Ah, Mifflin. For decades the area has enticed students with its low rent, proximity to State Street and high concentration of house parties. On a street that sports as many Badger flags and beer pong tables as Mifflin does, it's understandable that students have begun to feel like they own the place.
But about a week ago, some area students received a very rude awakening when local developer Patrick McCaughey proposed a four-story, 46-unit apartment building to be constructed on the 400 block of Mifflin Street. Thanks to the magic of Facebook, the proposal has drawn the attention of much of the student body, and the discussion is rife with accusations of the evils of modern development and what it will do to destroy the historically student-occupied neighborhood.
Though it's wonderful to see so many students willing to stand up for a cause they believe in, the ""Save Mifflin"" campaign is still largely based on flawed logic and deserves a fair examination from another point of view.
Contrary to what has been said, four stories is hardly a high rise, even for a relatively stunted city like Madison. Many of the houses on the street are at least three stories themselves and don't seem in any real danger of being lost in the shadow of the new development. The building's height should really remain a non-issue in the debate.
Some have other aesthetic concerns with the building as well, fearing that it won't fit with the neighborhood's traditional charm. Setting aside the question of how much actual ""charm"" Mifflin's decrepit houses possess, the architects of the proposed building have taken those concerns into account as well. Though the design will never please everybody, TJK builders have made it a point to add porches, railings and other low-profile features to blend in with the surrounding homes.
Another main complaint voiced via the ""Save Mifflin"" Facebook event seems to be fear for the future of the neighborhood. Organizers are concerned that this development will set a precedent of bulldozing existing houses for similar modern development. While I am sympathetic to the potentially bigger issue at stake here, I actually see very little evidence to back that belief.
Demolishing one house and a vacant structure hardly equates to driving students out of the neighborhood, and in fact this plan is a model of high-density urban planning that should be praised, not vilified. It's been pointed out a few times that developments like Lucky are actually more environmentally efficient than individual houses, so it's no surprise to me that a city as green as Madison is moving in this direction.
But there is a more important point many seem to have forgotten: Students don't own Mifflin. It's true the neighborhood has a long history with the student population, but Mifflin Street is also a vital part of downtown Madison.
The city rightly considers the needs of its more permanent residents in most planning decisions. It already houses the Public Library, Overture Center and Madison Senior Center, plus the backside of a successful West Washington Condo complex. It is a city street, part of a vibrant downtown area that has much more going for it than just a block party every May.
Downtown businesses bank on locals with a little extra spending money than your average student to stay afloat, which means those who can afford to frequent Fromagination and Soap Opera, not just State Street Brats.
Cities change. Madison has been in a state of constant development for decades, always under the watchful eye of the permanent residents who perhaps love this city even more than UW students. Students cycle through every four years, and though our wishes should by no means be pushed off to the side, they're not the only considerations in play here. Mifflin residents are just going to have to learn to share.
Lydia Statz is a junior majoring in journalism and international studies. Please send all feedback to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
