans says they need to address the foliage situation with the views.
Skretny reminds them that the use can impact the view and that needs to be considered.
Maniaci asks if they are going to give feedback on the architectural features and asks for a two minute overview. Supple talks about how they designed the windows (punched, recessed, balconies) to break up the design. Says this is more residential than first drawings, wrought iron detailing, awnings, flower boxes, rich classical appearance to relate to buildings on Wisconsin Avenue.
Stephans asks about the original building. Supple says old building doesn’t meet the standards of today. The 40’s building floor plate is very narrow. ADA, elevators, stairwells need to be expanded and puts alot of constraints on the building. It is an important building, but there are difficulties. [He’s trying to get them to talk about issues of interest to Landmarks Commission and the certificate of appropriateness, but they seem to be missing the point.]
Stephans asks why the style of the new building is so different from the old building. [Again, this should have been the center of the presentation.] Supple says when they tried to carry over the 40’s style to the new building it looked like a movie set, it looked fake. Says the public stair lets the 1940s building stand on its own. Dunn says strength of building is stronger if it stands on its own. Supple says that this is a collection of buildings around a public space, each piece stands on its own, like a collection of buildings around a public park.
Stephans asks about renovation of the 1940’s building. [Again, this should have been the center of the presentation.] Supple says they are putting in suites, maybe even permanent residents in the building. Dunn says the uses will be programmatic, Brigadoon Room, fitness area, back of office, meeting space, things that they can adapt better.
Stephans asks if it includes restoration of the building. [By now, the developer should have made that clear in an informational presentation to Landmarks Commission, and why he didn’t is beyond me.] Dunn says yes, need to restore the lower tier of the building, replace all windows. Asbestos, ADA, etc issues.
Slattery asks about sky walk and other exterior changes to the building [Again, should have been covered.] Says there will be changes for the banquet area.
Levitan added a view he wanted to see. They want to see what is there now as well.
Stephan says good not to carry the architecture through. Dunn says that they changed the whole scale of the building. Stair didn’t exist originally. Big facade over the rooms was taken off the building.
Stephans asks if they considered lowering the building as they approach the lake. Dunn says no, cuz of the terrace on top of the building. He then talks about the grand stair.
Maniaci asks what the front of the 1940’s building will look like. [Again, should have been part of the presentation and Landmarks commissioners shouldn’t need to be asking all these questions.] Dunn says he wants advice on entry way to 1940’s building and the pier area. [I’m not sure how you get that advice if they don’t present that information.]
Stephans asks about how they will maintain the pedestrian view when you approach the large mass of the 11 story building. He says that other attempts have been failures. Wants to maintain the pedestrian feeling. Dunn says they have spent alot of time on that. He says the stone detailing draws out the awnings, etc that give it a human urban scale. Strong stone ledge a few stories up.
A member of the public asked about the “public park” that Supple talked about. Can she bring a picnic basket and lawn chair and hang out for the day without using the hotel amenities. Dunn doesn’t answer the question.
Another member of the public asks about how long the buses will idle. Dunn explains how they plan to treat the buses.
With that, the meeting is over, but they discuss when the packet for the certificate of appropriateness will be submitted and the answer seems to be, sometime in August.
[Overall, it was strange. The developers didn’t present hardly any issues that related to the certificate of appropriateness which is the decision before the Landmarks Commission and the speakers there to support the project did not talk to issues related to that issue either. While the neighbors who had concerns about specific issues stayed rather focused and got few answers. And about sums up the problem with this project. It’s all a sales job, with no details or answers to the things that really matter.]
