Has Siting and Density (SAD)
Reached the Saturation Point in our Neighborhood (SPIN)?
I received an interesting
map from a neighbor one day a couple of weeks ago. It highlighted in somewhat
alarming detail a situation of
which I think many of us are only vaguely aware: in the Old Marketplace and Tenney-Lapham neighborhoods,
between Sidney and Pinckney
streets on one axis and E. Gorham
and E. Washington on the other axis, there are no fewer than nine existing
homeless shelters, group homes, social service agencies, and halfway houses.
The occasion for my
receiving this map was that an alert neighbor had received information that the
Executive Director of Housing Initiatives, Inc., Dean Loumos, intends to site
one more housing facility offering one bedroom, controlled-rent apartments to
the homeless, mentally ill, and low-income population in the former Zimmerman Plumbing
building -809 E. Johnson St.
The accompanying flyer urged us to attend an informational meeting that night, May 22, at 7:00 PM in the
Lapham school cafeteria. The leaflet
also mentioned that Mr. Loumos had not contacted the TLNA about his plans,
despite the fact that this building is in the heart of our neighborhood.
Attending the
meeting, I was surprised and
somewhat pleased that so many people could turn out on such short notice to
discuss this development. Tim Olsen,
past president of the TLNA, ably facilitated the questions, answers, and
"position statements,"
many of which were quite emotional in their content and delivery. Mr. Luomos had brought two persons who
are either consumers or consumers-directors of Housing Initiatives with him,
along with some literature describing the mission of Housing Initiatives, which
is "dedicated to providing high quality, affordably priced housing for
homeless mentally ill individuals."
Mr. Loumos was allowed to
speak first and to make his case. Stating that he felt that the "rumor mill" had
unfairly preceded him in making his announcement, he went on to say that the
reason none of us had heard anything about this transaction was that
"HI" had just signed the final papers that very afternoon-that he had
seen no reason to announce any plans until they were firm. (I am paraphrasing from memory here, so
I'm hoping to accurately capture
the tone of his remarks if not the exact language.) Attempting to be very
upbeat and reassuring, Luomos and
his group discussed in glowing terms the success rate of their two other houses
(one in our general neighborhood) and their plans for a "community theater" located
in part of the warehouse behind the shopfront building.
Though I am sure these
people intended to calm the fears of adjoining property owners and other
"interested parties"who are not so immediately affected by this
change, what I heard and felt was
a mixture of alarm and anger. My initial reaction, though I found Mr.
Loumos very personable, was that his confidence about his plans somewhat
ignored the fact that this property must be rezoned to accommodate more and
smaller apartments-and his discussing this change as a "done deal"
was a little premature. I also was irritated that he had not come forward to
our neighborhood association to
solicit views of the neighbors with whom he hopes to cooperate while this
project was still in the planning stage.
The appearance is that he wanted to sneak this facility in by the back
door.
Many fears were expressed
as well-a woman trained as a nurse asked Mr. Loumos for a "guarantee"
the safety of her young son, asking whether Mr. Loumos would "bet his
paycheck" that his clientele would be forced to stay on their
medications-a frequent problem for
mentally ill people. Her
opinions elicited an equally-emotional response from a man who suffers from a
mental illness, but who has become a fully-functioning client/employee for
Housing Initiatives.
Other concerns were more
practical, but no less serious-how many parking spaces would be added? How many would be needed to
accommodate the proposed theater?
Owners of businesses adjoining this facility expressed concern that
whether or not there was "actually" enough parking, that it is the
"perceived availability" of parking - a psychological factor which frequently
determines whether shoppers frequent business districts. I found this interesting and must
confess that it makes a lot of sense to me-we have been fighting to keep a
small, unique Johnson St. business district going. I have only lived in the
area twelve years and have already seen several businesses come and go. How many new residents know, for
example, that we had a butcher shop where the frame shop now sits? I miss it still. The businesses we do have are
wonderful and well-run-but we need more, not fewer. And Housing Initiatives
plan would practically ensure that once that business goes residential, it will
never go back to being a business.
One large concern for
many people, I believe, goes straight back to that map. Among our "social
service"-type facilities already in our boundaries is "ARC"
house, described as a Halfway House run by Wisconsin Prisons. By my reading of the map, it appears to be located within two
blocks of Lapham Elementary. It gives one food for thought, doesn't
it? Marquette School's painfully-recent
experience with the Transitional Education Program debacle springs immediately
to mind. So does the recent
Isthmus article about the same program, essentially a "puff piece" in
my opinion.
I think the label of the
map I received basically says it all:
"What's Wrong with This Picture?" What is wrong, in my
opinion, is that we are saturated with these kinds of facilities. Why is the West Side not as
"polka-dotted" with homeless facilities? Why do the services for the mentally ill cluster on the East
side? Is it because we do have a
fine reputation for being sensitive and tolerant? Progressive?
If so, I'm glad to live up
to that label. However, we are
also a stressed neighborhood and are struggling to keep the appearance and the
reality of a safe, affordable, but
protective place for both people and businesses to flourish.
Mr. Loumos took pains to
assure us that the facility will be staffed round the clock, that no drug or
alcohol problems would be allowed, that screening for appropriate residents is
tight and that people breaking the rules will be promptly removed. However, he was not really able to tell us why he had sought this
particular location-except that this would be HI's "flagship"
mixed-use facility. We are just
not all convinced that the flagship should find a port in a neighborhood which
may be suffering "siting saturation." At the very least, I believe those of us who are
directly or even remotely affected by this facility deserve a voice in the
decision, rather than having it foisted upon us.
Update: Attending last night's TLNA
meeting (June 21, 2001), I was
pleased to see that Mr. Loumos has now made time to meet with merchants in the neighborhood
and was present to speak, along with a business partner, Jim Schwall, to our
association. I am willing to
revise my assessment of the potential problems with Housing Initiatives a
little based on last night's additional facts. H.I. seems to
be an exceptionally well-run and managed enterprise. Moreover, Dean Loumos seems to be sincere in his promise to compromise and incorporate
solutions to neighbors'
concerns. If we want any more
new residences taking over formerly business property (which is a huge "if") I now believe that H.I. would be a good neighbor. And IF the proposed for-profit
community theater comes to fruition and rents the space intended, I would
welcome them too. Still, many
hurdles have to be jumped -not the least of which is zoning changes-before
H.I. makes its new port in TLNA. (What's
a metaphor for except to mix?)
What else I learned last
night: Acronyms are generally fun,
catchy, and a complete
puzzle: PUD, that unfortunate
abbreviation, stands for Planned Urban Development, as well as being a slang
term for a popular article of men's particular anatomy (or PAPA). What it means is a special "spot
zoning" exception granted by the City to projects it deems necessary or
desirable which do not meet the normal zoning regulations. There's something else similar called a
SIP (Special Ignorant Plan?) which I couldn't begin to understand. I only know
that I WANT one! When we tried to
add a tiny little bathroom downstairs on our house, we were told it violates
green space allowances and basically not even to bother. Where's the green space, you
PUD-seekers?
Not only does H.I.
require a PUD for its plan, but so does a totally new request, this one by a
man whose full name is Huang Nyugen (I think). This plan is represented by spokesperson Jim Vincent, whom I
had never met before and who denies any financial interest in this plan except that of being an architect
hired by Mr. Nguyen. The
idea is to move a condemned house from its present location on Blair St. and
shoehorn it in between two existing houses at 1014-1020 E. Johnson St. (or LIMBY in
Literally In My Back Yard).
There may have been merits to the Vincent/Huang plan, but Mr. Vincent's
manner is never going to convince me that we want to do him any favors. He was rude, condescending, arrogant,
and dismissive of sincere concerns.
He tried to lay blame for a very odd law that allows a person to move an
entire house without notifying the neighbors within 150 feet-as is customary for any request for property
changes-on one of his staunchest critics, who was present providing a necessary
informed and dissenting opinion.
He told me today that the board of TLNA is all "agenda-driven"
and that he was "blind-sided" walking into our association's meeting
because we are not truly representative of our neighborhood's views.
As Steve Martin used to
say, "Exc-u-u-use me!"
First, everybody has a personal agenda, but that does not mean we are
not simultaneously thinking of the greater good. Second, he has an agenda too-to make as much cash as possible
for himself and his client. In our
conversation today, he was joined by what he called his "new buddy"
in the neighborhood, the owner of the Speedjump coffee house (next to Norris
Ct.). Stosh was reluctant to give me
his name, but not his withering opinions of his neighbors' views of the house
moving scheme. He called the
laws governing development and
density "stupid," and
told me that he hadn't been able to find a place decent enough to rent for himself
because they are all rundown student housing-and that Mr. Nguyen's properties
at 1014 or 1020 were too expensive for him! Curious argument, that one. Mr. Vincent topped off our fairly civil discussion today by
saying that he didn't really need our approval to do what he and Mr. Nguyen
want and that if we as a neighborhood choose to fight it, we will lose.
Not only would his
proposed move increase density of those properties by TWELVE people, but it
sounds as if we could be treated to several more spaces of backyard
parking-something we have struggled against for several years. Huang would be
an absentee landlord and apparently (this is hearsay from a neighbor attending
the meeting) there have been numerous complaints and police calls to some of
his other properties. He has
allegedly sometimes needed to evict, but was vague about how many times and for
what causes.
My take? We have no reason as a neighborhood to
make Mr. Nguyen richer or increase the rental occupation in TLNA. None of the reasons given for how
this would benefit us made any sense-increasing diversity? GMAB-(Give me a break.) We are already diverse and proud
of it. Improving the appearance of
properties? The owner can do
that without moving another house in.
(To be fair, he did improve 1014 after the previous owner bungled it
badly, but in the process somebody added on a huge addition which Vincent
claims did not increase the occupancy.)
My question: why did anybody bother to add it on in
that case? When we took a vote as an association, not one person approved of
this proposal. In fact, we
resolved not to support it I
say we tell the Vincent/Nguyen gang resoundingly NO by attending their zoning
meeting and stating our case.
And while we are at it, please give me a couple acronyms to
play with. I'm kinda getting tired
of being COGS (Crank of Gorham Street-my own coinage.)
-
Gay Davidson-Zielske