Eyes on Milwaukee
Couture Could Break Ground This Summer
Barrett Lo company reaffirms Findorff as general contractor.
Get a daily rundown of the top stories on Urban Milwaukee
Barrett Lo company reaffirms Findorff as general contractor. Back to the full article.
Photos - Page 2
Great pictures! Love the streetcar running through this place. Moving forward in Milwaukee.
there is something so wrong about this building, who can live in it and who gets the benefit of it.
All the makings of a world class development.
Watching, anxiously awaiting this for the city.
I hope for all, that this proceeds with insight and passion.
This will display to visitors our clear vision.
I hope it happens. Wish it wasn’t white. Inject some color into our skyline please.
Looking less likely this will ever happen. The groundbreaking has been pushed back and back and back.
For the record, the most recent legal actions noted in the article as cause for “delay”–in which POP was a DEFENDANT and with Milwaukee County and City of Milwaukee as PLAINTIFFS–sought to find the “line” where the public trust doctrine should be applied in the future to protect former lakebed properties that had been subsequently filled. The judge ruled that a portion of the property was lakebed, but that the government was able to abdicate their trust responsibilities in limited circumstances. That lawsuit ended in late June of 2015. So 3 years ago or thereabouts.
I object to the cheap shot this author took regarding Preserve Our Parks (POP), criticizing them for Barrett’s delays. First, this case regarding Public Trust Doctrine took place over two years ago. Second, the case involved a Declaratory Judgment which meant the court was asked to weigh in on the issue of preserving land protected by this doctrine. This was required by a county board resolution since the Board had been informed that this was not an issue that had been resolved. Barrett was getting a sweet heart deal on lake front property as the only bidding contractor and basically well under fair market value, but the county required that Barrett clear this issue in court with a Declaratory Judgment. Third, once the court ruled that the Public Trust Doctrine would not apply since the land would still have a public use (public park along with public transit, both included in this project), Barrett was allowed to move forward. This satisfied the county requirement. POP did not appeal, and no delay was caused by this public interest advocate of public parks. Fourth and finally, this court case occurred nearly two years ago and fails to explain the long delays of this developer which I suspect has more to do with his delay in getting financing. But I have no inside track on that so it shall remain by surmise. Pat Jursik Former County Supervisor and in full disclosure, current POP member because most of us still care about advocating for public, open parks.