The Milwaukee River Work Group Does Not Speak for Me by Sura, September 24

On Sept 5th, after an anesthetizing presentation by Mandel (the first question didn’t come until 1 hour and 40 minutes into the presentation) on a proposal to build a 700-bed dorm on the Milwaukee River, the Milwaukee River Work Group’s PR person, Jeff Fleming, helped draft a letter to Alder Nik Kovac praising the development.

Despite the fact that there are 3 proposed locations under consideration for dorms, the letter is in glowing praise of this high-density development on the river. This draft was sent out by Ann Brummitt, the coordinator of the group to her email list which includes Mandel and other developers, DCD and UWM reps.

In that letter, the Milwaukee River Work Group (MRWG) claims that Mandel “embraces both the public interest and the goals of our organization.” What?! It dismisses the concerns of many neighbors and environmentalists as “separate concerns” including those about “the density of the development, traffic on neighboring streets, safety, plans for the property beyond the useful life of the dormitory, and the impact additional students might have on the surrounding residential neighborhoods.”

Those of us who live near the river know that the health of the river and the health of the neighborhoods are inextricably linked.

But it’s not surprising because in nearly ever decision-making move, with developers, DCD and other city staff and politicians, MRWG has not been represented by the neighbors who are knowledgeable and passionate about preserving the river (and who give the group credibility with the city), but by staff people who live in the suburbs or other parts of the city. Some of these people don’t even regularly attend meetings, and neighbors who do have not been invited to the decision-making table.

MRWG is limiting its idea of protection of the river to securing the viewshed, by restricting height and setback (and this is not even assured with the Mandel proposal). But these are not the only gauges of a health river or healthy surrounding neighborhoods.

Density is also an issue.

Look, density is an issue for the other 2 proposed dorm locations, on Farwell or Prospect Avenues, so why is it not an issue for a development abutting our Primary Environmental Corridor?

Let’s do the math. 700 students for 9 months of the year is equivalent to almost 200,000 visitors a year in our river corridor and surrounding neighborhoods. And this foot, bike and car traffic is not a group of teacher- and mentor-led children coming on a guided hike at the Urban Ecology Center.

In this regard, UWM, Mandel and MRWG have not incorporated the concerns of immediate neighbors, many of whom have been involved in MRWG. One hopes that Alder Kovac has a broader vision, one that will lead us to look to him for future leadership and not just more of the same old done deals that D’Amato brought us.

We are in a 2-year study period for an overlay district to protect our River. If we throw away this opportunity to use this time to actually study and incorporate new information, we will be left with a meaningless overlay.

Update: I just got back from an MRWG meeting. Two things of note.

1. Botanist and ecologist Dr. Gerould Wilhelm presented at the meeting. He talked about our need to view the river holistically — not just as the water that runs through a channel, but all the area that holds the bluffs, that feeds water into the river over the course of days or months or years. He also identified a 50 ft. setback as inadequate to protect the river.
2. The letter will be somewhat amended. But Jeff Fleming did it again. He gave some of us river-lovers a scolding, saying, “We need to be perceived as reasonable,” as if discussing density and carrying capacity is unreasonable and will cost us the protections of the overlay district. Sorry, dad.

I have to ask whose side MRWG and Fleming are on, if they’re willing to sell out on the main piece of land we’re working to protect.

As one of my friends said, “What you have witnessed I have seen so many times before: Hearings where staff and officails go before citizens. The hearing is “staged” and the community is just and add-on. It’s a sorry thing.”

If you haven’t yet contacted Nik with your thoughts on development on the river, now is the time: 286.3447, nkovac@milwaukee.gov.

P.S. For those who are worried that something worse might be built there, consider two things. First, the dorm is as tall as the height restrictions will allow. So anything else will also be kept to that height (and setback), and condos or other developments will also be less dense. Second, even Mike D’Amato said “no” to a Walgreens at that site. One expects Nik to at least match the man he challenged. Let’s hope he has the guts to surpass him and developer-driven goals.

24 Sep 2008 | 8:35 pm | UWM, Water, Development, Environmental Sustainability

No comments

Add your comments