The Moderne

As the US economy continued its slow recovery from the Great Recession, Milwaukee was left with a couple of failed development projects to complete, a changing real estate market, the opportunity to make small infrastructure changes, and questions about the future of transit.  In 2011, some of these ‘failed projects’ moved towards becoming successes, while the developers in town shifted from condominium development to apartments and hotels.  Small changes to the built environment came in the form of new bike infrastructure, and the conversion of streets to two-way traffic.  Although the Milwaukee County Transit System once again faced budget cuts, there was movement in bringing new modern transit service to Milwaukee in the form of express busing.

First Place on the River, Park Lafayette, and The Residences on Water all ended up in serious financial trouble, and in some cases in drawn out legal battles.  Park Lafayette, which had been considered by many a failure, became a turnaround success under the guidance of the Mandel Group in 2011 as it was converted from high-end condos to luxury apartments, and today it is 93% occupied.  Equally as impressive of a turnaround story is The Point on the River (formally First Place on the River).  The developer had run out of funding, and once the lending bank took over they brought in the  Mandel Group to complete the project.  Ever since, Mandel Group and Garrison Partners have been steadily selling units in the project, and while there were over 45 units available this time last year there are only 11 available for sale today.  The one significant project that has yet to be resolved is The Residences on Water, but signs indicate that the drawn out legal battle surrounding it is coming to a close.

The apartment market saw continued development through a strong reliance on WHEDA tax credits and other forms of  government financing (due to the weakened financial industry).  The construction of the Beerline B Apartments, which is being funded with WHEDA tax credits, nears completion.  Another WHEDA funded project, the 73-unit National City Lofts in Walker’s Point, began accepting tenants in October.  Although Mercy Housing Lakefront’s East Side apartment proposal received various city approvals, and appeared on the verge of moving forward, it failed to obtain WHEDA tax credits to support the funding of the project.  The second phase of The North End development, which will include two buildings and 155-units, gained approval for a $4.6 million loan from the City of Milwaukee and will utilize $26.9 million in WHEDA bonding to construct the project.  The most visible development in 2011 has been the construction of  the 30-story 203-unit apartment building, The Moderne.  It was financed with a $42.4 million loan from the AFL-CIO Housing Investment Trust (HIT), a $9.3 million loan by the City of Milwaukee, and $5 million private equity, and expects to be topping off in early 2012.

Hotel development became a hot area of development and controversy in 2011.  The controversial Marriott Hotel project was approved by the city, and in part because of the debate more of the historic buildings than originally proposed will be saved.  Unlike the Marriott project, two other downtown hotels are being developed within historic structures without significant demolition.  A proposal that would develop a Hilton Gardens Hotel within the Historic Loyalty Building in downtown Milwaukee worked through legal issues allowing for construction to get underway.  At The Brewery, Gorman & Company has started the redevelopment of the former brewhouse building into a boutique hotel.

Alterra's On-Street Bicycle Corral

The built environment saw small, but important improvements in 2011.  Wells Street was finally converted to two-way traffic and carmaggedon didn’t follow.  The streetscaping of Broadway in the Historic Third Ward, which will tie the district together, is finally being completed.  Bay View saw Milwaukee’s first raised bike lane built, and on-street bike corrals began popping up on streets around the East Side.  S. 2nd Street, in Walker’s Point, re-opened with the new street redesign, and quickly saw numerous establishments add cafe seating, and a the construction of a new building, the Milwaukee Fix, get underway.

Transit both made steps forward and steps backwards in 2011.  As we believed would happen, cuts to mass transit funding were deep at the state level, and threatened to push MCTS off the cliff.  Although new County Executive Chris Abele worked to maintain transit service by converting some routes to express routes to save money, this still represented a net reduction in service.  At the same time, the Milwaukee Streetcar project was approved by the Common Council on a 10-5 vote this year and has now proceeded into final engineering.  Though as we feared a challenge is being made to Milwaukee’s local control.  Brett Healy, of Oconomowoc, has petitioned the Public Service Commission to rule that, despite local ordinance, the City of Milwaukee must pay the cost to re-locate utilities operating in the public rights-of-way necessitated by the streetcar construction.

In 2011 Milwaukee continued to face a difficult financial and political environment, but managed to move forward on improvements to the built environment, transit, and many significant development projects.

The new East Library?

The Milwaukee Public Library Board of Trustee’s Building and Development Committee met at the East Library on Wednesday night to hear final proposals from the three respondents to the East Library Redevelopment RFP. The committee heard presentations from Stonehouse Development, Gorman & Company, and HSI Properties, and asked a number of questions of each of their presentations. Following a closed session for deliberations, the Building and Development Committee voted to move the proposal from HSI Properties forward to the full Library Board.

Following a public meeting held by Alderman Nik Kovac (a Library Board Trustee)  in September, all three applicants were previously granted additional time to refine their designs. This meeting provided each team with 20 minutes to use the projector to go over their design, and an additional 15 minutes for questions from the committee, and other trustees in attendance (as well as written questions from the audience as selected by Committee Chair John Gurda).

In attendance from the committee were Chair John Gurda, Vice Chair and Alderwoman Milele Coggs, Sharon Cook, Supervisor Theo Lipscomb, and Sam McGovern-Rowen. Also in attendance were Library Director Paula Kiely, Alderman Nik Kovac, and Board President and Alderman Ashanti Hamilton.

What follows is an attempt to capture the highlights of each presentation, as well as the most significant questions.

Stonehouse Development

Stonehouse was the first group to present. Rich Arneson, Stonehouse Vice President, led much of the team’s presentation, with assistance from Mike Bahr and Scott Davis of Plunkett Raysich Architects. Arneson emphasized many of the firms green accomplishments during the presentation. He also highlighted Stonehouse’s experience with WEHDA financing, the route his firm proposed to go for their design.

The architectural team highlighted the pocket park in their design along Cramer Street that would be available to the public. They also noted the library aspect of the project was supposed to be a modern interpretation of the facade on the former Pizza Man restaurant. The team has branded the window bays on the first floor as “windows on learning”, where children could sit and read. They noted that the tower piece on the corner of Cramer and North was inspired by the binding of a book.

The Stonehouse proposal included 80 residential units, 10 at market-rate, and 70 affordable units. The building was to be wrapped in eight three-bedroom townhomes.

John Gurda asked what was on the roof in the proposal, with Arneson noting the roof included solar panels, whose visibility could be adjusted.

Theo Lipscomb asked about the viability of getting the credits, to which Arneson that this was one of the best sites in Milwaukee, and that his firm has a good track record with receiving the low-income housing tax credits (LIHTC) from WHEDA. Sam McGovern-Rowen asked about the price per credit Stonehouse had budgeted to receive (87.50%, Gorman had budgeted the credits at 85% of their value). Arneson noted that this project was based on information they have received from a banking partner they had previously worked with, and that that number could end up even being higher.

Nik Kovac asked if a proposal of just market rate housing was considered? The response was yes, but that the funding as proposed in their response gave the best budget for the project. Kovac followed that up by asking about the mix between affordable and market rate, to which Arneson emphasized that the tax credits were a competitive process (a refrain that would be heard across all teams) and that to get the maximum number of points in the category a mix of 15% market-rate housing was needed, and that his firm had found a way to make 12% work.

An audience member, through a written comment, asked a series of parking questions. The response noted that parking was provided at a rate of one stall per unit, and that it would cost $60/month. It was also noted that the library parking would be separated underground from the residential parking. An additional question was asked about the proposed building’s height, to which the team responded it was a few feet below the zoning maximum at 54 feet.

A question about the location of the pocket park led the team to note that the building was designed to be built to the urban line in front, and that the park was used to break up the mass of the building.

Nik Kovac asked about the extra space in the building (1,200-1,500 square feet) as retail, to which the architectural team noted it was likely in the wrong spot for such a use, but could be redesigned.

• Stonehouse Revised Submittal (PDF)
• Stonehouse Revised Budget and Financial Projections (PDF)
• Stonehouse Original Proposal (PDF)

Gorman & Company

The Gorman presentation was led by firm Development Manager and General Counsel Ted Matkom. Matkom noted that the firm has an in-house architectural team as well as general contracting and property management teams. He admitted the firm’s initial design was lacking. He noted that they have now teamed with Eppstein Uhen Architects, to which President and CEO Greg Uhen was on hand to assist with the presentation. Matkom noted numerous other projects they have completed including the recently opened Villard Square Branch of the Milwaukee Public Library.

The design of the proposed 4-story building was shown to include a courtyard on the east side for residents, as well as town homes and all of the parking located completely below grade. The building was designed in a C shape, because of the uncertainty of what could be located to the east of the building in the future. A landscaped outdoor green space along Cramer Street was included for the library, as well as an optional second story patio and community room (would be converted to more units if the library elected not to purchase it). The goal for the project was to achieve a LEED Silver rating.

The building was to include (under their WHEDA funded model) 73 units, 57 one-bedroom units, 8 two-bedroom units, and 8 three-bedroom units, with a 68 to 5 split between affordable and market-rate units. The market rate proposal would have included 80 units in the form of 21 studio units, 43 one-bedroom units, 8 two-bedroom units, and 8 three-bedroom units. In both models, 85 parking spaces for the residents would have been included, as well as 41 for the library.

The truly unique aspect of Gorman’s proposal was that they were asking the library to pay $1,958,000 for the library space. This led to a series of questions for clarification where Ashanti Hamilton asked for a detailed explanation noting that “I must be slow”, and a follow-up question from John Gurda where he noted “I must be slower than Ashanti”, as well as questions from other members of the committee. Matkom noted that although on the face of it giving the land away (valued at roughly $2 million) for in exchange for a roughly $1.5 million library shell makes sense, in reality the value of the land is never realized by the developer because the library shell goes back on the land. Matkom noted that the rents would feasibly only cover the cost of construction, and that they had worked hard, but couldn’t make the numbers work. In response to a question from Hamilton, Matkom noted that yes, it is as “bad as it sounds”, the bottom line is that the library would need to come up with $2 million for this deal to work.

For posterity’s sake, Gorman broke down the cost of the library shell as follows.

• Cost per SF: $75
• Shell construction cost: $1,233,000
• Rooftop improvements: $125,000
• Library underground parking: $600,000
• Total: $1,958,000

Milele Coggs asked a question about the “band” that wraps the front of the building, and what could be done with it. The team responded that it could be made up of any number of materials, and that it could be used for a variety of things including public art.

Nik Kovac asked about  cost savings if the library didn’t want the second floor space, Matkom noted that this would shave about $200,000 off the cost of the shell.

• Gorman Revised Submittal (PDF)
• Gorman Revised Budget and Financial Projections (PDF)
• Gorman Original Proposal (PDF)

HSI Properties

Blair Williams, of WiRED Properties, led the presentation for the HSI team (the confusion between the two developer’s partnership was addressed later). The team also includes Engberg/Anderson who designed the Villard Library (as well as the Bay View Library and over 90 other libraries). Williams began by noting that he lives only a few blocks away, and that this is the library he brings his daughter to. He stated his believe that a market rate project is the best fit for the neighborhood. Like the other teams, he indicated this was a challenging project, stating that the “biggest challenge is you extract no value from the land the library sits in.”

Mark Ernest from Enberg Anderson noted that his firm did the 1999 master plan for North Avenue, and that the design follows the proposed architectural review board (one can rest assured there will be more on the proposed board in future articles). He also noted that his firm proposing using the existing stained glass in the building (if you look close, it’s there), more prominently in the facade of the new building.

Blair Williams highlighted that the development would include an option 2,500-5,000 of retail space on North Avenue, set back slightly so that the library was the most prominent feature. He noted that they were open to deed restrictions on the retail stall.

The HSI proposal includes two unique aspects, developing the building with only market-rate units (through HUD financing support) and surface-level library parking. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) financing support, something Williams noted HSI has experience through a recent project in Wauwatosa, would come in the form of a loan guarantee from the Section 221(d)(4) mortgage insurance program. Williams noted that while the loan guarantee is not a for sure thing, there is a very good reason to believe the outcome of the process will be positive. He stated that the guarantee’s are awarded as part of a competitive scoring process, and that one of the criteria is density. Noting that “the least expensive floor you build is the next one”, he explained that since their initial proposal they added a floor to increase the density of the building. Williams did state that the HUD process could take 10-12 months, and that final design would need to be completed before the final application was made.

The library parking is proposed to be located at the surface level behind the library, as it is currently. Similar to WiRED’s development in Shorewood (The Cornerstone, noted for its most visible tenant, Alterra), the parking entrance will be located in the middle of the building, and the building will span the entrance. The decision was made have street-level parking based on a perceived preference of Milwaukeean’s to park at street-level, as well as the ability for library officials to keep watch over the lots, and the ability to avoid any takeover by default of underground library stalls by residents.

Paul Kiely asked about the two developers, to which Blair noted they both “block and tackle”, but that they each bring their own specialties. HSI brings a lot of financing experience to the table, including experience with HUD, and WiRED brings multi-family experience. He said they are in many respects “co-developers”. The HSI representative in attendance nodded in agreement.

Nik Kovac asked about the surface parking being a design or finance decision. Williams indicated that although it was marginally cheaper (the length of the property is still residential parking underground), it was a design decision. Anticipating a second question from Kovac, he also noted that they didn’t use town houses because they are loss leaders, and there is a security problem “perception” of having your front door right at ground level. Williams noted that many of the homes of the East Side do not have entrances only a step or two off the street.

• HSI Revised Submittal (PDF)
• HSI Revised Budget and Financial Projections (PDF)
• HSI Original Proposal (PDF)

HSI's Revised Proposal - From North Avenue	HSI Floor Plan	HSI Floor Plan
HSI's Revised Proposal Night Time	HSI's Revised Proposal - Cramer Street	HSI's Revised Prosal - Thomas and Cramer

Moving Forward

Following a closed session to deliberate on the proposals, the Building and Development Committee voted to move forward the HSI Properties proposal. This proposal will now go before the full Library Board. It would have been interesting to be in the room to listen to the deliberations over the Gorman proposal, who appeared to be sounding an alarm about the financial viability of the project as conceived. If the project fails to get off the ground, it will be interesting to see if a revised RFP will emerge with terms similar to what Gorman proposed.

It is important to note that the HSI design is not final, and is likely to be slightly adjusted as the project moves forward. There were, however, no significant reservations about it raised, although there was debate about the lack of green space. Also noteworthy, under HSI’s timeline the new library would not open until 2014.

Best of luck to HSI, WiRED, and Engberg Anderson as they move forward.

MCTS services changes as a result of proposed Bayshore - Airport Express

The meeting, held at the Bay View Library, was focused primarily on the changes that would occur to existing south side service (Routes 11 and 15) as a result of the new service. The meeting was led primarily by Thomas Winter, Director of Schedule and Planning at MCTS, who guided the audience through the key points of the proposed Bayshore – Airport Express route, as well as changes to existing routes within the corridor. Winter did not focus on the other proposed express service routes, but they will include a Fondy – National Express and a Capitol Drive Express (a 27th Street Express was applied for, but not awarded).

MCTS will be utilizing CMAQ funds from two different sources, the cancelled Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee (KRM) commuter rail service (which died when the latest state budget pulled the plug on the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Transit Authority) and the never implemented bus rapid transit service along Fond du Lac, Greenfield, and National Avenues.

The short explanation, the Bayshore – Airport Express will connect Bayshore, UWM, Downtown, and Bay View with stops roughly every 1/4 of a mile, seven days a week, with headways of 10-15 minutes during the rush hours, and 15-20 minutes during off-peak times. The fare for the express service will be the same as standard service. It is intended to achieve between 20-25% time savings running the same route as traditional MCTS service.

Details – South Side

• Route 11 will be eliminated, but vast majority of service area will continue to have service via the express and other new or adjusted services. Some areas will actually see an increase as a result of the change.
• In some cases, riders will need to about one block further to get to a stop. Current MCTS service spaces stops at 1/8 mile, but express plans call for 1/4 mile spaced spots.
• Route 52 will be introduced to service one branch of the former 15 route on Clement, Pennsylvania, and 15th (pictured in map). It will terminate at Lincoln and Kinnickinnic.
• Route 56 will be introduced to service Greenfield Avenue from 2nd Street to 124th Street. This will replace an area formerly serviced by Routes 11 (to Miller Park Way) and 18 (70th to 124th). Service along Miller Park Way, previously provided by Route 11, will be eliminated.
• New Route 15 will still run unmodified on 1st Street, Kinnickinnic Avenue, Chicago Avenue, and Packard Avenue to Columbia Avenue.
• New Route 15 will run down Pittsburgh Avenue to Milwaukee Street through downtown. This will replace the service lost from the elimination of Route 11. The Bayshore – Airport Express will service Water Street.
• The Bayshore – Airport Express will divert from the current Route 15 at Lincoln and proceed south towards the airport on Howell. This will replace Route 11 service on Howell and Chase. Route 11 service on Boliver, Pine, and Layton will be discontinued. This new service supports the Aerotropolis concept.

Details – North Side

• Route 11 is being eliminated, but the stops on the north side of its route, Milwaukee Street, Ogden Avenue, Van Buren Street and Holton Street, will be serviced by new route 15.
• The new route 15, replacing the northern portion of Route 11, will continue north to Bayshore Mall instead of terminating at Capitol Drive. It will use Port Washington Road to get to Bayshore.
• The Bayshore – Airport Express will replace Route 15 service from Bayshore to downtown, running the same route to downtown as the 15 currently runs. Because of the express service, this will result in the elimination of some stops (from 1/8 mile spacing to 1/4 mile spacing), but stops will still be placed at all major destinations and transfer points.
• Route 68 is being eliminated. Limited 68 service on Green Tree, Lake Drive, and Brown Deer Road will be eliminated entirely. Route 68 service on Port Washington Road north of Bayshore will be replaced with Route 63, which currently terminates at Bayshore. Route 68 service south of Bayshore will be replaced by the new Route 15 to Capitol Drive. South of Capitol Drive to Keefe Avenue will no longer have service.

Following the introduction of the service changes by Thomas Winter, and brief comments in support by the Milwaukee County Supervisors in attendance, Supervisor Dimitrijevic led the question and answer session.

Questions from Audience

This is by no means a complete digest of the questions asked, but an attempt by myself to identify the most important and/or interesting questions and statements.

• When would the proposed changes go into effect? MCTS Manager Director, in attendance for the meeting, jumped in to note that the proposed changes would go into effect January 29th.
• One Howell Avenue resident noted that he liked the connection to the airport.
• Will the Bayshore – Airport Express run as late as other service? Yes
• Wifi in buses? Lloyd Grant – we are working with a local firm on in-bus advertising, this could happen. (My perspective – I don’t see it as likely, and I don’t believe that the new version of Transit TV proposed by Troy Shaw will produce the millions in revenue that has been projected, but I hope to be proven wrong.)
• Same commenter as wifi comment – Bus tickets should be handed out with tax receipts
• Same commenter as wifi comment – There should be park and ride areas on south side.
• Supervisor Jursik requested that Grant speak about the potential new farebox system. Grant mentioned that three years ago they received federal funding to help implement a new farebox system, and that he expected RFP responses this week. Supervisor Dimitrijevic noted that she hoped that a new system would utilize “smart cards” similar to those seen in other cities, which drew applause from the audience. Grant discussed a number of potential outcomes of the process, but noted that 40% of current fares are paid in cash.
• One commenter noted that park and rides should be installed across the south side to alleviate congestion at UWM and listed a number of potential locations including the airport. Supervisor Jursik noted that she didn’t think the airport would be likely, given its potential for abuse.
• How is service impacted from Brady and Farwell to downtown? Lloyd Grant noted that service would actually improve because of the switch from the 15 bus to express service.
• Will bike racks be on express route? Yes (drew applause from audience)
• MCTS driver – 1. Freeway Flyers being favored over local routes, not good. 2. The farebox is a trouble spot with the union, specifically the transfers. 3. How does it connect with streetcar? – Kris Martinsek, of Martinsek & Associates who is involved in the creation of the Milwaukee Streetcar, noted that streetcar project is in preliminary engineering and is being designed to have seamless connections with existing transit service.
• One life-long non-driver asked about smaller buses or vans to preserve service. Lloyd Grant responded that MCTS has retired their smaller vehicles over time as they aren’t as cost efficient given that they can’t be used on many routes.
• Express part of existing fare structure (following a comment thanking MCTS for their hard)? Lloyd Grant noted that this is the first time he has been asked, and that yes it would cost the same as a standard fare.
• Will Freeway Flyers stay the same? Yes.
• Multiple people noted the challenges in getting home from the airport to Bay View, that taxis frequently refused to give rides because of the airport fee structure. Where will the stop be at the airport? Where the Route 80 currently stops, at the south end of the Baggage Claim.
• Any change to Route 51? No changes at this time. This question was offered apparently in response to a neighborhood issue with bus noise, with people in attendance on both sides of the issue. Supervisor Haas remarked he was happy they have now met and could sit down to talk about it, which drew a laugh from the audience.
• What is the possibility that the CMAQ funds are not approved? Lloyd Grant said that rejection is not expected for any reason, and that it is up to Secretary of Transportation Gottleib to approve now.
• Samuel Jensen, representing the Milwaukee Transit Riders Union offered perhaps the most amusing remarks of the evening. He remarked that he was happy about the new service, but not happy to learn about it so late and that it was done in secret. He remarked that “we are not living in the Soviet Union or a third-world dictatorship.” During his comments he repeatedly said “this is absurd,” asking what other cuts were hidden (claiming the audience first learned of the Route 68 cuts today). He noted the lack of a real long-term funding solution for transit in Milwaukee, and asked when the Milwaukee County Board is going to do something about this? Supervisor Jursik downplayed his remarks, noting that he was attacking local politicians for an issue created by the state. She noted that she wasn’t pleased with being in the dark on the proposals before they were submitted. Her response ended with applause from the audience. Lloyd Grant noted that there were no unpublished cuts. Jensen responded by noting that Jacqueline Janz, MCTS Marketing Director, would do the USSR (Soviet Union) a service with her PR skills.
• After a few more questions, the meeting ended at 8 promptly because the Bay View Library closed.

Conclusion

Milwaukee County and MCTS have clearly been dealt a tough hand with the funding cuts to transit coming from the state budget. Despite the fact that the CMAQ funds at this point are only a two-year solution, and will result in some areas losing service, the solution is a creative one to stave off major cuts including the elimination of all Freeway Flyers, special event service (Summerfest, State Fair, Miller Park, etc, etc), and service reductions on many routes. In an ideal world, existing service would be maintained and new express service would be added on top, but given the circumstances this is a great solution to a terrible problem.

MCTS services changes as a result of proposed Bayshore - Airport Express

The East Library along North Avenue, with the parking lot immediately north of the building.

Wednesday night, Alderman Nik Kovac held a public meeting to allow feedback to be voiced regarding the three proposed alternatives for the redevelopment of the one-story East Library into a mixed-use facility. The meeting was a follow-up to a meeting last November discussing the potential of issuing a request-for-proposal (RFP) for the redevelopment of the East Library site. Attendees at the meeting were provided with an update on the process and allowed to ask questions about the process and proposals. In attendance were officials from the Milwaukee Public Libary, the City of Milwaukee Library board, the Department of City Development, and the Redevelopment Authority. Four public officials were in attendance listening and answering questions, Alderman Ashanti Hamilton (Library Board president), Alderman Nik Kovac (Library Board member), Alderwoman Milele Coggs (Library Board member), and Mayor Tom Barrett.

As a background on the process, the Library Board has proposed transforming the way library services are delivered by introducing three different types of libraries, mixed-use facilities, area libraries, and express libraries designed to expand facility hours and modernize operations. Following the November meeting, a RFP was issued for redevelopment of the East Library located on North Avenue. Gorman and Company, HSI Properties, and Stone House Development all responded to the RFP, offering designs that those answering questions agreed were all fairly similar. Before the questions began, the officials gave a brief overview of the process to-date, highlighting that the mixed-use Villard Avenue Library will open October 5th 15th and that the Library Board may make a decision on which, if any, of the proposals to invite back for individual review on September 27th. Alderman Kovac explained to the audience that for final approval the redevelopment plan would need approved by the Library Board, the full Common Council, the Mayor, and likely the East Side/North Avenue Architectural Review Board (assuming it is approved prior to this project).

Questions

A number of questions were asked of the officials in attendance. I have included summarized versions of many of the questions and answers below in an attempt to provide the most information about the project, but not to require one to read a word-by-word transcript of the meeting. The answers are not mine, but are paraphrased from the officials in the room.

Is the land being sold? Yes, for $20,000 as well as the provision that a white-box, first-floor condominium be provided for the East Library in return.

Who is the architect? The developer will have their own architect for the exterior of the building, as well as their privately-owned areas. The Milwaukee Public Library will contract with an architect to design their space.

Criteria for picking the best proposal? A number of things were mentioned including the size of the library condominium, parking, architectural design, compliance with design guidelines, prominence of library, articulated facades, green space, quality of materials, economic sustainability, and what the additional uses provide to the neighborhood.

A comment was made that many new apartments are targeted towards “new urban professionals”. The commenter noted that she would love to live above the library and that the developments could be targeted to “old urban professionals” as well.

Temporary library? The temporary library would need to be within walking distance and would likely be within a half-mile and not west of the Milwaukee River. Gorman was the only developer to propose a specific solution that involved a phased construction process with a temporary library on the north end of the lot similar to what is currently done in post-Katrina New Orleans.

Free parking? Yes, the same number if not more stalls. One proposal has surface parking, two have underground parking. All have at least 40 stalls. These stalls are in addition to any parking necessary for residents of the proposed apartments.

A comment was offered stating that the commenter was “not impressed” about the proposals. This drew applause from the audience. The commenter offered up that the designs looked too much like other new apartments in the area. This was repeated a few times.

The Urban Ecology Center is financing a new location through donations, could the library do the same? No, estimates have new single-story, 20,000 square-feet library costing $11.7 million to build. There are significant cost savings through building a mixed-use library, including the financial relief provided by the property taxes from the rest of the development. Alderman Nik Kovac noted that it has been shown that density on North Ave. is in demand.

Are we stuck with the designs presented? Can developer cheapen designs during construction? Alderman Kovac answered that no, we are not stuck with the designs as is, and that no the developers can not cheapen the designs during construction. At this point Mayor Barrett jumped in to note that we need to collectively decide if the designs meet our expectations, and that he, as well as others, expected more applicants.

In the only explicit endorsement of the night, one commenter stated they liked the HSI proposal the most, but merely because it was the one they disliked the least.

Historic Preservation Commissioner Sandra McSweeney asked about what happens if financing from WHEDA falls through for the selected developer (provided it was one of the two seeking low-income housing tax credits – Gorman, Stone House), noting that being awarded WHEDA financing is not always dependable (likely intended, in particular, as a reference to the failure of the Mercy Housing proposal to be awarded credits). Alderman Kovac remarked that similar to what happened at Garden Park, it would likely kill the project and require it to be restarted.

Is the condition of the library causing this? Not yet, but that at least one million dollars in maintenance would be required soon. Both Alderman Kovac and Mayor Barrett encouraged those in attendance to visit Villard Avenue Library.

Is a TIF available for the site? Alderman Kovac said that it was definitively not.

Ownership structure? The library would be in a condo owned by the Milwaukee Public Library, and that the library would hold a 50% share of the condo association.

One commenter noted that Milwaukee has many distinct neighborhoods, and that the mixed-use Villard Avenue Library appears great for that neighborhood, but in regards to the proposals the commenter stated “that’s the best they can do?”

Only one question was about height (compared to 5 at the first meeting). Alderman Kovac noted that all of the proposals were below the zoning height limit of 60 feet.

Blair Williams, part of the HSI Properties proposal and the only developer publicly in the room, noted that as it is in Milwaukee, density is driven by parking and the site is only so large (and underground parking is prohibitively expense below one floor). Answering to Alderman Hamilton’s question of him on design, Williams discussed that land costs are actually $1.5 million when the costs of the library condominium are considered. To those asking for an iconic building (a term that came up over and over), the cost of the building can’t exceed the revenue it generates. He noted that various forms of tax credits could help, similar to what was achieved when he developed The Cornerstone in Shorewood. Williams also noted the struggles from the timeline of the RFP, which resulted in a rendering that only reflects the massing and layout of the building, and not the end design.

Tax revenue? Earlier in the questioning, Williams had also jumped in to a question about the tax revenue from the site. Noting, contrary to what the officials estimated, the construction cost of the site would exceed the assessed value of the site, and therefore the tax revenue from the site would likely be in the ballpark of $200,000/year.

Moving Forward

It will be interesting to see what the outcome is given the feedback offered tonight. The pulse of the room didn’t seem warm to the designs, but it also didn’t appear overall hostile to the idea. Would those in attendance be happy with any design short of the quality of City Hall or the Central Library (two buildings that Alderman Kovac noted no RFP could cause to be built today in Milwaukee)? Is using the design as the central point of disagreement merely a way of attempting to reject the project as a whole? The panel of five (Alderwoman Coggs, Vaneesa Koster of DCD, Jim Plaisted of the East Side BID, Library Director Paula Kiely, area resident and Legacy Redevelopment Corporation founder Sally Peltz, and UWM SARUP Dean Robert Greenstreet, Ph.D) that is tasked with selecting which proposals to move forward has their work cut out for them.

If all three of the proposals are ultimately rejected and another RFP is issued, it would be interesting to see if the design quality improves with a longer window to respond and a reduction in the parking requirements for the library portion of the project from 40 stalls to 20.

Which proposal do you like? Vote in our latest poll in the sidebar. In addition there is an official form to offer your feedback in.

Renderings

Corrections – Alderman Kovac thankfully corrected two factual errors in my reporting. One, the Villard Avenue Library opens October 15th. Still please go visit. Two, Alderwoman Milele Coggs is not on the selection committee, but UWM School of Architecture and Urban Planning Dean Robert Greenstreet, Ph.D is.

Chris Socha, of The Kubala Washatko Architects, Inc., trying out the new bike corral at Cafe Hollander

Last week marked the installation of another on-street bike corral in Milwaukee.  The newest on-street bike corral is located at Cafe Hollander on Milwaukee’s East Side.  The first corral was installed by Alterra Coffee on Prospect Ave. and includes fencing that acts as a piece of public art.  The last two corrals installed, one at the Nomad and the latest one at Cafe Hollander, are of a simple design, but both add more parking for more people to use.  As with the other installations the business owner paid for the corral’s construction and installation, and in the case of the new Cafe Hollander corral it utilizes recycled bike staples.

The on-street bike corral pilot program, which was created by the City of Milwaukee and driven forward by Chris Socha, of The Kubala Washatko Architects Inc. initially included these three corrals.  And clearly, the program has experienced strong support from the City of Milwaukee, Alterra Coffee, and the Lowlands Group, but with the first three bike corrals proposed under the city’s pilot program having all now been installed where’s next?

Our readers have suggested The Comet, Honey Pie, Riveria Maya, Fuel, The Tracks, Whole Foods, Bradley Center, City Hall, Alterra Foundry, Cafe Benelux, The Public Market, Old World Third St., 2nd St. and National Ave., Lincoln Ave. and Kinnickinnic Ave., and Oakland Ave near Locust St.  Any more?

Nomad's On-Street Bike Corral

Portland has 67 on-street bike corrals, while Milwaukee now has two.   With the latest being installed this past week at the Nomad on the Lower East Side.  The Nomad’s new bike corral is located in an unused space along Warren St., and just as Alterra’s on-street bike corral, its installation removed no automobile parking spots.  In fact this installation added a net of sixteen (it added nine bike racks, while one rack was removed from the sidewalk) new parking spots for customers of the Nomad and surrounding businesses, albeit bicycle parking spots.

Unlike Alterra’s bike corral, which in addition to its intended functional use acts as a piece of public art, this rack is simple and to the point.  Parking your bicycle here is secure, common, and provided.  The design of this installation (additional border markings yet to be installed) is  more typical of the design seen in cities such as Portland and Minneapolis, and we would expect to see this design installed around Milwaukee as new businesses choose to incorporate on-street bike corrals into their business plan.

It is our understanding that Milwaukee’s third bike corral is in the works, so as soon as it is installed we’ll let you know.  Additionally, we wanted to know from you, where might you think a new on-street bike corral could work?  Let us know via email or the comments below.

Alterra's On-Street Bicycle Corral

Cities such as Portland, San Francisco, Seattle, and Minneapolis have installed on-street bike parking in recent years, and now you can add Milwaukee to the list. The  loading zone in front of Alterra’s 2211 N. Prospect Ave. location is Milwaukee’s first on-street bicycle parking corral.  Designed by Chris Socha, of The Kubala Washatko Architects Inc. and fabricated by Ryan Foat, Principal of Oxbow Studio LLC., the bike corral goes far beyond that of simply an installation of bike racks, it adds an element of public art to the street and improves the built environment.

This installation adds intrigue and functionality to the built environment, and is Milwaukee’s newest city comfort.  It makes better use of public space, and in fact has economic value to Alterra and neighboring businesses, as this bike corral can hold at least twenty bicycles (customers) at a time instead of just one car.   Its utility was clear when almost immediately after it opened up on Friday numerous bikes began filling the racks.  Additionally, this installation keeps the sidewalk clear for pedestrians and allows for more space to be dedicated for cafe seating at retail establishments.

I’m sure some will only see it as a bike rack, but in addition to being an improvement to Milwaukee’s built environment, this installation is part of a continuing trend.  The City of Milwaukee has seen ridership increase over 250% over the past five years, and now businesses like Alterra are looking to improve their bike infrastructure to make Milwaukee a better place and improve their bottom line.  Clearly, biking as a form of commuting, running errands, and a part of every day life is on the rise in Milwaukee, and we at UrbanMilwaukee.com expect to see this trend continue.

788 N. Jefferson St.

Two small projects, one in East Town and the other on the East Side, are currently taking an existing poor design situation and attempting to activate the street through new designs.

The 788 N. Jefferson St. building, in East Town, has long been a closed system, unwelcome to pedestrians, and disconnected from the street.  Even after the recent remodeling of the building’s facade the building still failed to connect to the street particularly well. The new design, by Matt Rinka of Rinka|Chung Architecture, will add light and visual interest to the facade.  Additionally, a section of the building, which will be opening as a new bar called Belmont Tavern, will feature doors that, much like the doors at Taylor’s across the street, better connect the indoor and outdoors.  This design invites pedestrians into the building, while extending the bar into the public realm.

Crank Daddy's

On the East Side Crank Daddy’s is moving from Farwell Ave. to 2170 N. Prospect Ave., and is redefining the existing building’s connection to the street in the process.  The existing structure was either built during a time of little zoning, or simply with little consideration for the street as the building is setback from the street behind a surface parking lot.  The new design, by Chris Socha, of Kubala Washatko Architects, attempts to correct for this mistake by creating a bicycle court to activate the space with customers and bicyclists.  Further, the design includes a small covered bike parking structure which helps to create a partial street wall along the sidewalk. The store will open this week.

Both of this projects are small, but interesting as they attempt to take an existing building and make it better.

UWM

Having an educated populace is good for society, it increases the earning of all workers, it helps to generate wealth and fuels innovation.  Subsidized parking doesn’t.

UWM recently announced that the school will no longer be utilizing the parking lot on Milwaukee’s lakefront for remote student parking, in part because the university had acquired the former Columbia-St. Mary’s Hospital parking garage adjacent to campus.

As part of this change the university had planned to charge students $4 per day to park at the garage, and end the student subsidy of parking.  Oddly, the UWM Student Association fought to continue the subsidization of parking for some students, at the cost of non-driving students.  These efforts apparently moved the university’s position, as Steve Schultze is reporting that UWM has “cut a tentative deal to charge all students $15 per semester to subsidize parking in the former Columbia-St. Mary’s Hospital ramp.”  This continued automobile subsidy isn’t a big one, but it is one example of how our institutions and policies, encourage people to drive, by hiding the true cost.

There are of course numerous services that all students contribute to, and as a society we often choose to subsidize certain priorities.  For example, we as a society subsidize economic development through TIF, government loans, and for decades now the mortgage interest deduction.  UWM students all put in for safety programs as well as many on-campus programs.  An argument can be made for or against many of these being subsidized, but this particular parking subsidy is not inline with the mission of the university, and brings with it hidden costs and negative impacts.

As an urban university, UWM should be encouraging students to live on or near campus and become part of the community.  By doing this UWM would be helping to fulfill its mission as an urban university while helping the neighborhood.  It would actually reduce parking needs and congestion, as students could walk, bike, or take transit to get to class instead of circling the neighborhood or garage in hopes of finding a spot.  In the long run, encouraging more students to make the East side of Milwaukee their home would help to keep demand strong for apartment development, help to fill rental vacancies on the East Side, and draw further retail development to the area.

For too long UWM has muddled in their commitment to being an urban university, it’s time for that to change.

Wisconsin Ave. Facade

Two controversial development projects received key approvals at the January 19th, 2011 meeting of the Common Council.

First, the development team for the $50 million Marriott Hotel project, which will be located near the corner of E. Wisconsin Ave. and N. Milwaukee St., won an appeal of the Historic Preservation Commission’s ruling that would have required a 15 foot setback for the upper floors of the building.  While the facades of some buildings along Wisconsin Ave. will be preserved or restored, this essentially approves the demolition of five buildings located in the East Side Commercial Historic District.  The 200-room hotel being developed by Jackson Street Management LLC. is expected to create 200 permanent jobs. It is being financed through the foreign investment via the federal EB-5 program, and if granted will utilized New Market Tax Credits.

Alderman Kovac discussed how the Historic Preservation Commission actually moved the process along quickly saying it moved “more quickly than your own front porch”.  He also reminded other council members that in 1983 the Common Council unanimously recommended these buildings for protection.

One significant change to the proposal was pushed by Alderman Wade.  He worked out an agreement with Jackson Street Management LLC. to a meet a level of EBE and RPP requirements on the project, following the pattern of the M.O.R.E. ordinance.

The appeal was approved on a vote of 13-2, with Alderman Bauman and Kovac voting against the appeal.

Corner Perspective

Also included in approvals at the January 19th 2011 Common Council meeting was an approval for the land sale and zoning for Greenwich Park Apartments. The $8.5 million apartment building, located near N. Farwell Ave. and Thomas St., will be 5-stories tall with 54-units, ranging from studios to 3-bedroom units, and include approximately 100 parking spots, of which 48 will be available for the general public.  This approval will allow Mercy Housing Lakefront, the project developer, to apply for WHEDA tax credits to assist in funding the project.

With these approvals in place, and likely support from Mayor Barrett, both projects appear to be poised to break ground this year.

Alterra's On-Street Bike Parking

Back on Park(ING) Day we wrote about the possibility of on-street bike corrals and how small changes to the built environment can help make for a better, more interesting Milwaukee.  But to create those small changes we need the City of Milwaukee and local businesses to work together to get things rolling.  Alterra is doing just that.  Alterra is working with the city to develop an on-street bike corral at Alterra’s Prospect Avenue location that will allow customers to safely and securely park their bicycle in a parking spot in front of the business.

On-street bike parking, similar to this proposal, has been tried in other cities such as Portland, San Francisco, and Seattle.  These cities have implemented on-street bike parking facilities because bike corrals help with traffic calming, provide a 10-to-1 customer to parking space ratio, improve the outdoor seating environment, welcome bike riders to an establishment, clear the sidewalks for pedestrians, and act as de facto curb extensions.  With this project Milwaukee will be added to the list of forward-looking, innovative cities that are exploring multi-modal transportation options, improving the built environment, and working towards better utilization of pavement.

Alterra’s project is a great step forward, but to continue the momentum, more will need to be done to change how parking spaces are viewed and to formalize a legal and affordable process to allow installations such as these within the City of Milwaukee.  For example, in Portland a formal process has been adopted for the creation of on-street bike corrals, and now more than 60 of these facilities have been installed.   One possible solution would be to make the approval process similar to that of outdoor street dining, by making it a special privilege, which would include a minimal annual fee and straightforward guidelines.

Early renderings of the bike corral were published on OnMilwaukee.com, but the project has continued to be refined and improved.  The updated renderings, by Chris Socha of Kubala Washatko Architects, Inc., are shown below:

Corner Perspective

Mercy Housing Lakefront’s $8.5 million Greenwich Park Apartments project received approval at the January 11th, 2011 meeting of the Zoning, Neighborhoods & Development Committee. The apartment building is planned for the corner of N. Farwell Ave. and Thomas St. on Milwaukee’s East Side. When complete the apartment building will be 5-stories tall with 54-units, ranging from studios to 3-bedroom units, and include about 100 parking spots, of which 48 will be available for the general public. The project will seek WHEDA tax credits as part of the financial package and will provide workforce housing, with a goal of attracting residents from US Bank and Columbia St. Mary’s.

Despite Murray Hill and Historic Water Tower Landmark Trust neighborhood groups opposition to the project, to some extent because of the workforce hosing, the project received support from Alderman Kovac and numerous community members.  Alderman Kovac explained that area plan includes increasing density along commercial corridors and increasing the availability of affordable housing on the East Side.  He added that he had been concerned about parking but now believes “I think we have a good parking solution.”  Wrapping up the meeting Alderman Witkowiak spoke about Mercy Housing saying “they’ve become good neighbors in our neighborhood.”

The proposal, including the zoning change and land sale, will now go before the full Common Council on January 19th, 2011.