[david cohen]

that's cool, Peacetrain...it's just a hotel, after all. why does is this city so masochistic over edifii?

[snoqueen]

How many of you think the "redesign" is really what it seems to be? I suspect it's what was wanted all along.

Commonly, the first plan some developers air publicly is meant to get shot down. There's a perception ANY first plan will get shot down (an unfair one, I think, but a self-fulfilling prophecy). Then the second plan is floated, purportedly incorporating all kinds of neighborhood-friendly features, timed to look like a tactical withdrawal from Plan 1 to give the general public the impression its demands have been heard.

Plan 1 can be any pie-in-the-sky crazy idea, forty stories taller than they expect to build, as wide as the entire Capitol, artistic as a Motel 6 with corinthian columns. Doesn't matter. People get to scream and yell about it and, hopefully, exhaust their complaint energy. Then Plan 2 is closer to what they think they can get, but I'm sure they load on extra features just so they have something to sacrifice in the horse-trading phase.

I've seen entire chunks lopped off the final version, too. The condo building (units now for sale) in the 600 block of E. Mifflin were originally approved with several more floors on their back half. Without explanation, the builder left them off come construction time. Obviously, this was a wise decision given the way downtown condos are selling at the moment.

I'm not saying developers are all tricksters, but there's a tendency to game the system. A really excellent design would make most of this unnecessary, but you don't see a lot of 'em. The idealist in me still believes if they unveiled the best design they could get, it would not only be welcomed but people in other parts of town would be saying "build one here too."

The closest I can think of to that is Troy Gardens condos (or is it cohousing) on Troy Drive. Who wouldn't want to have that next door? And I still think someone, somewhere, could come up with a hotel design as perfect for the Edgewater site as Troy Gardens is to its location. But we're nowhere near that in the present campaign and I don't see it on the horizon.

[DCB]

I think everyone wants to make this about Fred Mohs so that you don't have to listen to the concerns from people who are worried about the impact of the development on the lakes, the people concerned about the precedent it sets for historic district, the people who are concerned that our tax payer dollars are going for "public" space that most likely won't end up being public and those who are worried that if the TIF district gets extended down to the end of James Madison Park and over to E Washington Avenue that it will mean the end of those neighborhoods as developers accumulate adjoining lots and rip houses down to build larger developments.
....

All of those are very important issues. But do any of those other parties have any clout? Will any of those concerns change any votes on the Plan Commission?

Maybe Jason's point is that Fred's resources are the only reason the project wasn't rubber stamped from the get go.

[DCB]

What I don't get is why the mayor seems to be taking this so personally.

I think he takes everything too personally.

[green union terrace chair]

How many of you think the "redesign" is really what it seems to be? I suspect it's what was wanted all along.

Commonly, the first plan some developers air publicly is meant to get shot down.

...

You have located the head of the nail and have struck it with exacting force.

What is even more ludicrous about the Mayor's post is that he makes the neighborhood out to be the only thing in the way of this being built, completely ignoring historic district restrictions including 50-foot height limit, lakeshore building restrictions, the UDC and Plan commission process (and the last time UDC had a look at this proposal they raked it over the coals) and a few other ordinances I can't remember that would have to be rewritten.

This isn't about a small group of NIMBYists ... there are numerous ordinances that will prevent this from ever happening (or have to be rewritten ... but there is a reason they were created in the first place).

The fact that the Mayor is not defending the city's ordinances and is instead scapegoating a group of citizens (who have only been echoing that which is already on the city books) is absolutely reprehensible. He owes them a big apology.

[jjoyce]

I don't think it's true that everyone wants this to be about Fred Mohs. The truth is that it just IS. He's the guy who understands how to get on the news and he's the guy who Cap Neighborhoods people rally behind. And if there's a lawsuit, will it be those who are looking to preserve the shoreline and protect the lakes who will file it?

It's the perfect case of politics making for strange bedfellows, without question. But in this town, it seems like a story that gets told every time there's a decent-sized development under consideration: The NIMBY types gain the most traction and hold on longer than anyone else. And in this case, it's the guy with a big porch on Wisconsin Ave. who likes his view of Mendota and doesn't want to see an entirely boring hotel designed by a company known for building arenas blocking it.

[narcoleptish]

The closest I can think of to that is Troy Gardens condos (or is it cohousing) on Troy Drive. Who wouldn't want to have that next door?

I like Troy Gardens but I notice something kinda funny over there. I assume they were built without garages to shift the focus from the car culture and all that, yet there's a parking lot full of cars and many of the open porches are full of the crap one normally stores in the garage. They didn't really give up their cars or their materialism, just the place to store it all.

I still like them.

[Stu Levitan]

I don't think it's true that everyone wants this to be about Fred Mohs. The truth is that it just IS.

No, it isn't.
To the Landmarks Commission, it's primarily about whether the volume, height and mass meet the terms of the Mansion Hill Historic District.
To the Urban Design Commission, it's about the design.
To the Plan Commission, it's about the land use.
To the Council, it's about all that, plus the TIF.
No commissioner or alder thinks this is about Fred Mohs.
And that's the truth.

[green union terrace chair]

I don't think it's true that everyone wants this to be about Fred Mohs. The truth is that it just IS.

No, it isn't.
To the Landmarks Commission, it's primarily about whether the volume, height and mass meet the terms of the Mansion Hill Historic District.
To the Urban Design Commission, it's about the design.
To the Plan Commission, it's about the land use.
To the Council, it's about all that, plus the TIF.
No commissioner or alder thinks this is about Fred Mohs.
And that's the truth.

And as powerful as you might think Mohs is, JJoyce, he does not have an invisible hand moving in all the committees Stu listed.

Stu, is there not a hard, 50-foot limit on new construction in either the city historic distric or federal historic district (as this plot lies within both)?

[Madsci]

And to the common citizen, it's don't give the greedy bastards any TIF $. It just increases our property taxes while our incomes and property values are decreasing.

[jjoyce]

No, it isn't.
To the Landmarks Commission, it's primarily about whether the volume, height and mass meet the terms of the Mansion Hill Historic District.
To the Urban Design Commission, it's about the design.
To the Plan Commission, it's about the land use.
To the Council, it's about all that, plus the TIF.
No commissioner or alder thinks this is about Fred Mohs.
And that's the truth.

The arrogance of the boomer class never fails to amuse me. I'm sure you think your opinion here is the truth, but the truth is that it's an opinion. Sure, those bodies have their own takes on this design, but the discussion is primarily about those wanting to move the design forward vs. those who want to stop it. The spokesperson opposed is Mohs, like it or not. The spokesperson in favor is the mayor. The mayor has made it very clear in his blog that he's addressing Mohs, not those who sit on those commissions who have questions or concerns.

There are people who can make this process bumpier than it has been so far, but as far as I can tell, only one can actually halt it and that's Mohs, via a lawsuit, which he has threatened very publicly to any media outlet who puts a microphone in front of his face. Cieslewicz isn't addressing those who have reservations or would like more tweaks to the design or whatever (many of whom are approachable and willing to work with him), he's addressing the one guy who has said he's going to roadblock the thing (whose bona fides as a country club conservative makes him unlikely to want to work with Cieslewicz, politically, on anything).

The thread is about the mayor's strategy on this deal that, to date, includes three blog posts written with a slightly desperate tone, not the mechanics of city government. That's all about playing the political support game, the same game being played by Mohs in the media.

[Goober McTuber]

The arrogance of the boomer class never fails to amuse me.

In my humble opinion, that arrogance is deeply rooted in our recognition of our own intellectual and philosophical superiority. We’re also pretty good in the sack.

[Stu Levitan]

The arrogance of the boomer class never fails to amuse me. I'm sure you think your opinion here is the truth, but the truth is that it's an opinion.

Why do you consider it arrogant for me to express myself on something that is within my responsibility and direct knowledge? Just because I disagreed with you?

Maybe I only have an opinion, Jason, but it's the opinion of someone who will actually be voting on this proposal. Unlike, you know, you. And I can tell you that my vote, and those of all other commissioners, will be based on how we evaluate the proposal in terms of the ordinances we are sworn to uphold. It will not be based on the personalities or resources of advocates, or an analysis of what steps interested parties may or may not subsequently take.

[Bad Gradger]

And I can tell you that my vote, and those of all other commissioners, will be based on how we evaluate the proposal in terms of the ordinances we are sworn to uphold.

Which is just how it should be. There's a difference between the appointed commissions and the elected council: commissions are advisory, technical, and more-or-less insulated from public pressure; the council makes a final decision taking into account the recommendations of its advisory bodies, the overall welfare of the city, and public opinion. (At least that's how things should work.)

I don't agree with Jason that the opposition is about nothing more than Fred Mohs and his view of the lake, but Mohs is an important leader of the opposition and he knows how work both in the open and behind the scenes.

[jjoyce]

I'm sure that everyone who is part of this process or living in the neighborhood has a different view of this issue, based almost entirely on their own experiences. But as someone who is sitting completely and entirely OUTSIDE the process, taking in all of the information that's coming my way, it's pretty clear to me who is most involved in the conversation and who is driving that conversation.