At the Thursday July 23rd meeting of the Zoning, Neighborhoods & Development Committee the appeal of he interim historic designation of the Hide House complex in Bay View was heard.  The Hide House complex is made up of a series of buildings constructed over decades with the earliest buildings dating to 1898.  At earlier meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission Alderman Zielinski’s nomination of the complex for interim historic designation was approved.  General Capital Group and Joseph Property Development were appealing this nomination as they intend to demolish a portion of the Hide House complex built in the 1940′s to construct an affordable housing apartment building.

Deputy DCD Commissioner Martha Brown explained that the official staff report recommended designation of the 1898 buildings, although not the 1940s buildings.  Alderman Zielinski , took issue with this characterization of the staff report saying the front line historic preservation staff who don’t have any political motivations recommended interim historic designation for the entire development.

Bruce Block, the attorney representing the developer, pointed out that the development team has in the past “received national recognition for development excellence,” and that the proposed building, and use are allowed under the site’s current zoning.  Further he noted that it wasn’t until they had obtained a building permit and WHEDA tax credits that Alderman Zielinski requested the interim historic designation.  He laid out the reasoning for the appeal.  The major points were that the case for designating the structure is marginal at best, the 1898 portion is not at risk, rehabilitation of the 1940′s section is not economically viable, the proposed project is within zoning, and the project is consistent with Southeast Side Plan.

Reference was made to a December 2006 Business Journal article in which the developer stated their intention to demolish a portion of the Hide House complex to build condominiums.  At the time no nomination for historic designation was brought forward by Alderman Zielinski, in fact it wasn’t until after WHEDA tax credits were received, and building permits were pulled that the papers were filed.  There was debate over whether or not the Southeast Side Plan supports this type of project.  Attorney Bruce Block pointed to page 94 while Alderman Zielinski fired back pointing to page 99 on the plan saying that it contradicts the developers view of the plan.  Bruce Block expressed the development team’s belief that historic preservation laws are being misused in this case saying “it’s an inappropriate use of the city’s landmark ordinance.”

Alderman Zielinski brought his own theory to the table indicating his belief that there was something unusual going on saying that “basically what we’re seeing here is the executive branch using their pull and power to override the interests and the will of the neighborhood.”  He also on numerous occasions railed on about the lack of a community meeting, and specifically stating “there’s a big difference between an open house and having an actual public meeting.”

The development team had contacted the Wisconsin Historical Society and hired John Vogel, Ph.D., of Heritage Research LTD, an expert in the field of historic preservation, when this issue arose to determine if an appeal was warranted.  The Wisconsin Historical Society found that the Hide House complex consisted of unremarkable architecture, and was no nexus to Milwaukee’s tannery industry.  Specifically the Wisconsin Historical Society findings indicated that no portion of the project would be eligible for protection under history or architecture.  John Vogel , Ph.D. remarked “is something significant simply because it is old?  The simple answer is no.”  He explained that the Hide House was not the headquarters building, and it was not the primary facility of the Greenbaum Tanning Company.  Further, the structure itself has no distinguishing features of an architectural type, and lacks any company branding.  He went on to point out that it is not a unique example of south side industrial architecture, and that numerous other buildings of this style still exist on the south side.

Sig Strautmanis, one of the developers, explained that “the vast majority of the space have been vacant for decades,” which has led to the serious decline of the 1940′s buildings.  Just a few of the issues included items such as roof sections collapsing, structural slab failure, severe water damage, and some of the buildings were built with salvaged brick which is deteriorating.  He added that they don’t allow employees into these buildings anymore and that “this is beyond repair and salvation.”  Additionally, he explained that these buildings are functionally obsolete.  Saying that “the layout makes no sense,” the floors don’t line up, and some levels have no windows in large parts of the building.  He also explained that yes at one time the apartment building would have needed to go before BOZA for a variance, but that they had adjusted their plans to insure it conformed to the current zoning.  Referencing the nomination for historic designation he said “needless to say, the timing isn’t curious, it’s blatant frankly.”  Finally, he stated his belief that the opposition “isn’t about history,” that in fact “this is about thwarting a high quality affordable housing project”

A large number of Bay View residents spoke in opposition of the appeal.  The general argument for historic preservation spoke of the working class history of the neighborhood, and that the Hide House complex is part of this history.  It was said that Bay View workers  put their blood sweat, and tears into their homes, and the tannery.  Sandy Palokonis , a Bay View resident, summed up the opposition’s argument for historic preservation stating “it’s part of our houses, it’s part of working man’s history.”  Another common thread that rang through was that the neighborhood felt a community meeting should have been held regarding the project.  In addition to the dozen or so people who spoke in opposition, seven additional neighbors were counted in opposition.

There were residents, and tenants of Hide House that spoke in support of the appeal.  Marilyn Walczak, expressed her belief that the reason behind the interim historic designation “has nothing to do with historic preservation” she indicated that from what she’d seen that the opposition was about the low-income housing component.  Gibson Bathrick , whom initially attempted to redevelop the Hide House, explained that precedences had already been set at Hide House as other structures had been demolished due to safety concerns.  He added that redevelopment of the north end “wasn’t in the cards,” and that “it’s just not feasible.”

Assistant City Attorney Gregg Hagopian pointed out that “interim designation is on a structure basis,” not a complex basis indicating that the action taken by the Historic Preservation Commission may not be in line with the ordinance.  Recognizing the implication and in a clear attempt to find a balance between the needs of the community, and the rights of the property owner, Alderman Murphy made a motion to in effect “split the baby,” and designate buildings 1,2,3, and 4 as historic.  In reference to the other buildings he stated “in my opinion [they] don’t meet the definition of what is historic.”  Alderman Zielinski opposed the motion saying “I don’t follow the argument of splitting the baby.”  The appeal was granted on a vote of 3 to 2, in that it removed the historic preservation designation from buildings built in the 1940′s.  This action will now be taken up at the next meeting of the full Common Council.

Well St. Streetscaping

Latitude

Zilber Hall

Jackson Square Apartments

Eckstein Hall

Milwaukee County is going ahead with executing a plan for its pension system that involves borrowing money, investing it in the market, and hoping to earn a 2% profit.  The plan has garnered support from County Executive Walker, the County Board, and the county’s actuary consultant.

In summary, in order to pay for the massive pension funding gap caused by the first scandal, and lately the market’s performance, the county needs a lot of money.  To get that money they’ve issued $400 million in bonds since the start of 2009.  With the proceeds from the issuance of those 6% bonds, they’ll invest in the market at a hope of earning an 8% return.  They’ll then use the excess 2% they hope to earn to pay for the pension liabilities.  That amount of profit as planned is $237 million.

Seems like a good plan, until you consider what happens if things go wrong.  Assuming the stock market performs only at the rate of interest on the bonds, the county will have undertaken a large risk for zero reward.  More catastrophic though, would be for the market to under-perform the interest rate on the bonds.  Milwaukee County will then find itself in a far worse financial situation, with likely no ability to short-term borrow their way out of it.  The county has to do something, but borrowing-and-investing appears to be quite aggressive.

When a plan like this comes around, it’s best to ask yourself the question “if it really is this easy wouldn’t everyone be doing it?” Instead of discussing closing libraries, privatizing the Water Works, and having fewer firefighters per crew, why doesn’t the City of Milwaukee get the free cash it so desperately needs for its $90 million budget hole with pension bonds and investments?  Why don’t we see this as common place for local governments?  Why am I not doing it?

The answer is because it’s extremely risky.

Of course something that looks great on paper, but has a lot of long-term risk is just what a politician can feed on.  County Executive Walker is more than happy to look at this as a fix as he runs for Governor and looks to leave Milwaukee County with its troubles behind.  The Milwaukee County Board seems posed to go along, perhaps because it avoids drastic cuts that will be difficult to stomach (and get re-elected on).

The costs from the pension scandal haven’t gone away, and in a year where budgets are bad for every level of government dependant on property taxes, things are real bad for the county. While calls have gone out to dissolve the Milwaukee County government and eliminate the County Executive position, they seem far-fetched.  It’s time though to start small and have serious discussions about off-loading aspects of Milwaukee County to other units of government, existing or new, privitazed or not.  Consolidating services with the City of Milwaukee may provide cost savings for both departments, especially in the areas of information technology.  Any proposal from privitazing the airport to creating a regional transit authority should be investigated thoroughly with the hopes of putting Milwaukee County in a better long-term fiscal position.

Harry Drea, one of the developers of the Rivianna project, was before the committee to request an amendment to the previously approved General Planned Development, and approval of the Detailed Planned Development.  The change to the original General Planned Development was to include the building’s parapet, it was an increase of four feet three inches to the buildings height, but overall the massing of the project stayed essentially the same.

The Rivianna, at 236 S. Water St., will be made up of three 15-story towers, have up to 186 residential units and 236 hotel rooms.  As had been pointed out at the City Plan Commission meeting theRivianna project no longer includes helipads, or the waterfall feature.  The designed has been further defined since it was last before the committee.  The balconies are now inset into the building, the loading docks are hidden in the bulk of the building, and the Riverwalk will feature an elevator to insure ADA compliance.  It was also indicated that the proposal will still contain some affordable units.  The construction itself will create about 1,000 jobs of which 100% will be union labor, and the project will adhere to standards of M.O.R.E. ordinance.

Alderman Bauman, and residents from the Marine Terminal Lofts, which is located across the river, spoke in opposition to the project, generally due to the building’s height being taller than buildings in the Third Ward.  AldermanBauman stated his opposition saying that “the built environment is very important,” and that in his opinion “this is an example of bad urban planning.

Alderman Witkowiak responded to the concerns of the residents of the Marine Terminal Lofts saying that “most of the people on the south side of the river don’t feel that way.”  He explained that his constituents don’t think it should be consistent on both side, and he added his constituents believe “let’s be a little more creative,” and “let’s be different than they are in the Third Ward.”  Both approvals being requested at this committee meeting regarding theRivianna project were approved and will now go before the full Common Council.

Gorman & Company, and the Northwest Side Community Development Corporation were before the committee seeking an amendment to the Detailed Planned Development known as Villard Square.  The proposed mixed-use building will have space for the new the Villard Avenue Library as well as 47 apartments.  Although the library has yet to sign a lease for the space all intentions are to open the library in the Spring of 2011.

Alderman Witkowiak spoke in strong support of the project saying that “this maybe a model of libraries in the future,” and added “I’m looking forward to seeing this project.”  Paula Kiley, the Director of the Milwaukee Public Library, explained that this mixed-use concept is being explored, and that “other libraries have been identified for similar treatment.”  This file was approved and will now go before the full Common Council.

A Riverwalk Development Agreement with Schlitz RiverCenter LLC was before the committee to layout the terms regarding the redevelopment of the Riverwalk at 1505 North Rivercenter Drive.  The second amendment to the District 22, Beerline B, TIF was also before the committee.  This amendment would expand the boundary to include five additional parcels.  It also would fund 70% of the cost to bring the portion of Riverwalk, at 1505 North Rivercenter Drive, into compliance with the Riverwalk guidelines, and complete additional repairs.  As this section was built in 1998, prior to the guidelines, this agreement will also grant the City of Milwaukee a permanent public access easement.

This amendment also cleared the way for funding if a new section of Riverwalk is constructed at intersection of Brady St. and Water St.  The development would be eligible to receive a grant from the expanded TIF.  It was noted that with this expansion the TIF would still fully recover its costs by 2015, which would be five years prior to the statutory limit.  Both of these were approved and will now go before the full Common Council.

The development team of General Capital Group and Joseph Development was before the Historic Preservation Commission to request a certificate of appropriateness which would allow them to demolish a portion of the Hide House complex, a former tannery at 2625 S. Greeley St. in Bay View.  This became a necessary step for the developer to take because at the last meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission the entire Hide House complex had been nominated for interim historic designation by Alderman Zielinski, and received approval by the commission.

At the Monday July 20th meeting, prior to a presentation by the development team, and prior to any public commentary, a motion was made to adjourn the items related to the possible demolition.  Alderman Bauman argued that because the developer had also appealed the interim designation, that this request for a certificate of appropriateness wasn’t “ripe.”  Additionally, the commission argued that it didn’t need to hear this more than once and that by adjourning these items it would save everyone time.  Despite, this argument the result was that this maneuver lead to a lengthy discussion with Assistant City Attorney, Gregg C. Hagopian, regarding the possibility of legal issues that may arise by taking this action.  He warned the commission to “error on the side of caution,” but his advice was largely ignored by the commission as they adjourned the items.

A point not mentioned during the meeting, but one that makes this maneuver questionable, is that both Alderman Bauman and Alderman Zielinski sit on the Zoning, Neighborhoods & Development Committee so the chances of the interim designation being overturned on appeal seems on its face, pretty unlikely.  Once the significant items were adjourned the attorney for the development team, Bruce Block, was given a brief moment to speak during Item 7 as it had been noticed for public comments.  He explained, “to delay this for a month for no reason is definitely a hardship.”

This delay may only add a few weeks or a month to the project, but any delay to a project adds cost, and in this case threatens the entire project due to the time sensitivity of the WHEDA tax credits.

The next step in this process is the appeal of the interim historic designation which will go before the Zoning, Neighborhoods & Development Committee on Thursday July 23th, 2009.

Urban Milwaukee’s Upcoming Events & Meetings Calendar should help you keep up to date on important events effecting our neighborhoods, the City of Milwaukee, and our region.

July 20, 2009

Community & Economic Development Committee Meeting

July 20, 2009 9:00 am

The Community and Economic Development Committee hears matters relating to community development, block grants, job development, business improvement districts, city public relations, industrial land banks and revenue bonds, emerging business enterprises, recreation, cultural arts and the library system.The Community and Economic Development Committee meetings start at 9:00 pa.m. and are held in the Room 301-B, [...]

Historic Preservation Commission Meeting

July 20, 2009 3:00 pm

The Milwaukee Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) administers Milwaukee’s historic preservation ordinance, adopted in 1981, which provides certain kinds of legal protection for buildings or sites that have been declared historic by the Common Council. The HPC is responsible for designating historic landmarks and historic districts and for approving Certificates of Appropriateness (COAs) for permission to [...]

July 21, 2009

Zoning, Neighborhoods & Development Committee Meeting

July 21, 2009 9:00 am

The Zoning, Neighborhoods and Development Committee reviews issues relating to city development, zoning, historic preservation, incremental tax financing, building codes and housing projects.The Zoning, Neighborhoods and Development Committee meetings start at 9:00 a.m. and are held in the Room 301-B, City Hall, unless otherwise noted.[...]

July 23, 2009

Special Zoning, Neighborhoods & Development Committee Meeting

July 23, 2009 9:00 am

The Zoning, Neighborhoods and Development Committee reviews issues relating to city development, zoning, historic preservation, incremental tax financing, building codes and housing projects.The Zoning, Neighborhoods and Development Committee meetings start at 9:00 a.m. and are held in the Room 301-B, City Hall, unless otherwise noted.[...]

Special Public Works Committee Meeting

July 23, 2009 1:30 pm

The Public Works Committee is responsible for physical services provided by the city such as street and alley maintenance, waste collection, disposal and recycling, sewer, water and flood control projects, assessments, public buildings, land and waterways.This meeting of the Public Works Committee meetings will start at 1:30 p.m. and be held in the Room 301-B, [...]

The Milwaukee Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) administers Milwaukee’s historic preservation ordinance, adopted in 1981, which provides certain kinds of legal protection for buildings or sites that have been declared historic by the Common Council. The HPC is responsible for designating historic landmarks and historic districts and for approving Certificates of Appropriateness (COAs) for permission to alter historic buildings.

The HPC meets monthly on Mondays in City Hall, Room 301A, 200 E. Wells Street at 3:00 P.M. unless otherwise indicated.

Agenda

The Zoning, Neighborhoods and Development Committee reviews issues relating to city development, zoning, historic preservation, incremental tax financing, building codes and housing projects.

The Zoning, Neighborhoods and Development Committee meetings start at 9:00 a.m. and are held in the Room 301-B, City Hall, unless otherwise noted.

Agenda

The Public Works Committee is responsible for physical services provided by the city such as street and alley maintenance, waste collection, disposal and recycling, sewer, water and flood control projects, assessments, public buildings, land and waterways.

This meeting of the Public Works Committee meetings will start at 1:30 p.m. and be held in the Room 301-B, City Hall.

Agenda