The September Public Meeting, Part 1

This post will cover the first part of the public meeting of September 21st, 2009. In another post, which we’ll get up in a day or two, we’ll recap the comments and questions from the audience.

At the September 21st public meeting, after quick introductions from Alder Maniaci and the steering committee, Apex presented their concepts for the 200 block of East Mifflin.

The first presenter was Steve Yoder, president of Apex. His presentation, available here in PDF format focused on Apex the company, some of their other properties, their motivation for the project, and an introduction to four concepts: three on the south side of the 200 block of E Mifflin, where existing two and three stories homes are located, and one on the north side of E Mifflin, on top of the McCormick parking lot.

The second presentation was from Matt Tills and Bob Feller from Iconica, focused more on the four designs. Their presentation is also available here in PDF format. I’ve pulled out the massing designs of the the concepts, because I think those are the easiest versions to get oriented and get a sense of the building concept. The full presentation includes some styled renderings, as well as top-down views of the building footprints, so please check that out, too.

The first option is the “Two Towers” option:


The second option is the “Connected Towers”:


Option three is the Elongated single building:


Finally, option four is on top of the parking ramp:


Using SketchUp, Apex attempted to show how the parking ramp concept aligned with the Capitol Point condo tower. It didn’t quite work, so Apex sent this rendering to the steering committee two days later. They did not present this on the 21st (so don’t think you’ve gone crazy and missed it at the presentation).



12 Responses to The September Public Meeting, Part 1

  1. Beth Horikawa says:

    It’s still not correct–what they have labeled floor 3 is floor 5 of CP–I live on floor 5 and I can just see over the top of the ramp now. So it will affect more floors than they have indicated (floor 8 is actually floor 10).

  2. Steve Yoder says:


    The building cross section shows the top of the parking ramp at about the middle of the 3rd floor of Capital Point. Is that about right?


  3. David Waugh says:

    I’m sorry I could not make it to the meeting. My initial reaction to this project is that I like developing the ramp. However, I am very concerned about losing the houses that exist across the street from the ramp. They are historical and appear to be in good shape. I am in favor of high density development in the proper location. This is not one of them. Developers should be looking for locations that do not require the removal of historic homes. There is plenty of space for bigger buildings down the street — Don Miller car lot, Madison Dairy.
    -David Waugh
    1213 East Mifflin

  4. Beth Horikawa says:

    Hi Steve–I can just barely see over the ramp on the fifth floor (no one on the fourth floor can see over the ramp)–the current plan would impact everyone through floor 10. Only the top three floors (11, 12 and 14) would have a view–and I think except for 14, 11 and 12 would also be impacted in terms of panorama. My current view includes trees on the other side of the ramp and Lake Mendota, both of which would be eliminated by the plan.

  5. Dan Ross says:

    Thank you for attempting this rendering.

    The 3 Street levels of Capitol Point are numbered as follows: 1st: North Hamilton garage, 2nd(“L”): Webster garage, and 3rd: E Mifflin garage. Street Level in the diagram is actually the 3rd level. Levels 4 and higher are residences.

    I do think the “top of the ramp” is not set high enough in the comparison rendering, as Capitol Point level 4 (labeled Floor 2 in the rendering) has only a view of the brick facing of Capitol Square North, as Beth noted. I thought someone at the meeting said that Cap Square North is 12 feet high on that corner, but with the guard walls and support posts, it must be higher than that.

    I realize the rendering says “subject to verification” of the floor heights. There are probably some adjustments to be made to it.

  6. Steve Yoder says:

    Hey all,

    I’ll have the architects tighten up the cross section to properly reflect the buildings height.


  7. I applaud Apex for taking the bold step of coming out with such an aggressive, and in my opinion, forward thinking proposal.

    It does seem odd to me that those already living in a “tower” are concerned about the height of what is being proposed. Just seems to be human nature to want to dictate what can be done on that which you don’t own. No blame placed here on my part, just struck me as odd.

  8. Beth Horikawa says:

    Hi Darren–I do appreciate your perspective; this exchange is important. I guess to me it is not so “odd” for committed property owners/downtown residents to be concerned about a rental blocking our views and having the views we now have. Parking is also an issue. I don’t know if you live down here, but on event days (Farmers’ Market, Taste, bike races, Art Fair, game days, etc.) the traffic for the ramp is almost gridlock. How can Webster St. & the 100/200/300 E. Mifflin blocks absorb ever more traffic from the 150+ proposed rental units? Just some thoughts.

  9. Marilyn Martin says:

    I agree with Beth about the parking issue and “gridlock.” In addition to the events cited and their demand, we will have the opening of the Children’s Museum in 2010 and even more need for parking.

  10. Jerry says:

    As a banker, I want to let you know there is no way any of these projects are getting funded. As I told the Hammes company, Marcus and Apex, there is no money for these projects. Frankly, there is no money for condo buyers either unless you put 25% down.

    I am going to sit in my Capitol Point Penthouse with my view and sipping that special Bordeaux.

    Thank you Brenda for killing these projects.

    • capitol point owner says:

      Interesting. Being acquainted as I am with the penthouse owners, I wasn’t aware of a “banker Jerry’ owning a penthouse.

  11. Jerry says:

    That’s because my name is not Jerry and [not entirely impolite, but not entirely polite, material removed.] I am a banker though! [Completely off topic material removed -ed]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: