Multi-tasking . . .
OPENING, GETTING STARTED
– Roll Call, all here I believe.
– A moment of silence for Rosemary Lee, the 21st alder, who recently passed away.
– Suspension of the rules to allow items to be taken out of order and add items for referral.
HONORING RESOLUTIONS
– Big Brothers, Big Sisters resolution (Item 6 taken out of order)
– Lots of retirements James Martinson (city engineering – 29 years), Rita Johnson (fire – 44 years), Lorri Wendorff (community services – 36 years), Lucia Nunez (Director of Department of Civil Rights) – Ann Gullickson (metro – 19 years) was referred to the TPC and will be at the next council meeting.
-– Proclaiming Oscar Mireles as Madison’s next Poet Laureate (Item 26 taken out of order)
45 minutes later . . .
CONSENT AGENDA
All linked linked here – and they at 65 and 67 because there are registrants on those items. Everything passes on the agenda as referred to in the report except those items listed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS (agenda linked for number references)
8 – 13 – Alcohol licenses – no registrants except available to answer questions, motions to grant including with conditions. Skidmore abstains on 10. Passes on voice vote unanimously.
16 & 17 – Board of Public Works items – plans, specs and assessements. They skip 14 waiting for Chris Schmidt to come back. They adopt 16 and 17 first.
15 – One speaker says he doesn’t think that they need to replace the curb and gutter during the public hearing. After 16 & 17 they then go back to item 15, they suspend the rules. Denise DeMarb moves adoption and asks Rob Phillips to explain the sidewalk replacement and curb and gutter replacement policy. Rob Phillips, City Engineer says it is on the website, usually its tripping hazards or drainage issues that cause ponding and then ice issues in the winter. Curb and gutter is similar, he says the one person who showed up they would be willing to go out and review to see if it needs to be replaced and re-evaluate. Mo Cheeks asks about the practice of allowing staff to determine when sidewalks and gutters need to be replaced and decide who gets charged. How does that compare to otehr municipalities. Palm says that this is something we discuss alot and it pretty much has to charged to the property owner.
18 – Suspend the rules, move adoption. David Ahrens asks Rob Phillips to explain the motion, there were no minutes yet, what was the effect of the motion. Phillips said that they wanted to keep the project moving, but there was an issue with Dempsey Rd and some items that needed additional consideration. 1 is that Dempsey Rd is part of the lake loop and the bike path was designed on the west side of the road, but no bike lanes in the street but wanted to make it a route usable for families and having an offroad path was determined to be more usable. Also, a diagonal crossing was being proposed, like the bike path at Atwood and the Board of Public Works wanted to consider them further. They want to look at their option. There will be a separate resolution on these two issues. Rebecca Kemble asks if it could be referred to Ped Bike Motor Vehicle. Phillips says that they think they will come up with a solution amenable to everyone. Kemble says that she thinks those committee members have time to consider this. Phillips says they did meet with one of the members today, if this helps. Motion passes unanimously, but I missed the answer to the question about if those two issues come back to council, I believe they do.
14 – A speaker just registered to speak, they allow it/no objections. He lives on Hillcrest Drive and has concerns, says the neighbors don’t want this and has concerns about safety and damages to his house. Mark Clear asks Rob Phillips about the cost of the project, there is $2M in the resolution, but the speaker said it would be $13M. Phillips says it is $2.17M, passes unanimously on a voice vote.
19 – passes on a voice vote.
20 – is referred to the next meeting.
21 – Tabled to the end of the agenda.
22 – Passes, voice vote, no discussion
23 – re-refer to Plan Commission
24 – passes, voice vote, no discussion
SEPARATED ITEMS
28 – Technical adjustments to the 2015 budget – reconsideration, they agree without discussion, they make a motion to adopt 3rd substitute, it passes to become the main motion. Ahrens asks Dave Schmiedicke the Finance Director, he asks what the how this impacts the fund balance ratios, but they don’t expect much to change and it should stay aroudn 15% which is their target. Main motion passes unanimously. They do a roll call and they all vote aye.
30 – Department of Civil Rights report on Workforce Diversity Rebecca Kemble asks about the length of the report (more than 400 pages) and why it is stamped draft. Is it a draft, will we see it again. Civil Rights staff, Jason Glozier, he says that as soon as they accept it it will not be a draft. Kemble asks if they should accept or adopt. Michael May, City Attorney says if they adopt the report, it makes it policy, if they accept it its not official policy. He says in this case there is not much of a difference. Kemble says that if they adopt there is more accountability. Staff says that this is to comply with federal standards. Kemble asks about the differences between this report and previous reports. Staff says that previously they just looked at hiring and under utilized goals and not they are looking at culture.
Mayor announces that there are a number of registrations on item 102 and he tells the public that they aren’t allowed to speak on it (an hour and a half after the meeting started.) Clear points out that they are likely confused because it is related to item 21.
65 – Hill Farm Neighborhood Plan. Nan Fey says they asked for this to be referred to the community gardens issue, their recommendations were largely followed except for one, which she gave them a memo on that they have, but she wants language retained about locating additional community gardens on public lands. They feel it is important to try to continue to site community gardens in parks and she thinks that they should be an element in every neighborhood plan given he high level of interest and waiting lists. She emphasizes benefits of locating community gardens on public lands – they are important community assets. If they are located on private land, it goes against the city policy adopted in 1999, and the gardens would be less secure in the future. She says if they want to debate this issue, that is ok, but it should be debated as a policy in a neighborhood plan. She asks them to consider the entire city, and not just their individual districts and asks them to stick with the original recommendation from the community gardens committee.
The chair of the neighborhood planning committee, he says Rennebohm Park is already entirely programmed and they ask for flexibility in the placement of the gardens since the park will be facing development pressure from projects.
Chris Schmidt asks Nan Fey if additional language would be consistent with city policy. He makes an amendment on page 55 to ID additional places for community gardens on city owned land. He says this addresses the issue of following policy, without touching the hot button issues in his district.
Steve King asks if they could request it be kept in the planning area. Schmidt says that is presumed. He says they can discuss that later.
They adopt the amendment unanimously. Chris Schmidt does a bunch of thank yous. Clear also does a round of thank-yous. King echos that we need to have community gardens on our radar screen more often, he sits on the committee, but even in his district where here is low neighborhood involvement, there is a request pool for community space. He says that millenials love it, even tho the demographics of the current gardeners is aging. He says they should keep it in mind in future plans. Passes unanimously.
67 – Quisling Clinic Certified Survey Map There is a registrant, they don’t speak, no questions. It passes.
TREE LANE – Item 21
Public Testimony
Heartland Housing has 2 representatives in support and not wishing to speak. They have 3 wishing to speak. Rachel Krinsky is also here with the development team. First person says not long ago they were here to talk about Rethke, they have been under construction for a few months and should open in May. Today they are here to talka bout the 2nd permanent supportive housing project. He’s the Executive Director of Heartland Housing and they have 1000 units in their portfolio and they work with vulnerable populations with strong service providers, they develop high quality housing and design it well. They have their own property managers and they partnered with the YWCA for services. They did an RFP with the city, this is part of a larger development. They have been working with city and county officials, the site was identified by CDA staff, it meets location standards by WHEDA, which is a chief component in completing the project. He says the site is exciting, it works well for what they are proposing. This is a commitment by them because they believe in it and that it will work well for the residents who live there. The site is in an amenity rich neighborhood, transit, parks, schools, shopping, services and employment. These folks don’t always have that opportunity and studies show that it leads to better outcomes. They do background and criminal checks, they have policies, drug and loitering policy. They want to be considered an asset.
The architect describes the site, its long and narrow with woods and preserves wetland areas. He explains the water retention, he says some trees will be removed, mostly green ash, 1 american elm and 1 catalpa that are in poor condition, all in the wetland are preserved. He says there is space for 27 car spaces, 14 bike spaces outside and 60 indoor bike spaces. He says they meet requirements for setbacks for the site, its 4 stories, one story below underlying zoning, they use residential materials, he says the entry and roofline was modified by UDC and it was commended.
Rachel Krinsky Executive Director of YWCA, they have been doing affordable housing since 1909 and for homeless families since the 90s. It was beyond their capacity to do this on their own, but are excited to partner with Heartland who shares their values. YWCA has worked with these families and families like them, throughout the community. They are successful in their efforts to stabilize their housing. Madison desperately needs affordable housing, you know that. There are hundreds of families that can’t get into shelter and can’t get into housing, this is a critical site. This is a good site, its not perfect, we know that, we would like to find the perfect site, we never get the perfect site. The downtown site does not have parking, common space, playground or parks, but homeless families can come there and be successful. 85 – 100% of their families reach housing stability, even if they don’t have a parking space, this is a really good site, don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Final speaker for Hearthland says this is a good project on a good site, it has onsite services, it has on site and off site amenities and resources – parks, libraries, etc. They have a multi-purpose space, a quiet area, a tot lot, family gathering space – they are all important to the success of the building. There is a wealth of resources that help families thrive. There have been some concerns distributed, one of them is about parking. Their experience is that they have more spaces than cars that will be owned. If there was no public transit they would be concerned. There are concerns about open space, the site is irregularly shaped, part is a wetland, but next to city open space. They understand the city is looking at investing with a bike path and that would open up more space. They have 4500 more sq feet of open space. They have 3 parks within a mile, that is great access. To sum up, good project, good site, right zoning, if they have to include a commercial use it would reduce the open space. They expect to be here for decades and bring their success here.
Ron Tractenburg represents a “commercial landowner”, his registration has all the LLCs involved, we need affordable housing, housing first works and this is needed, but they are concerned about the site. Its been than living on the street, but it is inadequate. He has concerns about what they have to do to make the site usable. He says that the parking might be ok, but he is concerned about the open space requirement, he says it is 1/3 of what is required for residential use. It doesn’t have the internal infrastructure for serving the kids who live there. He says this is not where you put this type of housing, its inadequate, it breaks all the planning rules, it will likely pass 20 – 0. He wishes everyone well to make ti work, please look at the zoning standards and the comments of the residents of the area. 99% of the people recognize the need, but have concerns about this as proposed and if it is adequate.
Bruce Flynn talks really fast – he says this is taller than other buildings, the site is small, the project should be smaller, Heartland says that they can’t do it. Going to a park requires more planning. The project has exceptions that others don’t get, they might not have cars now, but as they improve their lives they may have cars, there is no place to expand parking. He is on the board of neighboring condo to the north, he feels their opinions are being ignored, its disheartening. We will deal with any issues that arise, he was hoping they would be more responsive. He is concerned about safety issues with a commercial alley there, it is heavily trafficked. Thanks for listening.
Patricia LaCrosse – she works with people experiencing homelessness, excited for the proposal, its urgent. She says that she is a parenting educator for kids in DAIS, ARC, Salvation Army and motels, and sometimes Housing and Hope projects. She has seen the struggles, particularly 0 – kindergarten. She says there is stress when there is no stability, and it makes it hard to attach to their children. She works with about 65 0 – kindergarten kids every year, she works with newborns from the hospitals. She says that 750 – 1000 square feet for a 3 bedroom, but at the Salvation Army they are living in 175 square feet for 6 people, if they are lucky to get in. 18 families are sharing 1 boys and 1 girls bathroom at the Salvation Army. They line up on long tables to have a inconsistently nutritional meal, its public and demeaning and stressful hearing the comments about how they raise their kids, it dis-empowers people. So this is a luxury to sit down for a family meal. Dense housing is the Galaxie by Salvation Army, there isn’t an issue with adding 100 kids to the schools. She says that they need a full time case manager for 45 families, other programs is one for 12 families.
Resident 2 blocks from the project is in favor of the project (missed her name), they have a diverse neighborhood with different types of housing, she appreciates the diversity of the neighborhood and affordable housing can be easily accommodated. There is traffic, but they could add more bus service, the retail is important, you can walk to it, but they have 2 malls and they can get there with a brisk walk – and it includes jobs. Of course if you are going to make affordable housing it will be smaller and denser, but it should be in a stable neighborhood to be able to function at its potential There are parks that are close and nice and there is good transportation. Madison is not affordable for people working in low paying jobs. Our neighborhood is not hostile to poor people or diversity.
Sonya Hubner understands the need for affordable housing, she has the same concerns as her neighbors, but she is mad about the process. This site is acknowledged to be wrong, yet it gets moved forward, it makes no sense. When the project was first introduced to the neighborhood, they got a postcard 48 hours before the meeting, much had already been decided. The location, size and scope were non-negotiable, but they were told it wasn’t a done deal, was the correct and honest truth. Concerns of there residents, the taxpayers, were ignored. At UDC, total disregard for those who live there and building the tallest building in the neighborhood will have a negative impact on the properties, there was no shade study. A 50 foot structure will provide a lot of shade where it is sunny and green space. At plan commission they admitted it did not meet the standards. Rules and standards are for all to follow. This process has failed, the overall project is the same as presented a year ago. there are exceptions for parking and green space, neighborhood concerns have not been addressed, they have disregarded standards, they are choosing the developer over the taxpayer and there has been no compromise. The welands will be jeopardized and the green space buffer to the commercial space will be gone. This doesn’t add quality of life to the neighborhood. She doesn’t support it.
Judy Kroger is opposed because it is 4 stories and it is a large building, its a large building on a small site. They said it woudl fit and blend in, but it does not, it is the only 4 story building. She lives in the condos, she wanted lots of sunlight and didn’t want tot look at parking lots, windows and balaconies. She will be losing sunlight and might be forced to leave. She is a taxpayer and isnt’ valued in the discission. What about the safety of the children who will live there. This is on an alley on the dumpster side of the mall, they will be competing with the semis and traffic that zips through the alley to avoid the lights. She is concerned about erosion, water retention, she says it is not a good place for children to be playing. She says there were people in opposition to the plan and they were told to go to the design meeting, and then they were told to go to a different meeting, so we went to the zoning meeting, and none of our concerns mattered there, this is one last chance, you’re jamming a 4 story buidling that will stick out tlike crazy and create a wall.
Last speaker I got distracted, she didn’t think it was going to be a problem with height, density, etc. It’s hard to get to know people because it is spread out, she thinks the density is good. She agrees parking is ok, thinks its a good neighborhood for families. (I missed alot, she was more articulate than all that.) She says, if you put kids in a building, they make friends.
Michael Kern speaks for a “third option”. Wants a smaller site, not for families.
Another speaker against, same talking points.
Questions of speakers
Mo Cheeks asks the developer about density. He says that they have done more dense projects with fewer parking spaces and open spaces in Milwaukee. They feel it is appropriate.
Cheeks asks about management. Developer says that families are varried, some will be at work 1st or 2nd shift, and some are in high school and other are small kids, their lives will vary and they will be using the spaces differently.
Rummel asks about how you manage a property with 150 kids. He says that the YWCA is looking for ways to engage them. Rachel Krinsky says maybe 90 children is more like it. She says they have 150 people in their building downtown. They have 30 – 40 children, but they are all under 5. They have programming, its a great volunteer opportunity, they might do something similar depending upon if its a need.
(I’m really distracted at the moment . . . .)
Shari Carter is asking what they heard from the neighbors and how they addressed it. He says they looked at the height and increasing usable space. They made changes to the facade to make it reflective of comments they heard at UDC. They sitched from 3 and 4 bedrooms to 2 and 3, smaller units and fewer people. We heard conflicting stories about open space. The wetland areas was preserved. She asks how many feet they are from it, he says they are clsoe, but not in it. They say 6 feet from it. She says the city owned parcel is not affected. They did do shadow studies, and they think the trees will have more effect on the shading than the building. They looked at that. Carter asks how many public meetings they held. They had three beyond the UDC and plan meetings.
Procedure
They remove item 21 from the table. They make a motion. They declare the public hearing open. No one else wants to speak.
Staff questions
Mayor asks to speak first. Hesays 4 years ago the city was not doing well with applications to WHEDA and tax credit applications, we didn’t have great projects in good locations, and we decided to look at sites and make it known to developers that if they wanted to have a sound application and get city support, and a year ago we did well. We are continuing with that process. He asks Natalie Erdman to explain the rest. She says that they have worked to increase the scores and we have been more successful in getting the tax credits. Sorry, I suck, too much going on . . . she describes the process of buidling affordable housing in the city and all the efforts we need to go through. I’m a sucky blogger right now (perhaps I’ll rehab this in the morning – mark 4)
Planning staff Heather Stouder explains the staff position on this project and says that the usable open space is reasonable given the site and the fact that this is a Planned Development.
Shiva Bidar asks about the shadow study, was that new info tonight. Stouder says that they didn’t get the info at plan, but its 120 feet from the other building and only 50 feet tall, so planning staff didn’t raise it as a concern. Given the height and distance, they didn’t seek it earlier in the process.
Bidar asks about availability of parks, she says she thinks there is a park 2 blocks away, is that correct. Yes, it is less than a 1/4 mile, Walnut Grove is one mile and then the school facilities have large open spaces a mile to the east.
Rummel asks about the wetlands and a bike path. Rob Phillips says there is a greenway next to the parcel that could have a path depending upon further study and work with the neighborhood. The seciton west of Tree Lane they did go through a process and have approved plans and specs, but this section hasn’t been done yet.
Rummel asks about the grade change, would the improvements fix that and asks about the trees. Phillips says there were alot of scrub trees that had to be removed to manage the stormwater, he expects there are quite a few trees that would need to be removed to improve the greenway.
DeMarb asks about the kids playing the the alley of the commercial space, will there be a barrier between the space and the alley. Erdman explains the site and that it is adjacent to a commercial building and a retention pond, not the mall.
DeMarb asks about density, Stouder says there is a 900 units per acre student space that is the densest in the city, we have a wide variety. DeMarb asks about the size of the apartments, Stouder says they are smaller than market rate, but not necessarily than smaller than student housing, not as small as the micro units. Erdman says they are comparable to public housing they are building and larger than the current public housing units.
DeMarb asks about how to know what is going on at meetings and where to show up to speak to get your concerns addressed. Are meetings defined for people and was a list given out. Matt Wachter says at the second neighborhood meeting, a schedule was presented with the topics. It was a slide in a presentation.
DeMarb asks about the cavalier comments about “lets see how it goes” – that isn’t her experience. Erdman says the staff never addressed it this way, they did a study 3 years ago, you have seen the initial reports and they are looking at how to support good supportive housing. They toured projects in other communities, they researched people in other communitites doing this work. We haven’t done this just like this before, but the CDA manages hundreds of units for people like this population. She says they have not been cavalier in any way and are looking for ways to stay engaged as the city, so we can adjust if we need to. Some of the comments came from commissioners.
Carter says at the plan commission there was a lot of discussion about the lot size, the green space and concerns about the fire department not building a station there.
Discussion
Paul Skidmore says this is in his district. UDC approved it unanimously and the plan commission did find it met the standards, he urges approval, good project, good site not perfect, but agrees with mayor this is an important project, its one step, but in the right direction.
Roll Call
20 ayes. Carter seemed to be the only one who might have waivered. Its unnanimous.
INTRODUCTIONS FROM THE FLOOR
Are here . . .
Legislative File No. 41084 – Opposing 2015 Wisconsin AB568 and 2015 Wisconsin SB445 and similar legislation including those that would condition local designation of historically-significant property and the local regulation of such property on the consent of the owner. (Ald. Ledell Zellers, D. 2)
• Recommended Action: Refer to Common Council meeting 1/19/16 for adoption
Legislative File No. 41278 – Amending Sections 12.1331(3) and 1.08(3)(a) of the Madison General Ordinances to modify the towing charge forfeiture and the bail deposit for violation of said violation. (Ald. Denise DeMarb, Council President)
• Recommended Action: Refer to Common Council meeting 1/19/16 for adoption
Denise DeMarb starts singing happy birthday.
Mayor asks for announcments, several people yell “bye Brynna” from the Cap Times. They adjourn.
