Like Us
Follow Us
Downer development draws attention of National Trust
The National Trust for Historic Preservation's Midwest Director, Royce A. Yeater sent a letter to the City of Milwaukee's Plan Commission Wednesday expressing the group's opposition -- spurred by neighborhood complaints -- to the proposed development of the parking lot at Downer Avenue and Belleview Place.
On Wednesday, OnMilwaukee.com reported Ald. Mike D'Amato saying the plan for a 5-story structure with parking addressed concerns expressed by neighbors, but at least one of those neighbors told OnMilwaukee.com that not everyone is satisfied. Another neighbor included OMC in a mass e-mail announcing the National Trust letter.
"The truth is that a large number of Ald. D'Amato's constituents have vigorously lobbied against, predominantly, the height of the condo towers, and the development of the parking lot," said East Side resident Dawn McCarthy.
"We have been told that the changes that have been made in the plans address our concerns. By the power of his position he has a voice, but his saying that our concerns have been addressed does not make it true. Nor is it true that we are against development, against change or few in number. Not a single neighborhood association in the area approved the master plan."
The National Trust's letter -- which was closed copied to Mayor Tom Barrett, Chip H. Brown, III of the Wisconsin Historical Society, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer James Draeger, Denise Hice, president of Milwaukee Preservation Alliance, Donna Schlieman, secretary of the Milwaukee Preservation Alliance and neighborhood residents Thea Kovac, Jeff Loss and McCarthy -– read, in part:
"I am writing you on behalf of the National Trust for Historic Preservation to express our strong opposition to the Detailed Plan Development proposed at 2574-90 North Downer Avenue. We are concerned that the 5-story parking garage proposed for the City of Milwaukee property at 2574-90 North Downer Avenue will have an adverse impact on both of these historic districts. The design and materials of the proposed development are entirely inappropriate for a historic district and its size is vastly out of scale for the pedestrian-friendly commercial area and residential neighborhoods on which it will intrude."
The letter points specifically to the impact a structure of the size proposed would have on surrounding homes.
"Simply put, a 5-story parking garage is not the right use for this site. The Downer Avenue Historic Commercial District, mostly comprised of two- and three-story commercial buildings built from 1903-1936, and the small scale residential homes closest to the Downer Avenue commercial district in the nearby North Point Historic District, will be overwhelmed by this development. One of the residences will be within 3 feet of the rear of the proposed new garage and will be dwarfed by this behemoth structure, drastically reducing its livability as sunlight is blocked and window views obscured."
It goes on to say that it does not oppose all development on the site and that some other proposals for the land are, in the eyes of the National Trust, better adapted to the site.
"We have reviewed several of the other submissions put forward in response to an RFP issued for the parcel, many of which are more appropriate for the site and would have much less of a negative impact on the surrounding neighborhoods."
McCarthy agrees.
"Opposition to the GPD on Downer is to the height, scale and appropriateness," said McCarthy. "This is a predominantly residential neighborhood and home owners here have been dismayed that zoning laws, put in place to protect homeowners, have been overturned to help a developer who claims he will reinvigorate Downer Avenue, although several tenants have left since he took ownership last summer."
D'Amato refused comment on the letter, saying in an e-mail, "The process will be followed and this building will go before the Historic Preservation Commission for approval."
A call to New Land Enterprises Friday was not returned by deadline.
Talkbacks
twoaday2 | April 27, 2007 at 3:58 p.m. (report)
Couple things. First the parking lot abuts the historic land, I don't believe it is actually part of the district. And as it's been a surface parking lot for many many years its hardly historic. Secondly they haven't halted anything yet as part of the process was to go before the historic preservation board anyhow. Finally the land isn't sold its all part of the deal contingent on approvals. Let me ask this.. if there was no parking garage built would the building of the 11 story building be the complaint we are hearing still?
| Rate this: |
observant | April 25, 2007 at 9:33 p.m. (report)
The Wisconsin Historical Society has halted New Land's progress. According to state law building in a historic district must not adversely affect historic districts. This parking garage, in their eyes, clearly does. The City Plan Commission, on Monday, voted to postpone making a decision. New Land has to go back to the drawing board! Maybe they should wait until the city actually sells the land to them. Maybe the city shouldn't sell the land to them, especially at only $350,000.
| Rate this: |
twoaday2 | April 24, 2007 at 2:57 p.m. (report)
observant> My bad the Miller? house is 90 ft away the other two families (kovak and ?) are in fact close to the garage. But had you watched the ZND meeting about a month back it was clear the opposition was significantly older (retirment age basically) than the supporters in the neighborhood. It was clearly visible to anyone paying attention. Further these people first all complained about the height of the condo tower (then 14 stories now 11), then the density (now its gonna have a hotel and some condos), now the garage. This has little to do with the tower, the garage, historic preservation or whatever it has to do with not in my backyard. PS I agree Boris should probably be in jail and D'amato is not helping himself with the neighbors. But we elect representatives not simply people who vote our way.
| Rate this: |
twoaday2 | April 24, 2007 at 2:56 p.m. (report)
observant> My bad the Miller? house is 90 ft away the other two families (kovak and ?) are in fact close to the garage. But had you watched the ZND meeting about a month back it was clear the opposition was significantly older (retirment age basically) than the supporters in the neighborhood. It was clearly visible to anyone paying attention. Further these people first all complained about the height of the condo tower (then 14 stories now 11), then the density (now its gonna have a hotel and some condos), now the garage. This has little to do with the tower, the garage, historic preservation or whatever it has to do with not in my backyard. PS I agree Boris should probably be in jail and D'amato is not helping himself with the neighbors. But we elect representatives not simply people who vote our way.
| Rate this: |
mitchgat | April 24, 2007 at 2:15 p.m. (report)
I live in a very old house (built in 1858) in a historic district in MKE. I didn't move to the area or into the house because of it's historical significance, yet now that I'm there I really do appreciate the charm and the craftsmanship that went into building it. I have friends who are engineers and architects who LOATHE development that's modern. They appreciate new and forward design but they think, for example, the Park Terrace Row Homes in the Beerline district are out of character with the area that they were built in. 'm just the opposite. I think we need to stop holding on so tightly to the past and start building FUTURE landmarks that people, in a 100 years or so, can be proud of and want to preserve. I agree that we need to preserve our current historic treasures, such as those that exist on Downer, but there's got to be a happy medium. What do people suggest as ways to compromise and improve the current Downer Ave. scene? This is not a case of NIMBY or people being afraid of change. Some of the reasons given for being against this development are quite valid! Has a compromise been offered or some other viable option introduced and I missed it? To me, doing nothing and not trying to improve the area isn't the answer either. I think folks need to work from a common ground, which I think is -- Downer Ave. has several wonderful, classic examples of architecture that should be preserved. These buildings do define the neighborhood and new retail options should be explored. Working from that common ground and removing much of the emotion and opinion from the discussion, might allow for a decision that's amicable to both sides.
| Rate this: |
Show me the other 17 Talkbacks
|
22 comments about this article.
Post a comment / write a review. |
Facebook Comments
Disclaimer: Please note that Facebook comments are posted through Facebook and cannot be approved, edited or declined by OnMilwaukee.com. The opinions expressed in Facebook comments do not necessarily reflect those of OnMilwaukee.com or its staff.
