Author Topic: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco  (Read 7299 times)

Captain Zissou

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3895
Re: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco
« Reply #45 on: February 20, 2020, 11:05:22 AM »
I too would love to see the Fuhrer's comments, so do you have a link where I could indoctrinate myself with his wise teachings?  I have been singing his praises far and wide to the masses.  He masterfully is opposing a zoning change when he himself received a zoning change for his architectural masterpiece fronting Hendricks avenue.  Truly a strategic mastermind at work.

sanmarcomatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
  • Donut Enthusiast
Re: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco
« Reply #46 on: February 20, 2020, 11:14:50 AM »
I too would love to see the Fuhrer's comments, so do you have a link where I could indoctrinate myself with his wise teachings?  I have been singing his praises far and wide to the masses.  He masterfully is opposing a zoning change when he himself received a zoning change for his architectural masterpiece fronting Hendricks avenue.  Truly a strategic mastermind at work.

Doesn’t look like video is available yet (probably too long!) but will be here:

https://www.coj.net/city-council/city-council-meetings-online.aspx

I am guessing this will be about 6 1/2 hours....I think public comments ended at about the 5 hour mark, so probably best to start around there and work backwards. Power Trip was reasonably close to the end.

On a side note, had no idea these meetings were on cable Channel 99.Always streamed them previously. As brilliant as I think I am, sometimes I am pretty stupid. But I do try to learn from my countless mistakes, so I have that going for me.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2020, 10:19:15 PM by sanmarcomatt »

sanmarcomatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
  • Donut Enthusiast
Re: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco
« Reply #47 on: February 25, 2020, 09:39:35 PM »
Landslide victory for the project as expected. Carlucci the only no vote. He didn’t disappoint with his usual droning on about his history. I was expecting a story about staring down Corn Pop at the fountain of lions.

Next up....appeal of course. (waste of everyone’s time).

Captain Zissou

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3895
Re: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco
« Reply #48 on: February 27, 2020, 01:40:54 PM »
Anybody going to the Smart San Marco event tonight?

Papa33

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 138
Re: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco
« Reply #49 on: February 27, 2020, 02:21:50 PM »
I want to see this development come to fruition, but I have to say, I find this whole "weighted average" to be a bogus concept.

Steve

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3356
Re: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco
« Reply #50 on: February 27, 2020, 05:33:31 PM »
I want to see this development come to fruition, but I have to say, I find this whole "weighted average" to be a bogus concept.

I agree. Be honest with the height and ask for the variance. Personally, I still would have been for it.

I will say....not impressed with Andy Allen’s comments on this one. I like his development, but I like him less after this.

sanmarcomatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
  • Donut Enthusiast
Re: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco
« Reply #51 on: February 27, 2020, 08:35:37 PM »
I want to see this development come to fruition, but I have to say, I find this whole "weighted average" to be a bogus concept.

I agree. Be honest with the height and ask for the variance. Personally, I still would have been for it.

I will say....not impressed with Andy Allen’s comments on this one. I like his development, but I like him less after this.

I do not know Mr Allen and not  sure what he said related to this that offended you but I will give these developers credit for bending over backwards with changes and concessions to a group that unfortunately had no intention of actually compromising. Probably would have been helpful to know that up front. Considering the ridiculous performance from some of RSSM at these public meetings, I can’t imagine what it was like to deal with them directly.




sanmarcomatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
  • Donut Enthusiast
Re: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco
« Reply #52 on: February 27, 2020, 08:41:02 PM »
Anybody going to the Smart San Marco event tonight?

I wanted to go and do some damage on the 133 but unfortunately I have been pretty chained up lately. Hoping for some freedom soon, though.

Did you go?

Captain Zissou

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3895
Re: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco
« Reply #53 on: February 28, 2020, 09:32:45 AM »
Did you go?

I did.  I am sure they burned through the 133 drinks, as there were always about 40-50 people in the room despite people coming and going throughout the evening.  Spirits were high as everyone was celebrating logic and reason triumphing over NIMBYism.  Some of the G&G regulars became community activists to get in on the free drinks.  I suspect their activism has since faded.

Scott Wilson and Leanna Cumber came through, so I guess they are with the good guys on this one.  I spoke with some of the guys on the project and it sounds like you're right that RSSM is even nastier in person.  Corner Lot offered to do more to accommodate RSSM, but were met with something to the effect of "don't bother, we're going to get this project shut down anyway".

sanmarcomatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
  • Donut Enthusiast
Re: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco
« Reply #54 on: February 28, 2020, 09:51:25 AM »

 I spoke with some of the guys on the project and it sounds like you're right that RSSM is even nastier in person.  Corner Lot offered to do more to accommodate RSSM, but were met with something to the effect of "don't bother, we're going to get this project shut down anyway".

Sadly, they became worse as the realization had set in that they were “ not going to get their way “. I expect they are not accustomed to that feeling. I just hope their lawyer cranks up the billable hours for however long this process takes.

I hope you got a chance to watch the council meeting clip I referenced in the PM I sent.

Tacachale

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7818
Re: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco
« Reply #55 on: February 28, 2020, 09:54:57 AM »

I hope you got a chance to watch the council meeting clip I referenced in the PM I sent.

Please share!
Do you believe that when the blue jay or another bird sings and the body is trembling, that is a signal that people are coming or something important is about to happen?

Captain Zissou

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3895
Re: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco
« Reply #56 on: February 28, 2020, 10:14:01 AM »
I get about 2 PMs a year, so I rarely check, but I just watched about 15 minutes of the comments.  The condescension by all toward the council and the veiled threats by the Fuhrer at the end of his comments are gold!   

Steve

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3356
Re: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco
« Reply #57 on: February 28, 2020, 10:50:00 AM »
I want to see this development come to fruition, but I have to say, I find this whole "weighted average" to be a bogus concept.

I agree. Be honest with the height and ask for the variance. Personally, I still would have been for it.

I will say....not impressed with Andy Allen’s comments on this one. I like his development, but I like him less after this.

I do not know Mr Allen and not  sure what he said related to this that offended you but I will give these developers credit for bending over backwards with changes and concessions to a group that unfortunately had no intention of actually compromising. Probably would have been helpful to know that up front. Considering the ridiculous performance from some of RSSM at these public meetings, I can’t imagine what it was like to deal with them directly.

Here's one of a few quotes of his:

Quote
I'm tired of small businesses shutting down, I'm tired of Nimbyism, and I'm tired of neighboring homes saying they want the development while making it impossible to build.  I find it hard to believe them especially after we conceded everything they requested in November to "make them happy!"

Here's why I don't like it: While the folks at RSSM would likely only settle for single family homes on the site and I believe some of their asks are ridiculous. With that said, they have every right to fight for what they want, just like the developers have the right to hire attorneys to fight for what THEY want. To me the tone is overly nasty and emotionally charged, which could come back to bite later IMO.

This, combined with "Weighted Average Height" isn't a good look. I have to agree that Weighted Average Height is a bit of nonsense. If you want to comply with 35 feet, then comply. If you don't, own it, and say your development is 49.5 Feet tall and you intend to apply for a variance.

Steve

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3356
Re: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco
« Reply #58 on: February 28, 2020, 10:54:52 AM »

 I spoke with some of the guys on the project and it sounds like you're right that RSSM is even nastier in person.  Corner Lot offered to do more to accommodate RSSM, but were met with something to the effect of "don't bother, we're going to get this project shut down anyway".

Sadly, they became worse as the realization had set in that they were “ not going to get their way “. I expect they are not accustomed to that feeling. I just hope their lawyer cranks up the billable hours for however long this process takes.

I hope you got a chance to watch the council meeting clip I referenced in the PM I sent.

This is not surprising at all and in 6 years on RAP we dealt with this a TON of times. You have a developer that wanted to do something that would not comply with the overlay, you had a group of neighbors which would fight it either way, and you had RAP that was trying to keep everyone happy. It isn't a easy job and more often than not, RAP was portrayed as the bad guy.

This is one area where I think SMPS didn't do a great job controlling the conversation. The two names you heard the most was Corner Lot and RSSM. I'm not saying SMPS' role here was easy, but it's never easy. I feel like I'm in the know but I STILL don't know what exactly SMPS' complaints were (I knew they were against it but what were the specific reasons), and what was their counter proposal. That's an issue.

sanmarcomatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
  • Donut Enthusiast
Re: Changed plans for Park Place at San Marco
« Reply #59 on: February 28, 2020, 11:10:43 AM »

Here's one of a few quotes of his:

Quote
I'm tired of small businesses shutting down, I'm tired of Nimbyism, and I'm tired of neighboring homes saying they want the development while making it impossible to build.  I find it hard to believe them especially after we conceded everything they requested in November to "make them happy!"

Here's why I don't like it: While the folks at RSSM would likely only settle for single family homes on the site and I believe some of their asks are ridiculous. With that said, they have every right to fight for what they want, just like the developers have the right to hire attorneys to fight for what THEY want. To me the tone is overly nasty and emotionally charged, which could come back to bite later IMO.

This, combined with "Weighted Average Height" isn't a good look. I have to agree that Weighted Average Height is a bit of nonsense. If you want to comply with 35 feet, then comply. If you don't, own it, and say your development is 49.5 Feet tall and you intend to apply for a variance.

Wow.  That’s what bothered you? Sure you didn’t  read that while checking the DAL ticker?  If you think that comment is nasty and emotionally charged, you may have needed a safe space if you had to deal with the other side :)