MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters · Instagram 
Thursday, August 21, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 76.0° F  Mostly Cloudy
Collapse Photo Bar

Isthmus on Edgewater

Please limit discussion in this area to local and state politics.

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby snoqueen » Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:47 am

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/g ... 002e0.html

And here's an article from a little earlier Tuesday describing the ongoing negotiations between the mayor's office and Bob Dunn, very relevant to tonight's meeting.
snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 11396
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby lukpac » Wed Nov 16, 2011 11:40 am

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/ ... 002e0.html

The council, with lots of questions for staff but no debate, deadlocked 10-10 with Mayor Paul Soglin refusing to break the tie — denying the 11 votes needed — to provide the Hammes Co. $16 million in tax incremental financing (TIF) assistance for the controversial redevelopment in the 2012 capital budget.

Soglin, who opposed the $16 million, will see his proposal for $3.3 million in TIF for the project be part of next year's budget.
[...]
Voting for the $16 million were: Alds. Cnare, Clear, Tim Bruer, Joe Clausius, Steve King, Bridget Maniaci, Matt Phair, Scott Resnick, Chris Schmidt and Paul Skidmore.

Casting no votes were: Alds. Verveer, Anita Weir, Shiva Bidar-Sielaff, Sue Ellingson, Jill Johnson, Larry Palm, Satya-Rhodes-Conway, Brian Solomon, Marsha Rummel and Lisa Subeck.
lukpac
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3362
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:51 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Crockett » Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:51 pm

A victory for Madison taxpayers.

End corporate welfare.
Crockett
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1206
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:37 am

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby rabble » Fri Dec 02, 2011 2:07 pm

Soglin, strangely enough, has a few thoughts on Edgewater in his blog.
I thought the last paragraph was interesting.

The Edgewater developer cited creation of public access as a major reason for the $16 million TIF. In fact, the public has had access rights at the Edgewater since 1965 and the public access rights required for the 2010 Edgewater project were very limited. The so-called ‘public space’ was subject to these restrictions:

-The hotel had the right to close and restrict access to the majority of the usable rooftop space 365 days a year.

-Public access rights were not required to be posted so the public would know these rights existed.

-The public access agreement says the use of food and beverages in the public access areas shall be limited to reasonable personal and individual use and shall not be allowed for group or multi-person consumption. Carry in of alcoholic beverages by the public was prohibited.
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6078
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby green union terrace chair » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:39 pm

NO PICNICS, NO PEACE
green union terrace chair
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2863
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Memorial Union

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby snoqueen » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:42 pm

That the public access was a sham was evident in every planning committee this proposal went through. I'm glad Soglin came out and said it: first, there already IS public access, and second, whatever improved public access the proposal might have offered was so limited as to be pointless. It certainly wasn't worth... what, $16 million? Good lord, the city could buy a lakeshore lot and tear everything down and build its own stairway for way less than that.
snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 11396
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby green union terrace chair » Fri Dec 02, 2011 4:22 pm

snoqueen wrote:Good lord, the city could buy a lakeshore lot and tear everything down and build its own stairway for way less than that.

Good point. If the city bought the current Edgewater for their $5M asking price and spent the other $11M on leveling it and then building public amenities, imagine what we could get?

Still not a good use of $16M in public funds, but far better than what Hammes was offering for the money.
green union terrace chair
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2863
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Memorial Union

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Henry Vilas » Sun Jul 29, 2012 10:05 am

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19722
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Detritus » Sun Jul 29, 2012 10:47 am


Meh on the design, but at least it won't totally fuck up the TIF district. Now at least it will contribute to the tax base instead of sucking off the public teat like some multi-millionaire tax cheat (excuse the redundancy).
Detritus
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2364
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 9:42 pm

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Huckleby » Sun Jul 29, 2012 12:10 pm

Celibrate! Celibrate! Dance to the music!

I'm giddy, this is almost too good to be true. I really thought Edgwater would just moulder in infamy. Well, I was wrong, there was a private way forward. The best of all possible outcomes.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6410
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Huckleby » Sun Jul 29, 2012 12:12 pm



What are your feelings about this development?
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6410
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby snoqueen » Sun Jul 29, 2012 12:47 pm

Same as before, I'd say. I don't like the design of the new tower, which I think is unattractive and out of scale. I like the plans to fix up the old tower. I very much like the news we aren't spending TIF money on some guy's private dream hotel with private luxury condos on the top floors. (Are those going to stay, given the 4-year backlog of unsold luxury condos in Madison?) I'm curious as to what accommodation the developer makes with DNR (the "new" DNR) regarding a pier.

My main impression was amusement at the mysterious ways big projects get financed at the last minute. Next time you see some developer pulling a sad face and saying "we can't build this unless the city steps up with TIF money" remember the record now cautions the city to be highly skeptical. Sometimes it might be true, other times the developer needs to go back to his accountants and backers and take another look.

I am much more excited about what's happening on E. Wash these days -- development that seems to rely on realistic economic possibilities instead of somebody's dream to reshape the appearance of the Lake Mendota shore to their liking. I sure hope the new hotel finds enough guests, but it's a weird and poorly-connected location. Good luck to 'em, though. Once it's built, nobody wants it to fail or stand empty.
snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 11396
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Henry Vilas » Sun Jul 29, 2012 12:56 pm

Huckleby wrote:


What are your feelings about this development?

As long as my tax money isn't used, it's up to the developer.
Last edited by Henry Vilas on Sun Jul 29, 2012 2:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19722
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby fennel » Sun Jul 29, 2012 1:06 pm

snoqueen wrote:Next time you see some developer pulling a sad face and saying "we can't build this unless the city steps up with TIF money" remember the record now cautions the city to be highly skeptical
I have a stunnning hunch that if the Council had not overridden the Landmarks decision, the developer would have decided that yes, a more scaled-back design is economically viable, after all. Oh well. It won't be the only hulking edifice in town.
fennel
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3143
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 4:24 pm
Location: Inside the Green Zone, Madison

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Huckleby » Sun Jul 29, 2012 1:29 pm

fennel wrote: I have a stunnning hunch that if the Council had not overridden the Landmarks decision, the developer would have decided that yes, a more scaled-back design is economically viable, after all.

I realize you said it's just a hunch, but based on what? The developer was under plenty of pressure to scale back the cost of his design, and his final proposal was what made sense to him. Today's news, private funding for a larger scale, is strong evidence against your hunch.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6410
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

PreviousNext

Return to Local Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 1 guest

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar