Milwaukee County Parks Director Sue Black doesn't rest

One might not blame Parks Director Black for sitting back and resting a bit on the laurels of last year's Gold Medal award for an underfunded park system. But that's not her style. Milwaukee County is better for her leadership.

Check out this story in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel about current plans for the parks.

Ten years of smart growth in wisconsn

Has it really been ten years since the State of Wisconsin began to require communities to adopt the thoughtful planning process known as "smart growth?" I still remember the "kicking and screaming" that John Torinus describes in his column on the success of that initiative in today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

Call me a skeptic, but I can't help wondering: If builders and realtors consider Smart Growth a success, how much conservation of natural and agricultural lands is being done? (Conservation is not the only goal of Smart Growth, of course, but it's the one that makes my urban wilderness heart warm.)

To learn more about Smart Growth, go to SmartGrowth.org/.

Plan Commission Approves Zoning for Milwaukee River Corridor

The following story is courtesy Milwaukee Riverkeeper. Milwaukee's Central Park is the popular name for the stretch of the Milwaukee River between Silver Spring Drive and North Avenue. It is one of the most amazing highlights of Milwaukee's amazing urban wilderness.

Milwaukee's Central Park - One Step Closer!

The City Planning Commission voted unanimous approval of the map and the Milwaukee River Design Guidelines for the Overlay Zone of Milwaukee's Central Park!

Milwaukee Riverkeeper and our partners on the Milwaukee River Work Group have been working hard on passing the Milwaukee River Greenway Overlay District legislation, which will protect over 8 miles of river, floodplain, and riverfront habitat from the former North Avenue Dam to Silver Spring Road.

Thanks to the many supporters who and came out and testified on behalf of the Milwaukee River!

Now on to a Public Works hearing for the stormwater and forestry provisions on Wednesday, May 12, a Zoning and Neighborhood Development Committee on Tuesday, May 18, and final approval by the Milwaukee Common Council on May 25.

For meeting locations and more information on Milwaukee's Central Park click here.

For more information about Milwaukee's Central Park click here.
For a slide show about Milwaukee's Central Park click here.

After rhetorical firestorm Wauwatosa adopts UWM plan despite questions

What was Alderman Donegan thinking? The rest of the Wauwatosa Common Council went very quiet; the audience went still as if holding their breaths. The one unmentionable topic was broached, and despite protestations to “drain emotion from the debate” this one brought out emotions aplenty: is preservation of the Eschweiler buildings worth the loss of potential parkland?

The reaction was predictable. In fact, Mr. Donovan even predicted it himself, saying that he’d be “getting a lot of letters” by taking this position. What he got, in very short order, was a firestorm of criticism from the council. Never mind that the preservation of those buildings, which are on the national registry of historic places, has always been a prerequisite for any development on the county grounds, end of argument. No, there had to be an exhaustive review of Wauwatosa’s stewardship of historic properties and reassertion of preservation as one of the city’s premier values.

In fact, this stunning turn in what should have been a conversation about the merits and scope of UWM’s plan followed an award ceremony. We had just witnessed the charm and effervescent delight on the faces of elementary school children for artwork they had done on the theme of historic Wauwatosa. The contest was sponsored by the Historical Society. If questioning the value of the Eschweiler buildings was some sort of strategy, it not only failed utterly but, in my opinion, it derailed an important debate.

Nearly an hour of rhetoric obscured the fact that Alderman Donovan had not suggested that the historic buildings be demolished. His much more measured and reasonable motion was simply to return the question of approval back to the committee on community development for further study. Unfortunately, his tactless comments about preservation made it possible for vocal aldermen who had already made up their minds to dismiss his other very pertinent questions. The foremost of these were: Will Wauwatosa give a green light to 200,000 sq. ft. of residential development before it knows how much the renovation of the Eschweiler buildings will cost? What if, after construction of the apartment units (intended to enable the developer to renovate the dilapidated structures) it is then determined that the cost is still too high?

More important to the many patient audience members, Alderman Donegan’s motion to remand the resolution back to the committee superseded one by Alderman Hanson to amend the resolution. Hanson’s motion would have limited the total square footage of development to the originally agreed 850,000, down from UWM’s request of almost 1.2 million sq. ft. Late in the evening, by the time the council returned to Mr. Hanson’s motion, which had the support of most of the environmental groups represented in the audience, no one was in the mood for further debate. This significant difference in development footprints was dismissed as “negligible.” (Never mind that, if all of the still speculative developments are completed and further need is demonstrated, UWM could come back to Wauwatosa with a new request to return to its 1.2 million.) The “no” vote on that amendment was quickly followed by approval of UWM’s preliminary plan for Innovation Park with two dissenting votes.

To view my recent photo shoot on the county grounds go to my flickr site.

For more information and analysis:
The Daily Reporter
The Political Environment
Milwaukee County First

Wauwatosa: proceed with caution on the milwaukee county grounds

An open letter to the Wauwatosa Common Council.

My positions on UWM’s plans for the county grounds closely match those of Barb Agnew, director of the Monarch Trail, and I will try not to repeat them. I have four main points to make: 1) constituencies, 2) compromise, 3) some details of the plan, 4) caution.

1. Who are the constituents here and what are their interests?

The committee on community development discussion last Tuesday night was dominated by concerns about the details of the UWM plan. UWM is clearly the dominant stakeholder. Representatives of the Monarch Trail, Riverkeeper, Sierra Club and other concerned groups, although not allowed to speak, were visibly present. Some of their concerns were acknowledged during the discussion. Although the audience included ordinary citizens, like myself, what was missing was even a passing reference to the overwhelming opposition that was expressed in last week’s public hearing to any sort of development. The point I made at that meeting still stands: no constituents stood up to support this plan. The environmental organizations are not taking the extremist position in this conversation; they—however reluctantly—see the need for compromise.

2. It’s time for a new compromise.

Ten years ago the Common Council compromised. The public then, as now, clearly wanted no development. The Kubala-Washatko plan that was approved by Wauwatosa allowed for some development. During the past year we have seen further compromise. UWM’s good plan takes many environmental concerns into account. However, the requested acreage increased from 66 to 89 and that was approved. Now you are being asked to allow a significant increase in overall square footage of development from 850,000 to nearly 1.2 million. This is too much. It’s time for the developers to compromise, not the public.

3. The devil is in the details.

Most of the plan, which includes habitat protections, bio-remediation of storm water, and sensitivity to the relationship between parklands and developments, among other things, is a good compromise. The committee discussed some specifics of the plan and added judicious restrictions. These were accepted by the UWM representatives at Tuesday’s meeting. I want to urge action by the Council on three major details.

 As Barb Agnew has said, it would be a mistake to raise the building heights in order to reduce the footprint of development. (See my previous blog for more on that.)

 Instead, the overall footprint of development should be reduced by limiting the square footage to the originally agreed 850,000. UWM needs only a small fraction of that for its campus. This is the compromise needed to give the public its due.

 The initial phase of development, as presented to the committee, makes it clear that complete development is not only years away but speculative. While it may make economic sense to install the utility infrastructures in anticipation of full development, the exit road to Swan Blvd., which would divide protected wildlife habitat areas, should not be constructed until a later phase makes it necessary.

4. Caution and vigilance will be needed.

By the end of a meeting that went very late some of the aldermen seemed a bit shell shocked at the magnitude and importance of the issues being discussed. (Read the blog I posted online previously for a more complete description of that meeting.) A very real dilemma was inadvertently created by the coincidence of such a large turnover in the middle of this process. I urge the common council to acknowledge the need to slow this process down and honor the instincts of those committee members who had valid questions. Please send this back to the committee before a final vote is taken.

As Alderman Jay pointed out so graphically, vigilance will be needed even after your well-intentioned specifications are put in place. This is not the moment to proceed without exceptional caution. I thank you all for your sincere efforts and your obvious concern for this vital and special place. We are about to change Wauwatosa indelibly. Let us do it right.

For a portfolio of photographs of this area that I shot during a two hour walk on Wednesday, April 29, go to my flickr site.

Gulf oil spill proves we all live in an urban wilderness

I hit a solid wall of backed up traffic the moment I turned onto the Ontario Street entrance to the Kennedy Expressway. The jam continued on for miles and didn’t ease up until the Edens split off from the Kennedy. On the other side of the median, traffic coming into Chicago for Saturday evening activities was even worse. As we crept along my friends and I reflected on our enjoyable afternoon seeing ArtChicago. It didn’t occur to me to think about all the gasoline that my car burned, let alone the imponderable amount of oil that was being consumed all around us on this one highway in the one city out of all the cities and highways on this one day.

 

Meanwhile, an estimated 200,000 gallons of oil per day continues to gush to the surface of the gulf of Mexico off Louisiana. It will most likely become the worst oil spill in the nation’s history, with the potential to destroy marine, marsh, and coastline habitats from around the Gulf to North Carolina due to the interconnected ecology of the Gulf Stream system. We all live in an urban wilderness. The butterfly effect sounds ridiculous if you think about a single butterfly. Here's a more understandable parable. Everything is interconnected. Oil spills happen all the time. The size of this one makes it more newsworthy. But oil spills can ruin the environment with regularity as long as we can drive around without thinking of them as a consequence of our actions.

Coincidences can be such a pain! It’s a bit hard not to see this as some kind of global payback for the Obama’s decision to open up more coastline for drilling.

There is plenty of news coverage. I’ve read The New York Times and Associated Press accounts.

A walk on the Milwaukee County Grounds

On Wednesday, after the Wauwatosa Common Council's committee on community development rezoned this land, I went out for a walk and took a few pictures. Here is a sample. More can be found on my flickr site.

The Sycamore tree, highlight of the Monarch Trail and roosting site during the fall migration.

The Eschweiler complex. Five buildings designed by the famed Milwaukee architect still stand on the grounds. Restoration of the historic buildings is planned as part of the Innovation Park proposal.