I’m glad that CM Hohnke held fast to his prior position and especially grateful to CM Higgins for voting against a measure that would have been an affront to Council’s prerogatives and responsibility. Council made a difficult decision previously and its decisions should not be revisited continually until someone gets a desired result. (CM Anglin, Briere, and Kunselman, thanks to you too.)

It would have been especially galling to see Council change direction because of the game of chicken the developer has been playing. We’ll hope that he doesn’t cut off his property’s nose to spite the city’s face.

I don’t think that councilmembers Derezinski and Smith would have sponsored the resolution and asked the attorney’s office to expend the energy to vet the revised proposal and to make sure that it was properly ensconced in a development agreement unless they had a clear indication that the outcome would be different — specifically that Carsten Hohnke would support Heritage Row with the revisions that had been made. It’s worth recalling that back on July 6, 2010 — the same meeting when Heritage Row was previously reconsidered — Hohnke himself was in the midst of bringing back Heritage Row for a second reconsideration on the same evening, when Mayor Hieftje called for a recess. On returning from the recess, Hohnke apologized to his colleagues, withdrew the motion and chalked it up to conflicting advice from the attorney’s office.

Korea was quicker (1950-53), though I guess the “peace” remains a little strained.

I support this revised Heritage row as better than the likely options, even as I understand why many neighbors do not support it. If we had a council that supported historic preservation, I might well take a different stand.