High Speed Rail Meeting a.k.a. Madisonians Behaving Badly

I really believe there is something in that east side water that doesn't belong there. Well, that's not fair, there were people there from all over Dane County, and all the bad behavior didn't come from Madisonians.

I couldn't do my usual thorough summary on this meeting from Tuesday night cuz, well, they just kept saying the same things over and over and over and over and it amounted to "we don't know, there will be a process" to which the response was the equivalent of "there was no process to pick the station, why should we trust you." I don't know who didn't see that coming, and no matter how many times they said, "there was a process 5 years ago", no one was buying it. That about sums up the meeting, here's a few other nuggets of information or points of interest.

GETTING STARTED
The two presenters from the DOT were John Oimoen, High Speed Passenger Rail Program & Paul Trombino, Division Operations Director. [ooops, and Chris Klein, don't know how I missed that.]

Rummel did a welcome, introduced the mayor and city staff, indicated it was supposed to be a neighborhood meeting, the public process will come later, this is the first meeting. Intent is to let people who live along the rail ask questions.

Mayor says he started working on high speed rail 10 years ago, this is exciting, it will put us on the map, baby boomers will have other options, it will "mix people up", it will help exchange ideas and products and services and new products will be invented. Too early to answer questions about how high the fence is and what color it will be, there will be a public proess preview and opportunity to get questions and comments so as go forward on public participation process, thanks and compliments Rummel for setting it up so early.

There is a letter from the SASY Council and a map of the crossings, but they ran out of them.

PRESENTATION
Here's the powerpoint.

Highlights are
- Eventually you will be able to connect throughout the midwest, including cities like St. Louis, Cincinnati, Kansas City, Detroit, Chicago and Minneapolis/St. Paul - 9 states.
- This will be 110mph speed service
- They will share the corridors with freight
- Prices will be competitive with air cuz you can get downtown
- They are doing a Madison to Minneapolis environmental study, a joint project of WISDOT and Minnesota Dept of Transportation. They are looking at which corridors they will use, they are looking at routes and alternatives, will pair down routes to alternatives, likely 3, there will be a lot of public involvement in the next 12 months
- The $810M in federal money includes stations for Madison, Brookfield, Oconomowoc and Watertown.
- They did a lot of work in 2001 to look at station alternatives, did an environmental assessment, proposed station locations, got their public hearings done, and had 6 alternatives for Madison.
- 3 alteratives were chosen for further analysis for Madison, the airport, Pennsylvania Ave and downtown Monona Terrace, the others were eliminated.
- Applied for funding in October 2009, projects had to be shovel ready.
- The did a feasibility study of the Madison stations, they went back to their previous work, updated it for current conditions, also added Yahara Station at First St and they chose Monona Terrace because it best meets the evaluation criteria. It was a re-validation of the environmental process.
- They still have to complete the preliminary and final engineering report, environmental document for the stations needs to be done, have grant agreement to start work on the station and will begin drafting work for the corridor design.
- There will be a public involvement process for corridor and station – workshops will be soon, starts in June, they will work with the alder and city, there will be public info meetings as well, and a public hearing.
- They want the draft document approved in 2011.
- This summer they will look at specific station it will be at 1 W Wilson or the DOR building.
- The corridor process will look at concerns about noise and vibration issues, corridor management plan, will do outreach to property owners.
- There will be a labor and business advisory committee to work with small and local businesses.
- There will be a stakeholder committee to look at mitigation options, come up with a corridor management plan, landscaping, fencing, signal and crossing devices – there will be public info meetings on a frequent basis.
- 2013 is the goal.
- There will be 6 daily round trips Milwaukee to Madison.
- It will be a 110 mph service by 2016, originally it will only travel at 79 miles per hour.
- It will take 1 hour 13 minutes to get to Milwaukee with stops, 1 hour 4 minutes express.

QUESTIONS/ANSEWERS AND COMMENTS AND OTHER ITEMS REVEALED BY THE DISCUSSION
Q: Is this a done deal? We'll get it whether we want it or not, and it is funded, right?
A: Yes.

Q: Will the stations be built on to an existing building?
A: That will be part of the public process.

C: They need to deterine if it will be the DOR or 1 W Wilson buidling in the next few weeks. Then they will have renderings to see what it will look like and they will get input then. (i.e. there is a process, you're not really included until after we decide)

Q: Why downtown where more crossings and traffic, John Nolan and Blair is bad enough already and to be multimodal downtown doesn't make sense due to all the traffic and the Isthmus?
A: We wanted to be downtown because there will be more ridership. They also based it on work done in 2000, they used that criteria to decide. Oh, and they are going to study it further. They may need to make improvements to intersections, re-time lights, add left turn lanes, etc to deal with traffic.

Q: Will there be improvements at Blair St?
A: They will study it.

Q: If so, who will pay?
A: There is money in the grant to deal with it.

Q: What three sites did you look at?
A1: They don't answer the question.
A2: They added Yahara Station and Kohl Center. (but they have another answer in a bit)

Q: How is the train powered?
A: They can buy 8 locomotives, they are diesel. The have less emissions, quieter engines, but if not ready to go in 2013, they can use Amtrack engines.

Q: What about air pollution?
A: They have to accommodate emissions under Monona Terrace, they need to study that. Ventilation system needs to be developed.

Q: Will the trains spend the night downtown?
A: No, they will be at the maintenance facility, that they still need to locate.

Q: Will there be engines on both ends?
A: Never answered.

Q: Where will passengers load?
A (3): They need to decide that in the next few weeks. 1 W Wilson was original idea, 2nd is DOA building, those were the only two that they looked at, they don’t have to purchase anything. The state investment board building was mentioned but they don’t own it and not a location they looked at.

Q: Will the train engines run all night?
A: That hasn't been determined yet.

Q: What will happen to property values and will they be compensated?
A: You will be compensated if they have to take your property. But mostly, this will be enhancements to the neighborhood.

Q: Will there be street closings?
A: Originally they looked at Brearly and Livingston, they need to look at that again.

Q: Will there be a fence the whole way?
A: They have to look at that.

Q; What will happen to quality of life if neighborhood is split, there will be more crime, drugs and they will need more police presence, will we get it?
A: No answer.

Q: What happens to our community gardens?
A: No answer, they will answer it later. (Answer is, of course, we don't know.)

Q: Have you looked at what will happen to the livibility of the area?
A: They will sit down with people with concerns and try to mitigate them and try to enhance the community, there are no pre-decisions, the process will decide.

Q: Who will buy our houses if we have to sell? Will you?
A: No answer.

C: Speaker says Milwaukee station is not downtown. The crowd argues about how far it is.

Q: What will be the traffic impacts?
A: They have to study that.

Q: Homeowners live downtown now, not when the study was done. Also housing market has changed. Will you redo the study?
A: No.

C: Rummel asked poor Rob Phillips to talk about the process. He did the best he could to say very little about the DOT process. He said when it is all said and done, not everyone will be pleased, but hopefully some of you will be or you will have a better understanding of the issues, that is what the meetings are about and the process going forward.

C: They said the original announcement was for the airport, that was recommended for trains to the Twin cities, after the announcement, there was tremendous public pressure to say the train should go downtown where the people are. That is when they re-evaluated and threw in the Yahara Station and Kohl Center. They decided the extra riders (60K/yr?) were why.

Q: What about Yahara Station?
A: Yahara was closer to downtown, they hadn't done any preliminary work, they would have to start over on the environmental study, the project would not get done by 2013. They got the money because the project was shovel ready. He says the traffic impacts are not much more and infrastructure is not in place at airport or Yahara Station.

Q: Why did you make the decision without public input?
A: They say that is not true, that 5 year old document was what they got the grant based on, it said if train terminated in Madison Monona Terrace is the choice, so its not a great surprise Monona Terrace was picked.

Q: What will the fence look like where the rail splits?
A: They will meet with property owners and help figure that out. Don't know right now.

Q: How do we get involved in the public process?
A: The public involvement team will be in the community with business cards and contacts. Contact them as frequently as you want, there will be workshops in June, they will update the website and work with the alder and city.

C: A train supporter says that the MPO (Metrpolitan Planning Organization) is responsible for picking a train station and they have to release the money. He says they will have a hearing on June 2. He says he doesn't want to see funds released for downtown station until we know what will be there, will it be an intermodal station. City will have to put money in, grant won't cover it all. 60% of people coming to use the train won't come from Maidson, that is why the airport makes sense with all the parking.

C: Lucy Mathiak said that she is worried about transportation costs for the schools if the kids can't safely walk or bike they will need to pay for buses and this splits several elementary school attendance areas in half. And 3 (or 4?) of the 4 schools are fragile and have been threatened to be closed in the last 4 years (Hawthorne, Schenk, Emerson, Marquette/Lapham) They're moving too fast and have not allowed enough time to study impacts on schools, small businesses and others impacted.

NOTE: Before I go on, its important to note that the sound system at Olbrich sucks, and people need to speak right into the microphone to be heard and several times, a very rude and obnoxious guy yelled from the back of the room to talk into the microphone. So much so, that almost every speaker that got up there asked him if they could hear and he would tell them if they were good enough.

NOTE: I should also note, that there were many developers in the room, as well as an attorney/lobbyist and members of DMI and the Chamber. I don't think any of them lived in the district, and certain not in the affected area. As the mom of one of my friends put it "I didn't expect to see so many suits, I expected to see my neighbors." She left very, very frustrated by the meeting with no answers to things she is interested in, and she lives right on the tracks.

Q: Are quiet zones in jeopardy because of the project?
A1: No.
A2: They will need to look at safety and will work with the city and evaluate as we go forward.

C: The person who asked the question asked them to give them straight answers.

Q: Speaker asks Mayor Dave why we won't protect the quiet zones?
A: Mayor Dave Cieslewicz "wait", we said at beginning of meeting we are coming to you early to frame the questions that you have [funny, do the public's questions need "framing"?], we said we don’t have answers and they outlined a process to get your questions, but your preferences are also important, so when talk we talk about siting or fences, those are open questions, they can’t tell you, they can’t tell you what the fence will look like.

Q: Is the fence a done deal?
A: Mayor says likely

Q: Everywhere?
A: Mayor is clearly exasperated and says it won’t come through the city at 110mph, but at 79mph, he's not sure if everywhere, no one knows, this is an iterative process that will take a year. He please with them for their patience, he heard a lot of conclusions drawn about property taxes, schools (He says, I don't know where that came from in an annoyed tone of voice), sitings, etc. we are getting ahead of ourselves, we want to hear you, this is an iterative process and we will come to conclusions that will ameliorate the issues or get you answers.

C: Same guy still talking that originally asked about the quiet zones, he says he tried to get answers, he found a phone number, called 4 times, message machine not working, then he called Donna Brown at DOT in Milwaukee 4 times, he could leave a message, waited 4 days, not a word, and he told her his questions, they were basic and simple. He then emailed, did get an reply, but no answer, if this is the process we can’t wait a year.

C: Someone says we need to decide in the next 90 days according to the grant.

C: Jerk in the back of the room who is not helping with a tense meeting yells at him to "sit down and shut up".

NOTE: I thought there was going to be a physical altercation as the quiet zones guy went back to confront the "sit down and shut up guy".

NOTE: I know the names of more than a majority of people who spoke and were involved, but I don't know everyone's names so I'm leaving them all out.

C: DOT apologizes for the phone number, will give his number 266-1114 (I think that was Paul) he will answer any question.

Q: What about the quiet zones?
A3: If infrastructure in place, can’t image why we would eliminate it.

Q: Fencing?
A: Don’t know answers to the questions don’t have them cuz we committed we won’t do it til we get public input, no decision on fencing or station design until public input, so no answers. They says they will have the same process they did for the Marquette interchange, they had over 3000 meetings since 1996.

C: Rummel thanks the quiet zone guy for working so hard on these issues.

NOTE: People have largely left as it is apparent there are no answers to the questions they came for.

Q: Will they use the whole right of way or can they keep the plantings they have in the right of way?
A: They will likely use the whole width of the railroad property on both sides of the tracks.

Q: Will there be two high speed rail and one freight track.
A: They have not determined if 2 or 1 track, that is part of the process, there will be a corridor management plan and that will determine the width of the right of way, they will be working with people. If community gardens are encroaching on right of way, they will have to look at it, may be opportunity to use some of that property.

Q/C: More worried about traffic (doesn't live on east side) How will this impact traffic on John Nolen and other places they have to travel around downtown? (Makes snide remark about not caring about the color of the fence.) Will there be groups to talk about permanent crossings and bridges so people can cross and walk freely? If not, leave it on the outskirts of town, no one would go back and put the trains where they are, but we can build bridges and pathways, should be done before more planning goes on.
A: They will do the traffic analysis, will try to mitiage and have efficient movement.

Q: I like trains, he lives close and deals with the noise, do people out there agree with me about trains being good?
A: Clapping.
C: Thanks, I just wanted to show that there are supporters in the room, looks like 50/50

Q: Will the trains be much lighter and shorter and not make the same noise, and is it possible to have lights timed so short commuter trains can come through?
A: They will work on quiet zones and safety yes, new passenger trains are primary safety issues, quieter, lighter and better on safety issues. This is not a freight train, you will not hear them the same, locomotives are different, may not hear or see as quickly as a freight train.
A2: They will run on welded rail, not 40 foot rail that makes more noise, concrete ties are also going to help with stability and quieter ride.

C: Speaker gets up to speak and says to the jerk in the back of the room "please don't yell at me, I'm a teacher and I get that all day long.

C: Homeowner in area, would like a fence, can’t build one cuz of easement.

Q: Asks how they chose this route instead of Canadian Pacific, which is more of a commercial area, why is it where all the neighborhoods are.
A: They looked at that, same number of crossings. Communities not the same, but not a time difference, this doesn’t preclude them using that line when they are going to the twin cities, that could be a route out.

Q: Guy says he's pro-rail, but the studies they based this on are old, there have been lots of expansions, in other suburb areas and as time goes on, the number of people who use the train will increase from outside the area, thought meeting was positive, but why downtown?
A: Not directly answered this time.

Q: Will it not go to St. Paul?
A: That will be studied. That will take 2 - 3 years to do the environmental study.

Q: Will they be building a second station in 2016?
A: That will be studied.

Q: Who will pay for that second station? People in City of Madison pay for it and 60% of the users are outside of City of Madison.
A: Station costs are included in the $810M includes cost to build stations so working through that.

C: Seems like there are more comments than questions, so I decided to add my comments, he wonders where all the fears are coming from with long trains, these are 8 cars long, they will be quicker than a stoplight if you are stopped, he says the fears are not warranted. Says the trains won't be more disruptive than the 60K cars on E Washington per day or the 80K cars on the beltline.

Q: Will this be an integrated multi-modal station? How will people get downtown?
A: They are working with the City to address elements of station from an inter-modal perspective.

Q: Why not delay to get it right?
A: We've been working on it for a long time.

Q: What about the tracks in Central Park can they be relocated?
A: Yes looking at it, have that info from the city, part of the consideration.

SUMMARY
We don't know.
There will be a process.
We will look at things you brought up.
Nobody believes them due to how the process has gone so far.
Read more!

Meetings Added this Week

When I do the week ahead, I have the information from Friday, but during the week many meetings get added, here's what we have for this week:

YESTERDAY
Meeting: 201 STATE FOUNDATION INC. & MADISON CULTURAL ARTS DISTRICT SPECIAL JOINT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Date: 5/25/2010 4:30 PM
Location: 201 STATE ST. LOWER LEVEL BOARDROOM

TODAY
Meeting: BOARD OF ASSESSORS, SCHEDULE 1
Date: 5/26/2010 8:30 AM
Location: ROOM 101 CCB

Meeting: STREET USE STAFF COMMISSION
Date: 5/26/2010 10:00 AM
Location: ROOM 108 CCB

TOMORROW
Meeting: MADISON CITY CHANNEL AD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Date: 5/27/2010 5:00 PM
Location: ROOM 300 MMB
(NOTE: Not sure why this is showing up as an addition, since it was on there twice already, but its a good reminder that this important meeting is coming up. What would we do without city channel?)

Meeting: WARNER PARK COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER ADVISORY SUBCOMMITTEE
Date: 5/27/2010 6:00 PM
Location: 1625 NORTHPORT DR.

Read more!

Is Your Beach Safe to Swim In?

Well, don't swim in the beach, swim in the water, or wait, don't do that either, check the list first! Here's how they tested. 10 beaches closed.

May 24th - Preliminary beach water quality testing has begun for the 2010 season. Please check back for water quality updates and other information regarding the opening of the 2010 beach season.

BB Clarke CLOSED May 24th - The water temperature was 73°F. This beach is closed for swimming due to blue-green algae. The beach will reopen when their levels decline. The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swim at their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

Bernies Open The Public Health Madison-Dane County Laboratory tested bacterial water quality at this beach on May 24, 2010. The results were acceptable. The water temperature was 73°F. The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swim at their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

Brittingham CLOSED The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swim at their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

Esther CLOSED The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swim at their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

Goodland County Park CLOSED The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swim at their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

Governor Nelson State Park N/A

Hudson CLOSED The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swim at their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

James Madison Open The Public Health Madison-Dane County Laboratory tested bacterial water quality at this beach on May 24, 2010. The results were acceptable. The water temperature was 65°F. The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swim at their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

Lake Kegonsa State Park N/A

Lake Mendota County Park CLOSED The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swim at their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

Maple Bluff N/A

Marshall CLOSED The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swim at their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

Memorial Union CLOSED The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swim at their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

Olbrich Open The Public Health Madison-Dane County Laboratory tested bacterial water quality at this beach on May 24, 2010. The results were acceptable. The water temperature was 80°F. The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swim at their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

Olin CLOSED The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swim at their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

Spring Harbor CLOSED The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swim at their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

Stoughton Mandt Park Pond N/A

Tenney Open The Public Health Madison-Dane County Laboratory tested bacterial water quality at this beach on May 24, 2010. The results were acceptable. The water temperature was 65°F. The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swimat their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

Verona Fireman's Park N/A

Vilas Open The Public Health Madison-Dane County Laboratory tested bacterial water quality at this beach on May 24, 2010. The results were acceptable. The water temperature was 81°F. The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swim at their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

Warner Open The Public Health Madison-Dane County Laboratory tested bacterial water quality at this beach on May 24, 2010. The results were acceptable. The water temperature was 73°F. The regular lifeguard season for 2010 has not started yet. People may swim at their own risk. Blue-green algae (Cyanobacteria) may still be present and their levels can be variable depending on the waves and wind. Beachgoers should use common sense and avoid contact with algal blooms that they may observe.

More info here.
Read more!

DMI's Plans for Mansion Hill

Oh yeah, the Edgewater was just a start . . . and they have plans to spend more of the TIF and keep the district open longer as well. Read it and weep.

They're not waiting, time to charge ahead.

Hello everyone:
Please see the memo from Gary Peterson. We will discuss this at the June 24th Economic Development Committee meeting. Thanks for such a good meeting this AM.

Susan Schmitz
DMI President
Hovde Building
122 W. Washington Ave. Suite 250
Madison, WI 53703

Here's the memo. It was written in April.

Date: April 28, 2010
To: DMI Economic Development Committee
From: Gary l. Peterson, AICP
Re: Historic Districts and the Edgewater Project

Many of you probably know that I have been a Community Planner for over 40 years. You might also recall that the City hired the firm of Crispell-Snyder, Inc. to conduct a Blight Study of the area that principally includes the two Historic Districts, Mansion Hill and Langdon Street. I conducted those studies. Prior to that, I conducted many Blight Studies in two states including in the 1960’s when the methodologies and standards in the studies were reviewed and approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. I used those same standards and methodologies in the Mansion Hill and Langdon Street studies. What the studies found was that the area, comprised principally of these two Historic Districts, has many urban problems commonly found in older neighborhoods. In these two districts, the Historic designation has not worked to eliminate the urban problems. In fact it has probably compounded them and they could get worse before they get better.

Here is my view of the situation:

1. The areas designated as Historic Districts have problems:

a. Many buildings in the two districts are not historic.

b. Some parcels with buildings may not be contributing buildings.

c. Vacant parcels, in the form of parking lots, are listed as Contributing Buildings to the Historical Designation.

d. Several parking lots are gravel parking lots making their designation even more suspect.

e. As a Planner, I see that such misrepresentations create a creditability problem.

f. To rehabilitate or demolish a Historical Building or Contributing Building, an additional set of standards are imposed on the owner. As I understand it, these standards can be used to stop any change. Redevelopment or rehabilitation loses, further deterioration or blight wins.

2. The Historic Buildings within the Historic District have problems.

a. Many of the identified historical buildings and contributing buildings are blighted and many show long term neglect.

b. Several contributing and non-contributing buildings are vacant. Not only do they not contribute to the vitality of the neighborhood, but they also represent an “out of the ordinary” problem. This is not a location where you should find vacant buildings.

3. As I understand it, efforts to improve the neighborhood are being stymied and held hostage by historic designation and that includes development of what are now parking lots. There also appears to be no organized efforts to improve the neighborhoods.

4. Both the Mansion Hill and Langdon Street Districts are far short of their potential. Rather than a current asset to the City they are a liability. Both Historic Districts have major problems that distract significantly from what should be a high quality neighborhood. This opinion is verified by the fact at least 158 structures in February 2009 in the two districts were blighted. Please understand blighted is more than a term. Blighted represents moderate to major exterior elements of a structure are deteriorated. Paint will not fix blight. Blight repairs include new or significantly repaired roofs, widow replacement, siding renewal or replacement, and doors needing replacement and in some cases major repairs or replacement of foundations. In addition there are more than 250 Blighting Influences. The Blighting Influences in these districts include: land underutilization, lack of parking, identified hazards to health and safety (including 3 or more steps) with no hand rail, anti-freeze, oil, gas and automobile battery sitting in the open, corner building cornice protruding, exposed wires, uneven sidewalk, drop off adjacent to sidewalk, poor site conditions, poor walks and driveways, inadequate outdoor storage and screening, lack of handicap accessibility to building accessible by the public, graffiti, missing fence staves or parts, exposed electric box and wires, soil, bank and yard erosion, deteriorated, rotten, leaning and cracked retaining walls, and plugged storm drain.

5. What should be done:

a. Decide just what our Historical Districts are intended to do. Do we want them to preserve (at all costs) what exists (historical, non-historical, blight), stagnate new development, redevelopment and over all attraction? Or do we want to have areas of community pride that preserves truly historic structures and stimulates needed redevelopment? This effort will require City participation in cooperation with private interests. Private interests have created the blighted area. Private interests alone will not reverse current trends.

b. The validity and applicability of the Mansion Hill and Langdon Street Historical Districts need to be reviewed. This includes reviewing the boundaries and the designation of each property. The Districts need City wide review and an infusion of creditability. Have the reviews conducted by outside consultants using both historical attributes and also the economic feasibility of designating a building as historical or contributing building. We particularly need to review the boundaries where they have stretched past non-historical or non-contributing buildings just to pick up 1, 2 or 3 structures that are not historical. We can preserve our Historic areas without holding hostages.

c. The Landmarks Commission Ordinance was written many years ago and the goals and intent of the ordinance do not seem to be applicable today. The ordinance needs to be reviewed relative to content by which changes are reviewed. The lack of credibility and flexibility in the ordinance is obvious.

d. Utilize Tax Incremental District (TID) s.66.1105 and Neighborhood Improvement District (NID) s. 66.1110 funds to eliminate these urban problems

6. Why do we need TID and NID District participation? Why can’t the private sector do it alone? Examples from within the Historic Districts of why the Private Sector cannot and will not do it alone are as follows:

a. An existing 7 story obsolete, non-historical building needs to be replaced. An owner will not tear a 7 story building down and replace it with a two or three story building. TIF financing would be needed to absorb the write down in real estate value.

b. The most blighted building in the area is a frame 2 story house that has major foundation, wall, roof, window, and door deterioration. It shows decades of neglect. It is a relatively small house. There is nothing significant about it, yet it is listed as a Contributing Building. Dozens of houses in better condition are not being repaired, why would this one be rescued even if it is possible to rescue? If it is not physically possible to rescue it, it will only continue to be a blight on the neighborhood. The private sector will never rescue this house.

c. The third example is a large frame 3 flat. It was built as a three flat and now is divided into many apartments. Nothing grand about it but it is listed as a Contributing Building. Its problem is its size relative to the need of exterior repairs. The foundation is deteriorated and will continue to deteriorate. It is a very large building on a very large deteriorating foundation. All 3 levels of the structure’s exterior walls, roof, fascia and soffit need major repairs. A large number of windows on all 3 levels need replacing. The private sector will never do this.

I hope that these suggestions are helpful because Historic Districts are an asset to any City and, when taken care of, become an attraction that leads to the City’s growth. I volunteer for Downtown Madison, Inc. (DMI) and would be willing to work further on this important issue. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.

Gary Peterson, AICP
Sustainable Services, Inc.

I wonder how much TIF they want to spend in the area and how long they want to keep the schools from their tax growth.

I'd also be curious, are there any historic districts these folks would honor? Or should they be eliminated altogether? Do they think all historic districts are holding their neighborhoods hostage? If they are willing to declare war on the oldest and most precious of the historic districts, why bother having any at all? What examples would they give of where Historic Districts are an asset?
Read more!

No More Spending Like Drunken Sailors (On Credit)

The Mayor has all his bright shiny toys, now, he says, its time to cut back. It's about time.

May 18, 2010
TO: Department & Division Heads
FR: Mayor Dave Cieslewicz
RE: 2011 Capital Budget Targets & Review of 2009 Capital Borrowing

When we kicked off our capital budget process a year ago, I asked you to strive for balance. This year, as we continue to face the challenges of the great recession, that must still be our goal.

While we know economic recovery is coming, we also know it will not happen overnight. So this year, we must continue to balance the need for smart investments in our city with the need to face difficult budget realities brought on by a deep recession.

In my seven years as mayor, we have substantially increased the capital investment in our city with very good results. We’ve added two new fires stations, increased our ambulance fleet from six to eight, made major investments in our branch libraries, revitalized Allied Drive and the Villager, and committed to building a great new Central Library. In addition, we’ve made significant progress in our five year effort to reduce the miles of substandard arterial streets by two-thirds.

It has always been clear to me that these investments would present challenges in coming years as our debt repayments demanded more from our operating budgets. These were decisions the Council and I willingly made with that in mind. But we must also continue to take into account the real impact our borrowing will have on what will continue to be very challenging operating budgets in the coming years.

So, with the thought of balance in mind today, I am setting our 2011 borrowing goal at a 10% reduction from the Capital Improvement Plan. That is a goal of $58 million in new levy-supported borrowing and $80 million for the total borrowing package.

I expect that agencies will take into account potential savings from lower contract bids and otherwise trim their projects accordingly. We must also continue to focus on how each capital investment accomplishes three important goals: growing our tax base, creating jobs and strengthening our local economy. The times demand steadiness and an intelligent, fact-based approach. We will also continue to consider tangible results from our capital investments like those measured in Madison Measures in my capital budget decisions.

We have an excellent group of managers, and I know you will step up to the challenge. This recession will end. Our goal as a city is to find the opportunities in the challenges, to weather the current climate, and to position ourselves to take full advantage of the recovery.

This is funny and ironic in so many ways. This mayor has hardly ever held back on capital spending, and the council warned him, with more votes against the capital budget than there have been in the past, but now, he finally catches on. Sigh . . . too bad its too late.

A 10% cut, eh? What does that mean for jobs? A chunk of that could have come from not doing the Edgewater. Read more!

Watch Allied Grow!

Call me a cynic, but I tend to think $9M spent towards these types of efforts would have a much bigger impact on the neighborhood than the building the City/CDA built.

Watch Allied Grow

Allied residents have been exchanging their time and talents - helping out the Wellness Center, Neighborhood Assn., tutoring kids, giving rides, getting services for themselves like computer help, classes, etc. - through the Dane County TimeBank service exchange and community building program.

At "Maxine's" TimeBank Store (2225 Allied Dr. lower lobby), named in memory of an Allied resident who was instrumental in getting the store going, neighbors are trading in the time they earn for clothes, toys, books, dishes and more.

TimeBank, along with the Allied Dunns Marsh Neighborhood Association, the Allied Wellness Center, Madison Apprenticeship Program (MAP), and the Dunns Marsh Neighborhood Association are working toward developing a social cooperative that will provide personal and community development activities and job skill building programs.

On Saturday May 22nd, from 12-3 there will be a cook out and activities outside the JFF office on Allied Drive, to highlight this effort. A container garden project is one of these activities.

Residents in each side of an apartment building interested in having a container for their building can sign up for one and choose whether they want to grow flowers, herbs or vegetables in their container. Each building will be responsible for caring for their plants.

There will also be four larger containers with vegetables at Head Start, Learning Center, Revival Ridge and Prairie Crossing where a portion of the vegetables will be donated to the food pantry or programs in the neighborhood. There is NO COST for your building's container garden.

It is our hope that the residents in every building will work together to keep their building's garden beautiful, which, in turn, will help make our community more beautiful and more healthy. These containers will be ready for folks to plant and decorate at the cook out, and then be distributed to the apartment buildings.

There will be a chance to learn why it is important to belong to a neighborhood association, what wellness activities are available to participate in at the Wellness Center, how TimeBank works, and how MAP can change your life! There will be a reading corner for kids, and good community fun to be had.

Sign up now for your building's container and plants, and come to a cook out on Saturday May 22, 12-3pm at the JFF Center to get your plants and to learn more about the co-op idea. Come watch Allied grow!

Read more!

City Attorney Responds to My Open Letter on Ethics

Mostly, he seems to think, nothing to see here and this isn't within the committee's purview. It's sort of his mantra It will be interesting to see how the committee responds. After all, it wasn't an open letter to the City Attorney, it was an appeal to the resident committee members to do their job and NOT defer to the city attorney on these matters.

It's also interesting, he didn't bother to tell me when they are meeting. No official word yet. I sure hope its a time when I can make it, they haven't asked me about what dates might work.

Finally, interesting that he mails me a copy, when they received the info by email . . . nice way of being difficult. It just creates extra unnecessary steps to get it scanned. So, here it is!

I'll have a more formal response to the letter next week, but for now, you can read the document and think about what your response would be. It's kind of poorly written and hard to follow along with my original letter, he notes there were 28 recommendations, but then doesn't really address them in a coherent or orderly fashion.

The real question that remains at the moment is, if they won't address the issues in a comprehensive kind of a way, will it force me to file complaints? Cuz, I can. Or perhaps, someone else wants to, so they see that there are others concerned besides me? Yeah, I know, I've heard all the excuses about why people don't want to stick their necks out and file complaints, and I totally understand, but if he's forcing our hand . . . someone want to step up?
Read more!

Take the poll!

Yeah, the Edgewater . . . the PR continues.

From: Kelly Starr-King [dbldrake@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 5:22 PM
To: Kelly @ Dane Buy Local
Subject: Please take a 2 second Edgewater poll.

Hello all ~ Wisconsin State Journal is taking a poll on how our community feels about the decision to move forward with the Edgewater Hotel re-development. Can you take 2 seconds to click on the link below, then scroll down...the poll is near the bottom on the left.

When I sent this email to you, the poll showed:

YES = 73
NO = 22
??? = 05

Please participate! As you've probably heard, our Alders spent the entire night debating this issue (I believe from 1:00 am - 7:45 am)...very hard work. Wouldn't it be nice for them to see how the community feels they did after all was said and done? With the current stats being 73% YES, it looks like they made the right decision...so far!

Thanks to those who helped make this possible!

Kelly

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sarah Carpenter
Date: Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:01 AM
Subject: Please take the Edgewater poll!
To: Tina Kurt


My Dear Friends –



Click on the Wisconsin State Journal link below to cast your vote. It only takes a second.



Next up for the Edgewater, smaller hurdles and a possible court challenge

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt_and_politics/article_1530fc7e-63aa-11df-8f10-001cc4c002e0.html



Sarah Dunn Carpenter

Director of Community Relations

Hammes Company

22 East Mifflin Street, Suite 800

Madison, WI. 53703

608-274-7447

608-274-7442 Fax

carpenters@hammescosports.com

www.edgewater2012.com



PLEASE VISIT THE WEBSITE FOR THE EDGEWATER REDEVELOPMENT - WWW.EDGEWATER2012.COM FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THE PROJECT AND TO REGISTER YOUR SUPPORT ON THE E-PETITION.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you.

Heh, I'm pretty sure, I'm not the intended recipient. :)
Read more!

Edgewater Round Up

Here's some of the press coverage, plus a few moments I found interesting from my blog, in case you didn't read all the way through.

LUKAS HAPPY WITH HIS ALDER
I don't always agree with Jed Sanborn, but at least he's consistent and principled.

SMALLER HURDLES LEFT
I think the biggest hurdle for the Edgewater is left, actually getting it in the TIF district and getting the Joint TIF Board with representatives from the schools and county and others to agree to keeping their tax base and their taxes longer. I think that is the next thing that could stop the project.

HARD QUESTIONS
These are indeed, some good questions.

PLACE YOUR BETS
Which Hotel will be the next one to come in for TIF. Verveer said at one of the meetings this week that the one on the corner of Johnson and Bassett are interested in TIF.

STATE JOURNAL CROWS
If only all the benefits they think we'll get really happen . . .

FEARFUL SYMMETRIES FEARFUL
For historic districts.

HOW TO SUMMARIZE A 12 HOUR MOMENT IN TIME
I have no idea how you summarize 12 hours into an article, but this is a good attempt.

THUY DIDN'T VOTE
In this article about how they voted, they note Thuy didn't vote. Some people say, she was standing on the other side of the wall right before she left. I understand why Julie Kerr had to go home, why Thuy Pham-Remmele did was never disclosed.

BREAKING NEWS
During the many hours of Edgewater we endured, at some point, Robbie Webber pointed out to those of us in press row that there was "breaking news" that the council did not do anything yet. We wondered, isn't that the opposite of "breaking news"?

STILL USING THOSE MISLEADING PHOTOS
The daily reporter should be ashamed. The new tower looks so small, and the pier so big and . . . the sailboat.

THIS, THE D.A. HAS MONEY FOR
Car crashes. Love the world when we rely on grants and what people with the money want to have happen, rules.

TWITTERED OUT
The Sconz stopped by the cops . . . not allowed in the Council Chambers . . .that's not right.

THREE LOW LIGHTS OF THE MEETING
Hulsey, Clear and Clear.

Hulsey sells out
I didn't capture this great, but he's in favor of the Edgewater, for the water quality?

Brett Hulsey, on Dane County Board and Lakes and water shed, support the project, its smart growth, good jobs, clean water and lake access, need rooms, traffic and air pollution. He worked at sierra Club on sprawl and worked all over. He says if they don't build up they build out. If don't build it here it will be built somewhere else. His son did a concert at the Edgewater, the place needs some work, frustrating to walk about to edge of bar and not be able to enjoy the lake. From a clean water point of view, if built in Middleton there would be more run off and water pollution. On the jobs issue, there was a lot of talk about PLA, as a union president, if the workers say its ok, I go with the workers, cuz if have a PLA doesn't mean anything if no project. On traffic, don't need to drive to downtown location. Finally, climate change, Wisconsin is 12th worst on business climate, people are doing backflips to do this project, you can send important message that the way to get jobs is to work with people that build things.

Clear on Landmarks
He couldn't support the Landmarks looking at the details of the 1940s building, which they were enthusiastic about and he says this.

Clear says can support most of it, but can't support approve, cuz it will get us back to where we are today and they could reject it out of spite, he is concerned they are handing them a loaded gun.

Clear accuses Verveer of filibustering
Clear:

Clear says that its hard to believe after all the hours UDC plan and landmarks have spent on this that my colleagues could not find a different way to do this, this is a blatant attempt to keep us here as long as possible until people begin to leave, vote it down, move to main motion.

Verveer:

Verveer asks for point of personal privilege, not trying to filibuster, trying to serve constituents who elected him to serve, would have had them available if he thought plan would take final action on March 22. He assumes it would have been referred, would have been better to have them addressed there. This is the most contentious project, these issues affect his constituents, this is a real life issue in terms of noise, issue at existing property, will talk as quickly as he can and not speak on main motion if can get this motion and one more on buses. He is not filibustering, that was an unfair characterization.

Read more!

What you really want to know . .. .

About that nearly 14 hour meeting . . ..

Conditional Use
Motion passes on voice vote, seems unanimous. The motion was to support the plan commissions "findings" or deny the appeal. More info in post 4.

PUD
There were several amendments in post 4 and 5.
Passes 16 - 4 with no votes being, Pham-Remmele, Rhodes Conway, Rummel and Verveer.

Landmarks
14 ayes on landmarks to overturn their decision, Thuy and Kerr went home. Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Solomon and Verveer voted no.
More info in post 5 on their discussion.

1965 Ordinance
Passed on a voice vote. No discussion or testimony at 6:30

TIF
TIF passes 12 - 6, 2 still absent (Kerr and Pham-Remmele)
No votes are Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Sanborn, Solomon, Verveer and Bidar-Sielaff.
More in post 5 on this issue.

The meeting ended at 7:42. I'm going to bed now, need to be at a staff meeting by 3:30.

Read more!

Live Blog of the Common Council Meeting, Part V (Final)

5:00 am . . . and I'm not kidding its getting light out.

VERVEER NOISE/HVAC MOTION
He reads a long motion, explains that they have had significant complaints about HVAC noise and he wants it to be reviewed by neighborhood, there are ways to mitigate it, says not a undue hardship on the applicant.

Maniaici says to look at A2 101.

Mayor says that is the motion. She wants a copy of what they are on.

Eagon says that with all due respect this is the 11th hour, if there is a noise issue, call building inspection, but do anything beyond that. He can't support it.

Schumacher says this is details that should have been done at plan commission, what is the typical process.

Murphy says review of HVAC is part of building plan review, prior to issuing building permit.

Schumacher asks wehre they are in the process.

Murphy says it won't happen for months. Murphy says time to accomplish it, prior to sign off.

Clear says that its hard to believe after all the hours UDC plan and landmarks have spent on this that my colleagues could not find a different way to do this, this is a blatant attempt to keep us here as long as possible until people begin to leave, vote it down, move to main motion.

Call the question - same result, Rhodes-Conway in the room.

Bruer says that he was just talking to Zoning Administrator who informed him that there are specific conditions about noise applied across the city and they are the standards the staff will review. He's sympathetic, the capable staff can deal with it.

it's been pointed out to me how pretty the sky is right now.

Verveer asks for point of personal privilege, not trying to filibuster, trying to serve constituents who elected him to serve, would have had them available if he thought plan would take final action on March 22. He assumes it would have been referred, would have been better to have them addressed there. This is the most contentious project, these issues affect his constituents, this is a real life issue in terms of noise, issue at existing property, will talk as quickly as he can and not speak on main motion if can get this motion and one more on buses. He is not filibustering, that was an unfair characterization.

Compton asks at what distance and what decibel level.

Verveer says he is asking plan commission to vet the issue, not staff sign off, this is a big deal in the neighborhood he represents.

Compton asks how far away, its a simple question.

Verveer asks her to read the motion, he just wants the issue heard.

Compton says that in her district she has issues with noise and hvac systems, there are some good thoughts regarding exterior mounted HVAC on a building of this height it shouldn't be an issue. This is too open, all they have to say they have a complaint for it to go back to the plan commission. [SHE DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE MOTION}

Rummel says that this looks at how to put in the equipment, once it is in it is harder to fix, see logic to do this on the front end, police have reasonableness standards, she has been through it and its not pretty.

Kerr passes.

motion fails on a voice vote.

VERVEER AMENDMENT ON BUSSES
That has been distributed, he reads it. No buses parked on streets, or where parking meters. He says this came up constantly, he has assured us repeatedly that this won't happen, the current practice and current operation, buses are routinely parked on Wis Ave, Dunn has assured this is not necessary. Doesn't think this is controversial.

Maniaci passes.

Passes on a voice vote.

VERVEER AMENDMENT ON VIEWSHED
Takes it off the table. Motion passes.

Verveer asks Murphy for language.

They are final editing, 30 seconds.

Murphy says that they suggest that they add to the second line, no structure, landscaping trees or other structures, except those on the PUD plans, strike "at city datum" language. Murphy says this addresses future changes not the Plan Commission version of things.

Verveer says that is the intent.

Maniaci asks how this would impact a tent for inclement weather.

Murphy says temporary structure not permitted depending upon the height.

Manaici says the railing and street lighting would be in violation, does that seem correct.

Murphy says that would be ok, but tents and other temporary structures could be a problem.

Maniaci removes temporary language.

Verveer says its friendly.

Eagon says for months we as a council have been obsessed with images and views, he doesn't know the elevations, can understand the intent, can't support it without a picture.

Cnare passes.

Maniaci asks about lighting plans and final plans that have not been submitted.

Murphy says good point, as items go to final approval, it could be an issue.

Maniaci says lighting is an issue, doesn't want to impact safety, so she would be interested in adding language that limits it to after final design approvals.

No objections.

Verveer asks Murphy if that language is appropriate, agrees with the intent.

Murphy says ok. Final approval by UDC is needed, as well as several city agencies.

Rummel says that we are in the trees now, if you want to tell them no trees, you should tell them now.

Motion is addition to PUD
10 ayes, 10 nos mayor votes no.
Nos were Clausius, Clear, Compton, Eagon, King, Palm, Pham-Remmele, Sanborn, Schumacher, Skidmore.

MAIN MOTION
Satya Rhodes Conway, 63% of her constituents against, in last 48 hours 300 emails, 78% against. That's not how she make her decisions per se, but they all opposed for different reasons. There has been alot said and written, not a small group for or against, that is patently false, this stretched throughout the city, very passionate, hopes refrain from characterizing support or opposition in a narrow way. The voices of people from her district sound louder to her.

ROLL CALL
Passes 16 4 with no votes being, Pham-Remmele, Rhodes Conway, Rummel and Verveer.

LANDMARSK APPEAL
Clear reads a long motion I didn't get. He says what is not in there is saying the Landmarks made the wrong decision or did not follow the laws before them. He says standards for council are different and they find them met.

Bidar-Sielaff says this is contentious in her district, what she heard today was that she has heard from many constituents, she has heard from both sides and she believes that one could end up on either side of the decision. She thinks Landmarks thoroughly and fairly looked at the information and made the decision she could. Process has been a huge part of the debate. Appeal is part of the process, this is not outside the process, its part of the process. She says that she looked at the appeal language. It does say we have to vote first based on the standards, 5 criteria and number one is the issue that created discussion. The ordinance is not clear about how volume relates to site. There are different metrics, can look at it from qualitative perspective, he wants to look at form qualitative perspective. The siting does provide for a taller building on the site, NGL should not be the primary building to arrive at that conclusion. The appeal language talks about preserving interest of public and owner. No one has contended that the Edgewater does not need to be renovated, there is interest in fixing up the property. She says that the hardship language and if it is self created, based on the language today, she doesn't believe the hardship is self created. She believe the economics of the need is important. She has thought long and hard and listened to testimony. She would like to repeat she is saddened to heard discussion about landmarks, they have been exemplary in their attempt to follow the law. She doesn't think this is a precedence. Appeal is for very special cases, normally do uphold landmarks.

Solomon says when he served as the WSJ ringleader for the Gang of 5, when we set economic development back 100 years, there were 6 reasons to vote against it and he is down to one and can't get passed it, think it will pass and that's ok. Look at language glad it says respectfully, thanks developer for going back to Landmarks, landmarks continues to get beat up, thinks that is a shame. Underline respectfully three times and put it in bold. He can't get past number one, thinks it sets a precedence that will show hardship to get around the landmarks ordinance, we should be careful about it.

Eagon echos support by Bidar-Sielaff, the reason he agrees with Solomons wording of respect, he sees different criteria between Landmarks and council the key word for him is purview. Our purview is broader, looking at intent and balancing test, he can view it in a larger purview. Can see where Landmarks comes from, but look through.

Kerr says she has to leave in 18 minutes, babysitter spend night on couch, husband in Houston, has to leave, asks to be excused.

Mayor says municipal court starts at 8:00.

Chris Schmidt talked briefly and I missed it.

Verveer wants to talk about his district. Proponents ask why not enthusiastic, he believes that overwhelming majority of his residents are in opposition to the plans as shown tonight. Missed some. He argued in December they should uphold Landmarks commission. He says what has changed since then was its bigger wider, taller, longer, the tower is more massive since December, how anyone who voted to uphold last December can vote differently he doesn't know. Missed some more. He says hardship was self created, council must find that it causes serious hardship . . . the owner has really only gone after one option of the tower which is larger, its hard to articulate serious hardship is present. He thinks serious hardship test is not met, but even if it is, it is self created. The last part of the ordinance shall not be a basis to reverse. The hardship was not created by the ordinance. Hotel is permitted, just not this big, the hardship is because of developer, they proposed a project that cannot be approved. Council has to uphold landmark's commission. Since December only gotten more massive. Those who voted to uphold in December, can't come to any other decision.

Maniaci says that she has had quite a journey on this topic, she was very excited to hear Julie Aulik talk about the environment, she made her arguments in better words, she thinks given the environment, there is a possibility hear. Developer did talk about hard ship. At landmarks Gorman came and she finds hardship on the site, era of building and characteristics and the site are an issue. The reasons she voted against the 850,000 cubic feet motion. She refers to a Gromacki memo and the 8 and 6 and 1 story building costs and in terms of the hardship if they could have done a smaller building they would have. She respects colleagues on landmarks, think purview is important, council has more to look at and has a balancing test.

Rummel says that district 6 is 9 - 1 opposed. Active district, aware of historic districts, a lot of concern about visually related area, when tried to think hard, might be responsible for making project bigger, the hardship is self created. In 1999 the same architect and issues of mold and water were right there and nothing changed. You heard other hoteliers talk about their investments.

interrupted,

Thuy just left.

Bidar-Sielaff, her constituent contact is 60 for, 40 against. She sees has respect for other districts. She says the project has been divisive. She wants to make sure we can divide our community into pro and anti landmarks and preservation. Missed a bunch.

It's 6:00

14 ayes on landmarks, Thuy and Kerr went home. Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Solomon and Verveer voted no.

TIF
Palm says his issue has always been the TIF, has consternation about the use of TIF, its a catch 22 project, we are supposed to do a public terrace, that is what caused the costs. His district response is 75% support the project, he didn't expect that. That is quite a show of luke warm support and his email was focused on TIF, some were concerned about schools, and taxes, but overall, he has supporters. He will be supporting TIF.

Compton says this is the one time she was opposed to TIF, She was opposed for the wrong reasons, it was personal. She talked about southwest TIF, appreciate Mayor will talk with me and Clear about making changes to industrial TID policy. Open your hearts and minds to that change. All of her doubts were dispelled by one thing, she would not be supporting it if it hadn't happen. In her district she was the most opposed. Majority is in support. Paul Riley raised issues, Gary Peterson says it will meet the standards, there is a review committee that will look at it.

Solomon says that TIF is his big concern as well, too many questions, too tired to think about it, the condo thing, battling numbers, transparency thing, and overall his biggest concerns are about policy exceptions, especially the self-supporting rule. Our staff who he has a great deal of faith in, all have said this is a worthwhile investment, that it will generate economic development and when look at it from that side, looking at comments about filling corporate projects, most opponents are against TIF, but in the end that is not what will happen. Staff say no city dollars will go for the project, so that helps him get over policy exceptions, but he also cares about the jobs and public access. He met with developer and . . . missed some . . ..

Still 40 members of the public hear.

Solomon has amendments.

Mayor says cleaning crew wants them out at 6:30, municipal court starts at 8:00.

SOLOMON AMENDMENT
1. Management agreement says that good testimony about 15 days, no more than 5 of the 15 days can be between June 1st and august 20th for complete closures. Changes 8 days for non-profits to 15 days.
2. Construction project, already negotiated a PLA, we'd like to see it. It's already done. Workforce development targets, he takes some of their language out, the agreement is between them and labor, but he is using that language, work with local programs, 3 job fairs, 25K donation, 25% of work hours in targeted folks - he's talking so fast I missed it. They defined targeted individuals up to $85K per year, he used poverty level standards.
3. Deals with neutrality for unions trying to organize. Second bullet speaks to 25% of jobs exceed living wage through wages or benefits unless they have a collective bargaining agreement, that language is in ordinance. Last part is 5% of jobs should be from targeted populations.

He says that developer hasn't necessarily agreed to all these.

Maniaci wants to ask Dunn, they said no, he ask Mike May for his thoughts on this, any concerns on attaching this to the TIF cuz its the PLA and targets being met, previous conversations with his staff they had concerns.

Zellhoefer wonders how city monitors it, is it DCR and do they have staff. The second comment in the construction portion she is worried about if unions would have a problem and say "if permitted in collective bargaining agreements"

Maniaci asks about poverty level definition.

Zellhoefer says . . . missed it. . . .

Solomon says that he meant to include that they would submit report and if less than 80% of goal the city would meet with them to talk about how to get back on target. He is not sure there is more that they could do. Sorry he left that out, he'll draw up the language.

Eagon asks if this is new precedence.

Zellhoefer sasy with the Marcus Hotel, but that was pre living wage and they also agreed to neutrality.

Verveer appreciates and supports it, he photo copied language from Marcus in 1999. he is not opposed, this is not new territory, missed a bunch . . . actually a lot . . . At Monday nights meeting they asked about neutrality, Dunn hasn't had a warm working relationship like they have with the trades, but there is not much to negotiate up to that point, language is straightforward, its soemthing communities do all over america. He says alders have talked to the unions, they are interested in representing the employees, missed a bunch more, its nearly 6:30.

He says that the public interest is that we are protecting the citys' interest as an investor, wants to make sure tax increment is protected, also social justice issues. Please support

Solomon has more language . . . he reads it. Will have to type it later.

Mayor says need to be out by 7:00, not 6:30, 6 alders still in the queue.

King says that we are going to lose everything, is there some way to deliberate this aspect without holding up the whole TIF vote by referring something, we and developer haven't looked at them, he is comfortable and doesn't want to lose the issue, will take more time to review but doesn't want to hold up the whole project.

Mayor says you could approve the TIF and then amend it later.

Cnare asks Zellhoefer about the reports, does the agreement expire in 10 years or does it run in perpetuity or does it go on for ever and ever.

Zellhoefer says that TIF agreement will terminate when city gets increment back, Cnare says it could expired quicker.

Bruer says that this is deja vu and a whole bunch of other things . . . he says this is a slippery slope, doing policy on the fly, this is bad for public participation, if this was the same as Marcus it would be different, today heard from trades and developer and then he says more things that he claims are interesting and I'm not sure that it is . . . :) sorry, its late/early, we've been here for 12 hours.

There's still 75+ hardy Madisonians (or not) in the room, and not a one of them sleeping.

Bruer still talking, asks Brian not to hold TIF hostage, find a better way to do this to make the changes, still talking . . . .says we shouldn't micromanage union contracts, partnership is working with labor and developer, lets have a time out, we have time. It can come back later. The Trades are dying to get called on, they want to address it. We can work with them in the future. Vote down the amendment, allow process and checks and balances play itself out.

Manaici thanks Brian, developer has seen this, a number of things in the document that developer has a issues with. Cuz developer and city attorney have issues, she wants to make amendments. She makes a substitute . . . Mayor and Bruer tell her what motion to make, to place it on file and have a resolution at the next meeting. She defers. Bruer makes the motion. They will have a motion at a later date.

Solomon asks if they are serious, look at what is in here, can anyone look in the mirror and say they disagree, a whole bunch of yeses. WE are giving them $16M and we don't want to ahve something, some goals, no claw back, we're just setting goals to get decent paying jobs, and if they don't meet the goals they jsut have to meet with us and talk to get back on target, I have 8 of you saying you disagree with it. That is shocking to him, the developer and he are close, they are close to full agreement on 80% of it. Agreement with the developer and you place it on file. That would blow my mind if the developer agrees and you place it on file. If you disagree with targeted goals for minority hiring and good jobs, someone needs to take me out for a beer and explain this.

They table the motion at suggestion of mayor. Voice vote is close.

1965 ORDINANCE
They place 22 on the table, there are registrants on 64. Mayor asks if anyone wishes to speak on 64. No one chooses to speak. Motion is to adopt. No discussion. Compton light blinking not there. No discussion. Voice vote passes, some no votes. 64 is adopted.

INTRODUCTIONS FROM THE FLOOR
Bidar Sielaff, by title only, immigration policy resolution. Referred to next meeting.

Rhodes-Conway has 18563 resolution that renewable energy premium of MG&E
should not be supported. I think referr

Rummel number 18555 for MSA services, referred to BPW.

Rummel 18565 on public market report. BOE, EDC, CDA and Plan?

Cnare introduces 18564 2010 budget amendment for Community Development for youth activities. Refer to Community Services and Board of Estimates

RECESS
They take a 2 minute recess. It's 6:53.

Farmers Market setting up outside. Taking more than 2 minutes.

Just talked to one of the clerks, has to be at work soon, will go home and take a shower and go to work.

7:08 ROLL CALL
Kerr excused, Pham-Remmele absent. Everyone else here.

Motion is to place it on file and have a separate resolution at a later date. Mayor suggests referring motion to next meeting. Mayor says they will place on file and Mayor will work with them.

Solomon doesn't want to withdraw, we are making a huge statement to every constituent who has said don't give $16M of our money to support this project, if we pass this today they will feel better, they don't feel like there is enough public benefit to justify a handout. For some it will be better, for some it won't be enough, they will feel like we heard them. These are not unreasonable, respects the community development initiative, he was trying to make sure their language was consistent. He says they will just do the workforce development program targets, they will get copy of PLA and 3rd bullet is report to us. This is all what they already agreed to. He wants to call developer back up. Wants to show we are getting a public benefit, I think we are there, this is our chance now. We're going to talk about TIF we debated fo r10 months, this is the time, let make sure there are community benefits.

Verveer asks what the motion is.

Mayor says place amendment on file but reintroduce amendemnt along same lines at next council meeting.

Verveer urges them to vote, Solomon won't be here for next 6 weeks, we are doing him as a colleague a disservice, he won't be here to participate in the next month or two, they are very close, but for some reasons don't want it to go forward, don't understand it. It's a disservice to him since he won't be able to attend meetings for the next many weeks. Oppose placing on file and vote up or down.

Sanborn says that no one should be casting votes on personal lives of makers of the motion. He is offended that quotas are based on skin color or veteran status without regard for income. This is the second time there were these last minute changes without committees or discussions, this is wrong, reject out of hand.

Schumacher says that you can disagree with Solomon and still walk away as friends, policy making for personality is not a good policy. Hotel not built yet, this can make rounds again. He has issues with the policy. These issues can backfire badly, we could have less employment. Labor unions already have agreements in place, that is a sign it is working and we don't need to interfere. Look at LA who might be filing bankruptcy.

Palm says that this is a huge thing to be doing last minute, we have heard about process over and over, but if you listen to what Verveer says the maker of the motion should be here to debate it. Two members left and can't be here, if going to play personal politics about who is here or not, thinks admirable and wants it to succeed, union member himself, but at the last moment, can conceptualize what this should be. Work has been done, we just didn't see it til now. With heavy heart supports referral to another time so it can get the due diligence and public can speak. This will give them an opportunity to speak. Tomorrow they won't tear off the 70s addition, we have a few weeks to hammer this out.

Cnare asks if we had a deadline has that been established, is there a date by which we need to have it done?

Zellhoefer says many pre-conditions in the agreement, this would be another pre-condition.

Cnare asks if they could delay it for 10 weeks to work on it, would that still be able to finish the paperwork.

Zellhoefer wants to start work right away.

Solomon, please don't worry about my surgery, that shouldn't impact votes. There are three parts, management agreement makes sure PAC is in place, developer agrees with the language. The construction part is the already negotiated pla, the second is the workforce targets already agreed upon, we are just putting it in our tif agreement. 3rd part is just a report on goals they came up with. The operational part of the contract, there is nothing on operational phase, he can see how you might be against jobs for minorities and veterans and low income individuals, can see how one or two might be offended by that. The only think that happens if they don't meet the goals after two years is they have to sit down and talk with use. We have public benefits, a union on board and a developer, this is the time to do it. Missed a bunch.

Maniaci is angry right now, she is against it because our meeting got hijacked, we recessed, the council is a party to this, its a respect thing, you talk about wanting to be responsible, it more rahs to throw things in at the last minute. Upset because working on the issue and at the very end of thd day, this is not the time to bring this forward. She's at a loss, nothing in this document she disagrees with, its the process and what we have gone through, this is not good policy making.

Eagon echos that thought. Voting to table isn't a vote against Solomon or card check, there are avenues to introduce this later. He wants to say reasonable people can disagree.

King says ditto. None of constituent contact was about this, they just want the project built. We didn't talk about what we should have talked about. More public benefit won't reasonable with this particular thing, we should do it thoughtfully and do it at a later date when we are in a consensus mode and get something productive done.

Bidar- Sielaff says we should all take a deep breath. Alder Solomon was trying to do the best, we have all brought and amendment at the last minute, he is bringing a good conversation, we can place on file or not, won't vote to place on file, this is important. 14 hours into meeting, lest try to take it for what it is, we sometimes do things at the last minutes because we have other jobs.

ROLL CALL
Placed on file 11 - 7 with two absences (Kerr and Pham-Remmele).
No votes - to not place on file were Cnare, Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Solomon, Verveer, Bidar-Sielaff, Schmidt

MAIN MOTION
Compton wants to say something, Mayor says that municipal court will be starting, Compton says TIF is not a hand out, not a gift, its an investment shared. She goes on . . . I tuned out. She says they are investing in the project, they will have dang good returns.

Rummel says she thought about it alot, thinks TIF is an important tool, is this our priority to fund a luxury hotel, she wants to raise the question, they are breaking rules, if you vote for this, will you tell your constituents that we are extending the TID to 2019 and that it is not going to the schools. You will have to make that case and I haven't heard anyone talk about how we will stop the blight in the district. There is money for small cap TIF but for her constituents, what about the E Wash Corridor or Industrial TIDs. Yes, it does alot of things, but the long term jobs are not even living wage jobs, how to you get by on $10.16 per hour? Is our priority to create this for the community, we need to step up more than this.

ROLL CALL
TIF passes 12 - 6, 2 still absent (Kerr and Pham-Remmele)
No votes are Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Sanborn, Solomon, Verveer and Bidar-Sielaff.

END
Maniaci says thank you, especially rookie class.

Clear says made history in a number of ways, thanks and move adjournment.

Meeting ends at 7:42.

Court needs room in 18 minutes.
Read more!

Live Blog of the Common Council Meeting, Part IV (Final)

12:55, 26 more speakers . . . no breaks!

Dennis Davidsaver lives and works downtown, asks them to follow laws and look at benefits and approve it. Lives in a neighborhood with large corporate neighbors and they contribute to safety and upkeep of neighborhood. They create economic development and ability to live and work in same neighborhood. Monona Terrace was a split issue too, but can anyone argue the positive impact they will have. Time to take another bold step forward. Edgewater is a landmark, but well worn, its a unique site, needs complex plan, fortunate to have Hammes to solve these issues to bring Edgewater back. We have an experienced and capable developer. Your approval will bring economic development. Gary Gorman sends regards from China, thinks it should be passed as well.

Bert Stitt and one other person went home.

I spoke - can't say what I said . . .

Rosemary Lee talking . . . missed it as I returned to my seat and talked to others.

[IT WAS JUST POINTED OUT TO ME THAT ITS GETTING LATE, MAYOR DAVE TOOK HIS CONTACTS OUT]

Camille Haney nothing to add, sat here for so long going to get two cents in, and she does, repeats testimony from Landmarks essentially and I'm not retyping it, saving my fingers for the actual debate, if we ever get there.

Mayor says all the rest of the speakers are in support it's 1:15 and I'm just taking a break, you'll have to go check out Kristin's live blog . . .

Those who spoke in support include:
- Melissa Mayer
- Allen Arntsen, Hammes paid lobbyist
- Amy Supple, Hammes paid lobbyist, passes
- Ken Saiki, Hammes paid lobbyist, left
- Steve Beitlow, Building Trades council, of course they, too, have skin in the game, but they don't want a PLA
- David Walsh, from NGL
- Michael Engelberger, Labor speaks
- Susan Schnmitz DMI passes
- Paul Davidsaver passes
- Kelley Star King - went home
- Mark Hoffman - Labor
- Tom Bergamini passes
- Ryan from labor passes
- Erik Minton went home
- Erin Freeburg left
- George Kampersorer left
- James Tye pass
- Michael Christopher passes
- Paul Davidsaver passes
- Dan Cornelius left

[HEY ALL THOSE GUYS IN THE ORANGE SHIRTS THAT WERE IN HERE WHEN ONLY SPEAKERS WERE SUPPOSED TO GET SEATS NEVER SPOKE . . . WAY TO GO LABOR GUYS. I GUESS THE RULES DIDN'T APPLY TO THEM.

QUESTIONS OF SPEAKERS
None.

CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING/RECESS
They decide to take a break, 9 want one, be back at 1:50

[IT LOOKS LIKE ABOUT A DOZEN PIZZAS WERE CONSUMED, THE MACHINES ARE OUT OF DIET COKE DOWNSTAIRS, THE CHOCOLATE COVERED COFFEE BEANS ARE KICKING IN, ITS JUST ABOUT 2:00, ALL ALDERS STILL PRESENT, NOT ALL IN THE ROOM]

PUBLIC COMMENTS ON TIF
They give people 4 minutes since they pared down their speakers

Robert Hundun, Hunden Strategic Partners, they did the hotel studies, he talks about what changed since they did their studies, but the Edgewater is still the best bet for the downtown. He was asked to review additional analysis, they have the HMI study and they looked at it and also looked at other documents to provide their opinion. His role is not a proponent or against a project, but his analysis is that this is a compelling project. The HMI study, their methodology, they did not see the Edgewater as a near luxury hotel and we see it differently, they didn't think it would perform differently or as well as the Hilton, they think the Hilton is great, when you have a high calliber hotel come in with marginal or moderate space . . . 30 seconds, says adr is off, the occupancy rates are off, the jobs impact is off, Mayor cuts him off

Bob Dunn - 4 minutes, different perspective than the market study, this is a very useful study, they did market research and all come to a number of conclusions, in looking at the analysis, with respect to the market, they exclude 107 rooms there, ignores the mixed use nature of the development, doesn't seem to be consistent with current design, rate for their hotel is at 110% or 115% of the market, could go on, also talks about what happened when Hilton entered the market, 23% market increased at low point in industry on heels of 911 and the results weren't that bad. He says the revenue is off - non-room revenue after spending $100M only grows by 15% so it takes absolute most conservative approach to the analysis that you can take. It represents a 9% decrease from the revenue. He's rattling off numbers . . . .he gets cut off.

Michael Hule, did the study,

[I MISSED WHAT WAS GOING ON BECAUSE A WHOLE BUNCH OF US WHO REGISTERED TO SPEAK WERE NOT LISTED AS SPEAKERS, WE HAD TO GET THE CLERK TO FIND OUR SLIPS, I DON'T KNOW WHO AGREED THAT THE SPEAKERS WOULD BE LIMITED, BUT IT WASN'T THE SPEAKERS]

5 Hoteliers speak . . . I'm sorry, I didn't blog it, I was making sure I had my testimony ready on TIF.

Lucy Mathiak here as an individual member of Board of Education, elected for last 4 years, on finance committee, spent 2 years as liaison on common council school board liaison committee. On Joint Board of Review. Not opposed to TIF. This is not private money, TIF decisions have profound impacts on other taxing authorities, the public schools are a major partner and you are loaning them our money as well. This affects all of us. The schools are here to educate kids, not to be an economic development engine. She says state and federal decisions have eroded support for education. They lost $18M in state aid in one year. In the first 8 years they have had many cuts adding up to $22M, they have more kids that are hungry with little or no support with home and with little health care, including mental health. We have some schools at 90% or more poverty level. We can't tax to the max, cuz they can't afford it, but keeping TIF open, money won't come back to schools and cut off . . . says thank you Mayor Dave, I know you care. [I THINK THAT WAS SARCASM]

Gary Peterson speaks, supports Edgewater, has done blight studies and TIF studies, did blight studies in the 60s, talks about the issues he ahs seen, Mansion Hill area is blighted under state law. We need it to assist with development of Edgewater, problems area wide, the alternatives they were shown should have had other options and

Robbie Webber says she wouldn't vote for it, huge amount of money, breaks many of our policies, we looked at TIF policy and made rules for a good reasons. The 50% rule was put in place, this is 240%, it will not support itself, won't pay it back. It breaks the policies, when you add these things up and doesn't that raise soem red flags, she voted against a popular good project when she was on the council, this is far beyond that, this is not a good use of $16M. The public amenities and public use they are going to be able to close the plaza for 15 days of the year, when, every Saturday in the summer, if approve it, put serious restrictions on when the plaza can be closed and make sure you get real public access. Urge not to approve it, if do restrict number of weekends and summer nights that they can close the publci access.

I spoke, most of it was in my previous post on the TIF meeting last night, well, Monday night.

Pete Ostlind says that the costs in the report from the expert don't add up to $16M and many areas included in the public access are items that are not public access. He talks about the Brasser numbers, he says the conservation easement is where we preserve what was already supposed to be preserved. We've sold it and paid for it many times, this doesn't pass the smell test. I missed a bunch.

Ledell Zellers speaks, public plaza can be closed any time, except from 7 - 8 am, that is not a public plaza.

2:40 QUESTIONS OF STAFF
Bidar Sielaff asks about jobs and hotels, what ratio do you use per room, what is the industry standards.

1.5 - 1.75 per room

So fair to say for 200 room hotel?

It would be 150

Eagon asks Dunn, on the condos and public access and what $16M will go for?

Dunn says that total cost is $34M, he repeats himself he says $16M are the public access areas, there are other structural things that need to happen. In the city's analysis, they deleted costs that still have to be paid for, he can go through it in great detail if they would like. You are contributing $16M of the $34.

Eagon asks about condos and how they benefit the project.

Dunn says that per TIF policy no recognition of the condos, they didn't like the city's approach, that aspect of the program is not eligible, we are looking at the total new construction, basing value of hotel on . . .

ooops, interrupted . . .

Verveer asks about the condos, how many condo units will this be on the top two floors?

Dunn says you could have 10 small units, they will not have that many units, will have small number of larger units, he thinks 6 or fewer.

Verveer asks how many suites.

Dunn says 10.

Verveer says he thought it was 17 per floor.

Dunn says they would be suites.

Verveer asks why if they are condos why will it have no impact on hotel revenues.

Dunn says city looks at it and assume new construction is fully occupied. They think of it as 6 floors of hotel room and 2 floors of condos. If they built it as hotel suits, it would generate extra income. Condos are important because the profit from the condos will go to the public access part of the program.

Verveer asks if they approve land use but not the TIF, what would you build without it.

Dunn says there is no project?

Verveer asks if it is for the PAC?

Dunn says we can't take it apart and put it back together without dealing with the PAC, he thinks that in order to pursue the project, removal of the 70s addition, its all tied together, with no TIF, there is no project. With the redesign from UDC, there is $8M more in costs, no additional rooms or condos, $8M of costs and worked hard to over come it, a portion covered by NGL for parking. PAC has gotten more expensive with each iteration, if more expensive and take TIF away.

Dunn shows the slide that shows the changes from each project. He says the public access piece is getting more expensive.

Verveer asks about management agreement, he says they got the different versions of the public access agreement, it doesn't have the word draft on it, told there will be a process later, is this document negotiable, or is the negotiation done? Is this something to be further negotiated.

Dunn says it has been negotiated, one thing that is important is that when first started the negotiations, not clear who would own and operate the space and the concept of that agreement was that we would negotiate something that would work no matter who owns and manages it. He says it is reciprocal. You have to look at both sides of the agreement, he thinks it is the principle terms, but there is more work to be done.

Verveer asks what that means, room for refinement?

Dunn says the basic terms are agreed to, but work to be done, this is a partnership, both parties need to find good solutions. They have looked at how Monona Terrace operates, more work to be done, but it will take to work through it.

Verveer asks what are we getting for $16M and he has concerns about specifics in the May 12 document, you're saying that the basic tenants of this management agreement have been negotiated, is that right, and the council will look at the specifics later. Would you object to major modifications?

Dunn says he'd have to understand a major modification. We could end up on either side of that agreement and city could too, what is a major modification. Is it hours of operation, event space.

Verveer says its all of the above. He has concerns on page 3, certain areas could be open 1 hour a day.

Dunn says that is not accurate.

Verveer asks if would negotiate it further.

Dunn wants to speak to one hour per day, he says on the plaza there is the right of way, that is what the city has today, In last iterations, they expanded the public space to include more, they get benefit of private space owned outside the right of way. He says the way the agreement is written there are three areas to be used for events, when there is an event, the public still has full access rights, they can still go down the stair and to the waterfront. I missed some, he says that it will be open more than one hour a day, 15 days a year they can close it completely, for instance 4th of July [GUESS THE DUDE WON'T BE WATCHING RHYTHM AND BOOMS] He says they should also have 8 days for community based organizations with no cost to them. He can's see how people interpret the document any other way.

Rummel says sorry she missed yesterday, she had a neighborhood meeting planned for a long time. Right now, public access can't be closed, with this they can.

Dunn says that they should clarify closed, he says if there is a wedding 4 - 10 in one area, what we were striving for was to bring those events downtown and be open to public, that event would take place in one area, but the public has access to the other space.

Rummel says people say we are paying for what we already have, what do we have now with the 1965 ordinance.

Dunn says rights of the public today, you could go there right now, almost all space is controlled area for mechanical equipment, there is 16 of space available, the majority is not accessible.

Rummel says she wants to know waht the spirit was, not the poor execution. Assuming you will charge to close off the space, is that part of the non-room revenue.

Dunn says you give 16m and we give 18m we take on operating costs forever, so yes, we generate revenue, they said city could own and operate and we could rent it, and response was that city won't put $34M in and maintain it, but we would like the rights for the public which led us to where we are today. Missed some.

Rummel asks how much time do they need for the event space to generate the revenue they need. Totally open to public or partially open to the public, neither is bad.

Rummel says she wants to know changes so they know what they are getting. The trades guy says that they don't need a PLA but heard you they have PLA can you explain.

Dunn says there is a PLA, but there is no project to sign it around.

Rummel asks about the jobs. How many at the living wage.

Dunn says look at packet from last October or November, they haven't changed, but been greatly distorted. He explains the numbers are on and off site jobs, missed a bunch again . . . lots of negotiations and side conversations going on, very interesting, don't know what they are about, but its 3:15 and people are looking weary.

Rummel asks about Landmarks and tax credits, would that reduce the cost of the project.

Dunn says not the cost, but becomes a source of financing, they do account for that on their side of the ledger. He says these conservation easements are used, if we can't do all that, its our problem.

Rummel asks about what happens if you don't have the money, will you give up parts of project for tax credits.

Dunn says he can't say.

Rummel asks if they would forego it.

Dunn says that they have to explore it.

Kerr says there was negotiation, who on the city side invovled.

Dunn says Gromacki and Zellhoefer.

Verveer asks Hule to finish his tesimony.

Hule talks about Hilton, says the Hilton was necessary to make Monona Terrace successful, that was one of the main driving points, this project is across downtown, not terribly far, but not attached to or adjacent to the convention center. It won't be participating in the convention business, if it is going to hit 70% occupancy they would need to lower rate to participate and also lower rates to get state business.

Verveer asks him to respond to Hundun's claim your study is flawed.

Hule two different experts with different points of view, can have a luxury hotel, the projections on this hotel will not reach the rates, the Pfister doesn't.

Pham-Remmele asks one of the hotelier, she asks at this time with the economy how well is the business doing. How successful?

A guy says room tax for 2009 was down 2009 and now see the room tax for first quarter up a little bit, so no where near 2008 and won't be there until 2013 at the earliest. 2010 will be above 2009 and it will take a while to get back.

Pham-Remmele says rarely pay rack rate, wonders how many of the rooms are taken for rate asking for, can go to hotwire and get cheap rates.

Guy says that that is what most people do. So, all hotels at one level or another, we participate in Orbitz, Hotline etc, also do government business, $70 is the state rate, we do it ta fill room and keep employees, room rates are down and will continue to be done. Travelers know the deals are out there.

Pham-Remmele says used to book rooms for conferences in 90s but now have to do teleconference, she can't afford it. Many peopel she knows people can't afford to travel, concerned how many would pay $300 to stay in the hotel. She asks about the restaurant, nice waiter, but within a few minutes, he couldn't wait on their table, like him and glad to tip, he was called to work, but told to go home, when talk about jobs, she feels bad, person shows up for work, he didn't get paid for the night. [PEOPLE ARE LOSING IT . . . ]

He says that happens in all restaurants.

She's still talking and repeating herself.

Mayor closes the hearing on 22.

LAND USE/PUD
Cnare makes motion of adoption, and recommendations of plan commission with an amended condition. She talks about the letter from Brad Murphy on Secretary of Interior language is struck, with the exception of the entrance, the one story addition and some other area, the design has to go back to Landmarks' commission.

QUESTIONS
Rummel would like to see it, it was alot of words. Clear is going to get it printed.

Bidar-Sielaff asks Murphy about the memo and the conversation, did he say they don't have purview over this project.

Murphy says yes, he didn't talk to state, Tim Parks did, they don't have jurisdiction unless they apply for tax credits. They can't review it, the city can't compel them to do so.

Bidar-Sielaff says no jurisdiction. Murphy agrees. She asks Parks to confirm, she says yes.

Mayor asks if while getting copies should they take up 5.

CONDITIONAL USE
Mayor asks May to explain.

Clear moves to accept the appeal.

They vote wihtout discussion.

Cnare moves to uphold the decision based on materials and what they heard, she reads the items they need to find. I audio recorded this, and can type it later.

It's seconded.

She hopes that they read the 120 pages of the transcript, she says look at the standards, they had three motions they take at the same time, she says that if you look at the meeting, they had a report from staff, they went through step by step and we have discussion and it doesn't always touch on each point, instructions say if approve and you agree standards are met, then move to council, they only say to say why not if they feel it does not meet it. If denied, they tell developer what they can do to get approval. They acted like they do. 7 hours of public testimony, they asked questions, this was not taken in order. They heard that it would improve the area, improve the tax base and parking. Also discussed waterfront setback. There were 67 people registered in support, 11 in opposition. She tells them to look at the staff report. staff report says the standards "could be met" she thinks that going through the experience, reading the minutes etc, if you return to plan commission, it won't change anything, it wasn't unanimous, shouldn't stand in way of looking at transcript and move on.

Kerr says she id defensive as the maker of the motion, she felt the conditional use standards had been met, heard testimony, read the report and felt standards were met, if she felt they weren't met she would have made a different motion. Hard not to be defensive, feels like plan commission did their job and wants to reassure her, political pressure wouldn't have an impact on her, if she felt she should, she'd deny it.

Compton says she would bet the ranch on that statement. She asks about why they are using the verbaiage about it being better for public welfare instead of not hurt it.

Murphy says he didn't make the motion.

Kitty Noonan drafted the motion, lets heard form her says the Mayor.

Noonan says it comes from testimony from the transcript.

Compton asks if that is how to address?

Noonan says the standard is negative instead of positive, but that is the way it was in the testimony.

Compton is uncomfortable with the language, not taking a pill that will make everything wonderful and beautiful instead of it won't harm me. Is there a reason.

Noonan says that without the finding being noted, that this was a way to highlight the testimony and findings that underlay the decision they made.

Cnare says this isn't an executive summary, if you want to list the standards, they plan commission did its job and it should be passed tonight.

Schumacher says not on plan commission as long as Kerr and Cnare, he is grumpy, this appeal stinks. The same group that doesn't want us to overturn one commission but wants this overturned. Plan commission has great members and staff. Given we had 7 hours of testimony he find audacity to come after us, appreciates what Cnare did.

Rummel says she understands that nothing should change, but plan commission should have better best practices. UDC doesn't have this kind of staff, we are encouraged to be clear when we find it meets standards. There was 7 hours of testimony and maybe someone felt the case wasn't made and you didn't talk about it, maybe you felt like it, but you didn't deliberate in any verbal way. You should be more mindful.

Bidar-Sielaff says she is clarifying info about the Standards if the they apply for tax credits.

Motion passes on voice vote, seems unanimous.

TAKE 3 BACK OFF THE TABLE
They all have copies now, the rest of us don't.

Compton asks a question I missed.

Murphy says that as they read 1, 2 and 3, the condition says that those elements must be submitted for review by the landmarks commission, doesn't require approval, just review. If you want landmarks to approve it, you should add the word "and approval" in 2 and 3.

Compton appreciates the recommendation but she does not want to.

Murphy says that all it requires is review. If PUD approved that is all that is required.

Compton asks if they could refer it many times, is there a reason it needs to go to Landmarks.

Murphy can't answer it.

Cnare says this reflects what the plan commission wanted, can't do what they wanted, they think historic renovation is important to the project and it should be looked at someone who is an expert. If state won't do it, would like Landmarks to do it, its comfort language to say they think historic preservation is important.

Compton asks if it is just a review it?

Cnare hopes they will offer concrete advice and developer will think it is helpful. She would ask Noonan what is in their purview. She says that landmarks asked to see it, it shouldn't be a big problem for them or the developer.

Noonan says not formal construct for the review, doesn't know Landmarks well, knows they do review things from time to time and these conditions were put on the conditions of appropriateness, staff and commission would review to see if they met.

Verveer moves separation of the 1940's language. They can vote on the rest of the motion.

Verveer asks Murphy about the suggested language change.

Murphy says when they send something back for final approval it is for the approval of the final details, not just review, if you want to be consistent, you would require approval.

4 AM . . . sigh . . .

He says that in number one might want to say that it has to be conducted to Secretary of the Interior standards for the exterior only.

I missed a bunch of Murphy explanation of adding language to the extent possible as approved by the Landmarks commission in item one.

Verveer makes motion to include approval and the language for one. Compton says it is not friendly.

DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT
Hopes not controversial, he says he support it, appreciates Kerr's attempt to respect the integrity of the tower. Landmarks commission can take care of the details, it was their intention to see the details later, they were not presented to them, this is the minutia they deal with regularly. This isn't controversial.

Compton says she has a problem cuz Landmarks opposes the project, woudl like ti to go to another body. She realizes not popular.

Calls the question.

Mayor ignores them and calls on Rummel.

Rummel says something I didn't understand, my bad.

Bidar-Sielaff support this, if modify decision of landmarks, this should be in the language, they need to review it. There has been a collegial conversation with the 40s building and there is an interest with the applicant to work with them, this is how we do the process.

Maniaci asks if this would jeopardize the the Certificate of Appropriateness.

May says no, these are common conditions, its a completely different opinion.

Manaici says that this will not hold up the project?

May says it shouldn't this is routine.

Clear says that they can't issue the building permit until cleared, they would still have veto approval.

Murphy says that they can appeal to the Common Council if concerned, this was staff's original recommendation. Missed some.

Bidar Sielaff asks if this was added to COA (Cert of Approval) would . . .oh, I don't know.

Rummel asks if we just leave it off, what would it do, we are granting and exception, can they delete the last part.

Murphy says the exception were based on conversation with state, those three exception that wouldn't comply with secretary of interior standards, that is why they are there, we are certain those elements of the project, even tho desirable, they most likely would not comply with the Secretary of Interior standards.

Rummel says he's willing to find out more.

Verveer assures Compton that the landmarks commission agreed and loved the 1940s buidling renovation, so I don't want you to think they don't want the project done, Manaici can confirm it, they won't put up road blocks to that. He also wants to address Rummel that if they pursue tax credits, this language won't preclude that, they still need the full review by the State Historical Society.

Clear says can support most of it, but can't support approve, cuz ti will get us back to where we are today and they could reject it out of spite, he is concerned they are handing them a loaded gun. [REALLY?]

Kerr says the front canopy as designed is better than built, but Secretary standards require to restore what was built. She think people on landmarks would agree.

Compton doesn't' doubt integrity of landmarks, but we should remove cloud or question, she wants to have it reviewed by landmarks and approved by staff.

Bidar-Sielaff says this is not a group of obstructionists, they will provide feedback and review. They have seen them work, they don't seem concerned that it will stop the project. Has been through hours of meetings, the 40s building is collegial, this is the usual process, she doesn't see that as problematic.

Clear agrees with Bidar-Sielaff, he thinks the could review, wants to go back to Maniaci's language at Landmarks, gave discretion to staff or landmarks commission.

Compton wants to rebut - city attorney says this is three - they give her leeway after she argues with them.

Compton says that no one is challenging the integrity of landmarks, it might sound like it, we're dealing with a business and millions of dollars, can little thinks happen, minor things could slow things done, she wants to remove a cloud, she thinks they can be successful, its not her $100M and need to protect all parties, we have a history of referrals, if we pass all this tonight, then move it forward, doesn't want it to trip on this language. Staff should approve.

Mayor re-reads the motion. Have audio, can add it later.

ROLL CALL
Passes 12 - 8
Nos are Clear, Compton, King, Maniaci, Pham-Remmele, SAnborn, Schumacher, Skidmore.

Amendment passes on voice vote, some nos.

AMENDMENT ON CHANGE TO PAC
Verveer has another amendment
Any change to public access component shall be considered a major alteration, especially any change which would include fencing or gates, to be approved by Common Council.

Verveer says that it wouldn't be minor alteration changed by alder and staff, major alteration has a public process and can have public input.

Eagon asks if it is any change, he asks if it could say any non-minor alterations.

Verveer says that it is no disrespect to the process, but it is his intent to have ti be a major intent, asks Murphy to give examples about what the alterations would be.

Murphy says the physical site plan for the area, not the use and maintenance agreement for the public space that will come back later.

Verveer agrees, he not talking about the agreement yet to be approved.

Murphy says if there is a proposal to make the spaces less accessible, that is not minor and should be considered by plan commission or common council as major alterations. There may be some minor changes between now and when building permits are issued. If the project is approved, the plans will have to meet all conditions of approval and city engineer says we need to ensure the areas are accessible. There will be some evolution of design between now and final sign off, if staff can approval things that are minor and consistent with conditions of approval.

Eagon want the language to be changed.

Verveer says there would be no point, its not a hardship. If it is minusculely minor, they can approve it.

Maniaci asks if it includes snow fencing, is it temporary or permanent.

Verveer asks if it si during the construction phase?

Manici says any at all.

Verveer is worried about fences for events, even if erected and removed every Saturday during the high season it should be approved. If it is for repair or maintenance or during construction it is ok.

Maniaci asks Murphy if he agrees with the assessment given the language.

Murphy's only concern is the one Eagon expressed, "any change" to the plans reviewing this evening, there will be changes, some will be minor or major and this suggests any deviation is a major alteration, and approved by plan and council.

Maniaci says a snow fence would go through three committees.

Murphy thought temporary fences would not be covered, but Verveer said it would.

Manaici asks if they would have to approve every configuration for temporary fences.

Murphy says that is not a practical solution, maker of motion should explain.

Solomon makes motion to say, after any change that limits accessibility or freedom of movement shall be considered a major alteration. He says that defines major, and gets to what Eagon gets it.

Verveer says it is friendly, and yes it should be approved by the common council.

That is friendly.

Clear and Schumacher say things I missed and Murphy answers questions as we contemplate at which point they lose quorum because people have to go to work. Rumor has it some have to leave at 5;30, 6;00 and 6:30. We have also heard that they have to be out of the room at 7:00 for municipal court and they have room 260 reserved for if they go past 7:00, which could happen if they don't lose quorum as people leave to go to work . . .

Compton asks if they word permanent can be added, Verveer says its friendly.

Solomon calls the question.

Chaos as they decide how to word it.

Eagon reluctantly supports it, not much more micromanaging, seems like we are designing bike lands on Midvale Blvd. (or Monona?) Mayor re-reads the motion.

Passes on a voice vote, appears unanimous.

MAIN MTOION
They tried to call the question, ala Clear, motion failed 11-9, Rhodes Conway out of room, those who did not vote for it were:
Cnare, Kerr, Palm, Pham-Remmele, Rummel, Solomon, Verveer and Bidar-sielaff

ANOTHER AMENDMENT
He reads a really long thing I missed, he says it attempts to inhibit current plans as proposed in March, that this won't undermine plans recommended by plan, but memorialize the 1965 ordinance and what they got us for the view, is permanently preserved, he is hoping that in the future that view shed will be reserved. Hopes this condition will amplify that important statement. He says the language should not conflict.

It's getting light out, 4:50

Murphy says that he isn't sure about the elevations in the motion. 75 feet and 5x? feet and staff had not verified that this is consistent with the existing elevation at Langdon and Wisconsin Ave. He says the intent of the condition is clear, with the understanding that portions of the tower already encroach into the area, they can't confirm those two elevations. Murphy says you could take the specific elevations out and refer to a point on the plan.

Verveer asks how to do that.

Pause to figure out the language, Mayor says we have to move along, Murphy says they are not capable at this point of figuring it out - but he says it more eloquently then I just summarized.

Verveer asks for alternative language.

Murphy says that it is not meant to apply to elements on existing plans.

Verveer says the language would work.

Murphy has some language, they table it for Murphy to work on it.

Compton asks Dunn to speak to it.

Mayor says no, public hearing is done.






Read more!