Business Improvement District Board #2 (historic Third Ward) - Regular Meeting

You take the role, please. Oh, sorry. Sorry.

Piper Eisenbrown.

Here. Sally

Pilts. Here. Nicholas Hans Robinson.

Here.

Patricia Keaton Can. Excused.

Matt Gerrose.

Here.

Robert Boutman. Here. Chair Jordan Morales?

Here. Okay. Moving on to item 251,026, resolution relating to a certificate of appropriateness for storefront replacement at 235 South 2nd Street in the South 2nd Street Historic District for Border Building LLC.

Okay. This is back from last month with a significant redesign that is much improved. This is the building on South 2nd. There have been challenges getting decent historic photos. The architects and I have both put in some effort and that one on the right is about best of risk.

There are some other angles. You can kind of make out early twentieth century storefront on the north end in this photo. It's almost certainly not 1850s. I will wait for Chris to do his thing.

Are we supposed to look at

it on the TV here?

Like, the crowd is supposed to see something, aren't they? Okay. Okay.

So this is the revised version. Full height full height windows and transoms, double doors, design in wood, careful detailing, added some OG moldings, slightly reset storefront entrances and bulkhead details that are period appropriate. This is the previous version that we rejected that was all off the shelf metal pieces. This is much closer to the traditional storefront design that we are familiar with. This is just Jacobo, which is standard drawing for comparison.

I have only one little concern and that's because I don't think there is a good answer.

There is one central window on the Oregon Street facade, which they are infilling to match in former loading bay

that is already filled in with this sort of gridded window. But it has the same lintel as all the double hung windows on the upper floors. But having one double hung here would also look weird. So I am not sure what the correct answer is. So I throw out to the commission to just leave it as drawn or suggest something else. Apart from that, I'm recommending approval.

Could Okay. We go back to that overall elevation so they can see it in context, So

sorry.

Would you mind saying your name and address?

Misty Rodberg. I am from Anderson Ashton representing the owner. Okay. We are the architecture group.

So you can

kind of see to the left on this image here that we've got the far left loading bay. They have that divided to kind of similar. It's a window with the Muttons division. So it's not a security glass situation. This is supposed to be looking comparable.

And then to the right on that same elevation is a continuation of the wood because that's going to be in the front area. What's currently there is a boarded up beadboard that was kind of filled in. So it does not have any appearance of the historic. I'd love to hear what we would we could do in that beyond what we were trying to

do. Okay.

All right. Any questions from commissioners?

So, what was in there right now, I guess we're going to have to keep going, is plywood. Yeah. Same size, same opening, brick, the rough opening, everything is the same. And then, this is a proposal which seems like it's sort consistent with that existing window on the left, the gridded thing. Yes. And the proportions of the lights are about Yes, close to ones

sir.

That seems consistent to me. Think with some storefront thing and there might actually even see more

on it.

So, think that that seems right. And then the rest of the storefront stuff you're touching and you've worked with them now on making certainly the proportions look right. Are you thinking too of getting some detailed drawings based on an approval?

There are some section details that I think are just enough in the file. Okay. There's sections through the trim, not full sections of everything. Okay. It's enough. Okay.

So, you're comfortable with the Okay.

Any other comments? Do we have a motion?

Sure. I'll move for approval as submitted with kind of gritted appearance of that opening on the South Side on Oregon Street. Second. Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All

right. Moving on to item 251,276, resolution granting permanent historic designation to the second German Episcopal Church, part of the Brewer's Hill National Register Historic District at 140 West Garfield Avenue in the 6th Aldermanic District.

Okay. This was held over last month so that the owner had more time to review the report. So I'm going to kind of rush through this as a broad overview. Second German Episcopal Church also known as Second Epworth Methodist Church also known as Methodist Church. At 2nd in Garfield in the Brewery's Hill neighborhood, boundary for this is proposed as one foot east of the existing building so that the two houses on the same parcel are cut out if perhaps the owner files us.

If this goes forward and the owner files a CSM, we are happy to amend the file before ZND. So this is a congregation built in 1862, starting on King Drive, moved here to get away from the expanding and noisy business district, hired local neighborhood architect, Herman Paul Schnetsky and neighborhood builders, the Reason Brothers. Church opened in 1888 with bilingual services and was one of the early broadcasters of sermons on the radio in Milwaukee. 1928, they merged with Epworth from 4th And Center. 1939, they hired Hugo Heuser for a renovation, a typical white congregation at the time.

However, by the 1950s, they realized they needed to adapt to the changing neighborhood and welcome the new African American community that was settling in. While it took them while according to more recent research, it took them some time to live up to this promise from 1955, they did get there. Unlike some of their neighboring churches, they refused to leave. Across the street was Garfield Avenue Baptist, which built new 1950 and veiled to the suburbs in 1963. Epworth hosted multiple civil rights speakers, black arts organizations for plays and art shows, urban league meetings for neighborhood improvement programs, planning space for the MPS Boycott of nineteen sixty five and founding member of Northcott Neighborhood and House and their official religious home.

Herman Paul Schnitzky was born in Germany in 1850. Multiple famous churches throughout the city, mostly German congregations. The main church on KK, a house in Concordia, the Blatz Headquarters Building was the Germania Building. Gothic typical Gothic revival style remodeled by Hugo Heuser who is most famous who did several churches but is most famous for the Wadham's Pagoda while he was working for Eshweiler. Boyser was well respected for his detailed drawings and this is one of the few drawings that survives in city permit records of what he did at this building.

While there does appear to have been some exterior work, I've only been able to find interior drawings. The staff is recommending recommending designation based on criteria F1, its exemplification of development of cultural, economic, social or historic heritage of the city as a response to suburbanization, white flight, African American settlement, civil rights involvement and support of the MPS boycott. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an architectural type, rare example of high Victorian Gothic, we don't have too many of these churches displaying the polychromy and it shows some subtle Germanic design influence. Number six, its identification is the work of artist, architect or craftsman, master builder whose individual works influence the development of the city. Schnetzky is obvious, Blatz Brewery, St.

John's Lutheran Vliet, F. Meyer Boot and Schuh on Pleasant, Greenfield School, which is now the West Allis Historical Society and the Germania Building. Hugo Heuser responsible for over 300 churches across the nation, at least 30 in Wisconsin and eight known in the city, several early state fair buildings and numerous homes throughout the city. And nine, it's essentially its character as a neighborhood landmark. Church is a contributing property to the existing Brewer's Hill National Register District and occupies a prominent corner.

Historic Brewer's Hill Association considers the building important to their neighborhood identity as one of the few surviving historic churches in their neighborhood. It is one of the largest buildings in the National Register District and is a prominent example and good example of well executed work with Cream City Brick. So staff is recommending designation under criteria for fulfilling criteria one, five, six and nine.

Okay. This item requires us to open for a public hearing. So, I'll hear a motion for that. So moved. Your second? Second. All right. All in favor of opening a public hearing? Aye. Aye.

With that, I guess we'll start inviting people up to give testimony on this item. Just as a reminder, last month we heard this item held it over to this month due to, I believe, the owner objected because just he didn't have enough time to review the information. So now we've had a month pass. Hopefully everybody's taking time that cares to review this file. And we'll hear commentary specifically we on this commission are specifically interested in commentary as it relates to the items F1, F5, F6, and F9 in the report.

So with that, we'll invite people to come up and say their piece. And when you come up, please say just your name and your address. All right.

Don't want to speak on behalf of the owner because I was hoping he would come first. Ryan, are you gonna come up here? Yeah. Okay. I need you to speak first. I can't I can't make this motion. So

Ryan Pattee, one of the property owners. So since the last meeting, I've been in ongoing conversations with Historic Preservation Alliance. We've made I've made some efforts to reach out to the Brewers Hill Association to discuss some alternatives to designate it as a local historic designation unsuccessfully. Like I said before, the process was triggered by a third party unauthorized raise order and we believe there's other ways to protect the building from being raised, which was the initial concerns rather than imposing a local historic designation. That's going to I know it's not part of the four points he brought up there, but to significantly increase repair costs and maintenance costs ultimately making the building unaffordable for local businesses that we generally are trying to attract.

Yes, request would be just to give us a little bit more time. We're working together trying to figure out alternatives. So we'd request to have more time to work together and try to find another resolution to

this rather than getting historic designation. So because I'm not the owner, cannot request that. But at this time

Can you

tell me your name?

Oh, I'm sorry. I'm Emerud. I am the Executive Director of Milwaukee Preservation Alliance, 1100 South 5th Street. And so due to that, at this time, MPA, we agree with the request just to hold the nomination decision for one more month. As community liaisons, we really believe that further communication among the stakeholders in this is very important.

I think Mr. Petit, the Bruise Hill Neighborhood Association, St. Marcus, and truly any others need the opportunity to sit down and talk to each other, before, you know, and it could be very useful before a final determination is made on this register because I think all the parties involved need understand the implications of what local designation means, the process of certificate of appropriateness, which I'm not sure everyone understands, and just the implications for the owner, for the association, etcetera. So we would just we're not saying no. Of course, we would never say no.

We are a preservation organization at our heart, and we respect the staff and the work that they're doing and agree with them that this building is very historic. We're just asking for a little bit more time to discuss it.

Mr. Chair, in our public hearings, is it appropriate to ask questions or do we like

to Yeah, just we have. I think

Is that not the chair?

We have before, yeah.

Rather than have you come back up in this kind of manner. I'm curious because this is presented so many times these years now that I've been on this commission that it's just going to cost too much money to be able to do proper maintenance on a building. Given that we don't have any authority inside, you can do whatever you want on the inside of any of our buildings on a local register, that it's really very much about the exterior envelope and its role in community affairs and what we all think of this as a treasureable kind of object for the community. So, given that and that these kind of churches because one of ours is identification number nine, right, a unique location. It's just really you don't have to be Methodist, whatever.

It's just it's a very important building in these kind of neighborhoods. The other one, one,

building, if you look at some of the most recent shots, it's been stripped of many of its original things around there. The stained glass is gone, the doors have been altered. It's been it was altered from the first architect to the second architect. So it's a shell of what it was when it was originally built. So our main concern is, for example, it used to have stained glass in the windows. Well, if we need to swap the windows out that are in there now, where we may have

to go back to what

they had then, which are you're talking 300,000 worth of windows, where if that is not required, it's probably $100,000 worth of windows. There's many other things along the line, metal and there's a bunch of them but mainly it's windows.

That's what I suspect. Things like brick and tuck point and so forth, you have to do this anyways.

Yes. That's not

all all to to anyways. Anyways. Yes. Has to be done anyway. Perhaps a big concern would be stained glass, but you understand that's what a commission is for, to look at these things, to evaluate them in a couple of years from now to say are there any alternatives to that, okay? And that you have a pretty good body of knowledgeable people here who are not in the business of trying to bankrupt owners, but in the business of lending advice and support for other things in Milwaukee and parts of the country, quite frankly. We have that perspective, okay? Window stained glass windows were just redone at St. Stanislaus on the South Side. You know St.

Stanislaus, okay? So, you have to kind of there are options. There are different types of French construction, you know, of decorative windows and so on. But that's the value of being locally designated is that you can have a discussion about these items that are expensive. Oftentimes, roofing slate roofs on church are very expensive but there are alternatives and that's what a commission offers is kind of that sort of advice and that professional understanding, you know, of what can be done.

None of us want to bankrupt any of the owners of old buildings. So I just want to say that. And I think if you're going to come back in a month and still have a position that you object to this, it's going to be important not to just be in the abstract that it costs too much money. You've got to kind of make a case here. You've got

address the five points that

we Right. That I understand is going be 100,000 but it could be $300,000 That just is not a good thing for us to make a decision. When you do come back, give us the specifics understanding that we can do whatever you want on the inside of the building. Okay? It's just the exterior envelope.

Yes. With that sorry, go ahead.

And I would like to understand what are the two of you able to discuss to move this agenda item along? And because it clearly, according to staff in terms of all the research that they've done, fits the criteria. So I'm a little bit confused as to what you as a non for profit who is is is core mission is preservation.

Mhmm.

How can you help this gentleman?

So for us, it was a conversation of thank you to Chairman Jaros for basically doing my job for me. That was a huge help, explaining the implications of the commission, what it would mean, what local designation would look like, what those costs, what the navigation of certificates of appropriateness would look like, and just understanding the process. I know sometimes ownership received these local designations wholly unprepared. I know we went through the holidays and things went very quickly. And I think that was and I also think there was some tension between ownership and the neighborhood association that we as an organization were hoping to resolve, to have everyone kind of sit at the table and say, okay, this is why the community is so invested in this.

So as ownership, you understand why it's important to them. They understand why you feel the way you do. So kind of acting as that liaison. So that is our position. Our position, and foremost, is always preservation. Our second position is getting the community involved and making sure everyone understands the process and the implications of that process.

What I'm

hearing, though, is the financial concerns or other concerns that you as an owner, you know, are questioning. So I I I appreciate the the the education Mhmm. And the negotiation and the trying to I mean, it's sort of like a yes or a no. You know, there isn't much I mean, most of it is around education. Mhmm.

And so I don't know if you're open to that since really if if it seems like we've seen this in other cases that the the, the concern financially of how this property property can move forward with you as an owner. That seems to be the crux of it. How does that get red remedied with education?

It won't. Education won't remedy that. I think it's more just trying to like I said, this all started with an unauthorized demo permit. Was hoping what we were hoping to resolve from this is offer a deed restriction, a memorandum of understanding, something that will not allow the building to ever be demoed. That's what we're trying to have done in this matter

Okay.

Rather that's been stopped and that's been explained as to how that weirdness occurred. Now we're into designation. And I am I'm I'm concerned that another month knowing that both of you have positions. I'm not sure it it and, again, you know, four more weeks, big deal. But I I just want I I want you to recognize come be come before us again in four weeks.

And and, again, to me, it's the financial piece. And rightfully, I mean, I totally get it just as as Matt was saying. But I don't know how that gets worked out through education.

If I may, my concern is we have the good people from the neighborhood also coming out for this meeting and then meeting prior and requires them to leave work early and take time from their families and stuff like that. I

you

know, last month we had a special meeting just to essentially put it on hold and we did give everybody a lot of time to which is something we don't even typically do, right? So we gave everybody a lot of time as a courtesy in the spirit of reasonableness and good faith to take time to review the contents of the report. The historicity is not going to change in thirty days. What will change is maybe less and less people come out from the Brewer's Hill Neighborhood Association the more and more we put this months and months down the road. The financial aspect is not going to change.

Now, have been investors or developers that have come to us for designation, to desire designation because there's actually incentives, right, to restore the property in a historically sensitive fashion. I'm wondering if you looked into those.

Tax credits.

Yes. Yes, I have.

I mean, we've had building people coming to us asking for buildings that were built in the 1980s to be designated because they want these tax credits and we love it. But, okay. Does anybody else in the commission have any questions for the owner? Do you have any more comments at all?

I do not. Okay.

Reside at 1832 North Palmer Street, and I am the President of the Historic Brewer's Hill Association. And I am here joined by three other of our Board members today. I just, for sake of time, I just want to speak very briefly on some of the points that you guys have just raised. Regarding any future proposed proponents, I just want to add some clarity here that all parties were notified on November 19 of the original hearing date. We did meet with Mr.

Pattee, the association did on November 20 to talk about his plans prior to that initial December hearing. We also met with one of the prospective buyers in December, so we have been very open and willing to communicate with both parties involved. And that December 16 hearing, as we know, was already held to allow additional time for Mr. Patti to review that staff report that was provided on December 12. So now here we are in January.

And just to quote Alder Reinbaughman from the previous meeting, he said that we are here today to determine whether the structure meets any of the criteria for historic designation period. We will not consider balancing of interest, costs, uncertainties, potential interference with future use. That discussion takes place at the council. The sole issue today is whether this building satisfies any of the criteria set forth in the ordinance. I just kind of wanted to reiterate that stance and stand by our statement that we made at the last hearing. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you.

Mr. Chair? Yes, sir.

It is possible for the commission to amend the guidelines. I don't think we would have the power to require the installation of stained glass windows anyway. So if the commission would care to insert a line about that into the guidelines, they can certainly direct that to occur in the designation motion.

I'm sorry. Is that is this I mean, you're assuming that that is a sole issue, financial issue.

I Is

that He's not incorrect.

He's not incorrect. That it's it's the hang up is the stained glass windows.

Yes.

Do we have precedent with stained glass? And I mean, surely It's very ambiguously not actually.

I mean, we Otherwise, not a company.

Yeah. With the designation. I

don't wouldn't say I'd be happy with it, but I would accept it.

Okay.

Typically, don't have the power to force people to put things back. We can make if they are touching it, we can make them do better or move in that direction. And we certainly wouldn't accept vinyl windows or anything. But at the most this church has in any location right now is a couple panes of colored glass, not stained in any way, no painting, no decorative, just single pane, single color. And that while it is a nice touch, I don't think we even need to require that.

We've accepted other things in place of what used to be stained glass in historic buildings in the past.

Yes, it was gone at the time of designation and this is already gone. We don't we haven't even found a picture of what it looked like other than two small windows behind the altar. Right.

Okay. Okay.

We actually did find them. I can share them with you. Alright.

You found this glass? We

found some old photos of them. We actually originally had reached out to, my ed, to work with some of their students to maybe try to put it on like a hard plastic substrate, to kind of replicate it on the inside. So, yeah, I can share

those with you. Cool.

So I think you just would be a great owner of a historic property.

I've got a lot of

old buildings. That's what I do. So I mean I've been through the process with Tim on Mitchell Street and a lot of the language is really ambiguous and it can be interpreted multiple ways. So I mean if there's something that's stating you do not have to do this, I think that's a good resolution.

Well, let's go with it then. I mean is that what we were looking for? I you

I don't know that we need to have any kind of amendment to it, right?

I'd The like it language is very I'd like strict

don't want to confuse

the matter. The idea is you have a commission, we have a number of precedents where we have worked with owners to, in some cases, put an additional pane of clear glass in front of because that's very delicate and those frames and the lead and so forth deteriorates road, Plus, we also road, are fortunate in Milwaukee to have one of the best in the country, Conrad Schmitt, you know Conrad Schmitt Studios. And they have done this stuff for many decades and they understand the implications of that and perhaps techniques in the spirit of saving the building of a congregation that doesn't have a whole lot of cash, but saving it and in some ways doing something that eventually in decades from now when a benevolent donor comes along and says, I want a couple million dollars, say, status loss. Then you get your windows in, but, you know, do no damage. Part of the idea here.

And this is all conversation that you can have at this level. I mean, I don't know that we can or should assure you, I don't know, with some sort of a kind of legal confidence that you can do whatever

you want. No, I don't just you not do whatever you want.

Just a specific item that says it doesn't have to go back to stained glass because there eight to 10 different people who can have different interpretations of what that means

when we do come back. Can that's

we, Tim, put that in there?

You have the power to change any any word or add anything you want in the step document.

This is so consistent that it's it's the stained glass window thing.

But remember now, when we make these decisions like this, this isn't the only church in Milwaukee. There are other churches. We're going to see other churches. They're going to come before us. They are going to look at some sort of light restriction with them and say, well, can you make up? And it could be a wonderfully wealthy congregation saying, we don't want to spend money on stained glass. We got to be very careful with building types like this that are repeated around the city.

Well, I go back to to staff. You were the one that came up with the idea, Tim. How

I am not attempting to suggest that we forbid stained glass going back in. I'm just saying that there isn't any right now and I don't believe we would have the power to require it and at the cost of and as Mr. Petillo is quite correct about the cost of stained glass. And if we were about to require it, I don't see a scenario in which the common counsel didn't overturn such requirement. So there would be a revolution here in

the It's

a different situation than all of us if there were stained glass still present in any of the windows. Well,

Are there other this is a public hearing.

Yes. Are there others will invite others. Thank you. Unless you guys have further comments, no. Okay. We will invite others to make comments on this Thank you. You. Just as a reminder, state your name and your address, if you don't mind, and speak into the microphone so we can hear.

I won't be publicly stating my address because I've already been threatened by one of the attendees today. But my name is Rachel Markin.

Tim Baldwin, 2023 North 2nd Street. Okay.

Okay. I just want to thank you guys again for meeting with us again and taking your time to hear from us once more about our position on this. And I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I am joined, as Kristen said, by our fellow HBHA Board members, Kristen Labs, Tim Baldwin, and Evan Lindberg. Our association, as we have stated, strongly supports the local historic designation for 140 West Garfield Avenue.

The action is critical to prevent the irreversible loss of a neighborhood landmark. As you guys know, landmarks can have an emotional significance to a lot of people. First, the 1987 early Gothic revival church is an architecturally significant building in Brewer's Hill that you guys have already noted within your own report, and it contributes to the historic streetscape throughout the distinctive massing and detailing. Second, it's a 138 year old history reflects the development of the community it has been serving, and it is a vital piece of the historic religious corridor within our community. We are here now because action is urgently needed, and we cannot postpone it any longer.

It's been postponed enough. A raised permit order was previously filed and though it has subsequently been withdrawn, the limited protections currently in place have already failed to prevent, as you guys have stated, irreversible damage including the loss of the building's original stained glass. And without designation, we risk further alteration and even demolition. I would also like to mention that the deed that Pat T Group had mentioned, putting it into the deed writing it in that it would be protected and not raised, would require further investment of our time as an association and we would also have to pursue it in a legal format to make it enforceable. So we are using the tools within our nature as a nonprofit association to come to you and to respectfully ask you to give this local historic designation which is part of your committee's responsibilities.

We also do not appreciate being contacted by a lawyer who served as a volunteer capacity for the MPA asking us to withdraw our application who was not acting within his capacity as a lawyer at the time but still sending it from his professional email. And we do not appreciate the insinuation that we have been combative. Instead, we would like to reiterate our position that we have been in open conversation with Ryan Pattee since he originally approached us after purchasing this building. We invited him to a community meeting where he could hear from the neighbors, from the people themselves, the residents themselves to find out what they wanted in this space. We tried to continue dialogue with him over two years where he was unreachable and unresponsive.

So for him to come in front of you today and say he would like to continue open dialogue, unfortunately his actions has not proven that to be true from our end. That's my statement. Thank you.

Thank you. I just have a question. The attorney, where did represented who?

I'm not aware of who or if he represented anyone. He did contact us from his law firm's email address and asked us to remove our application as a volunteer at the MPA.

Am I allowed to come back up? Sure. Did say my name again? Emma Redd, Milwaukee Preservation Alliance. If I may, that was our board, treasurer, Claude Krawczak. He works for a law firm. That is his only email, so I apologize if it appeared as though you were being contacted by an attorney. That is just Claude. That is the only email he used. It was not meant to be combative. It was not meant to be as though you were being approached by the law at all. That is not who we are as an organization. Doesn't have an association email? He not. Does not. We are a fledgling organization. We have two email addresses. He And so I apologize. We will look into that. That is a very good point and I'm glad you pointed it out to me.

Thank you. And I apologize. I was unaware. I think our organization was unaware that all of these conversations had taken place. I apologize for addressing this in front of the commission, but I wish that was something that would have been communicated with us. I think it would have helped NPA understand a little better the background and the situation before we came forward today and asked for another sustainer because that is something that we were not aware that these community conversations were going on. We thought this was something that happened very quickly. And so I apologize on behalf of the organization. We were not aware.

Do you withdraw your support

for that position then? I don't understand.

We'll keep comments directed to the commission. Mr. Briden.

To the commission, we do support the we never not supported the designation.

Okay. Okay. Thank you.

I'll make that very clear. We never not supported the designation.

Yes. Thank you for the clarification. Okay. Sir.

Basically just up here to kind of support Rachel in her statement and then the President's statement. I made the original application for the local designation and I reside within local historic district boundaries of Burroughs Hill, so I'm familiar with all the requirements of COA and there are some parts of my house that are not historically appropriate at the moment and historic preservation is not going to make me redo my siding just because it's not it's aluminum, so to speak. So I know they are not going to come after the church to replace their windows. If you are replacing windows, you may have suggestions.

Tim, look into his siding. I just kidding.

I'm I'm just

joking. The last

thing I'd like to add to my statement on the record is that every postponement does incur different costs to each individual. Yes. I'm sitting here right now with an expired time on my parking meter and I may in fact incur a parking ticket just to come up here and testify. I'm an unpaid volunteer for our association and I'm here representing the residents and their interest in this historic preservation. We are the historic Burroughs Hill Neighborhood Association and we take that seriously even though it is at our own cost. So I would like you to take that into consideration if you decide to postpone again today. I appreciate it.

So I I what you're describing, it hasn't come up before in terms of two years you've been working. I mean, it's quite different than

Yes, ma'am. We tried to keep that out of

this because we felt this was a

pretty cut and dry designation. Unfortunately, with the back and forth that they've been doing off the record, I felt it was important to include that context.

Yeah. Okay.

What do you think is going to happen? What happened to the building? Just out of curiosity.

What happened to the building?

If it wouldn't become historic.

Hope is that there would be a functional user that goes into that building that has an appreciation for the beauty and the history. What we've seen successfully in other neighborhoods of our size, of our demographic is breweries, entertainment venues, and those were things that Mr. Patti and his organization were looking at pursuing when we initiated this conversation with him about potential development opportunities over two years ago when he purchased it in 2023.

Okay. Really? Cool. Thank you. Do you guys have any other comments? No?

No. We just appreciate your time and taking this seriously.

Yes, absolutely.

Sorry I look like this. I just came from pickleball.

No, that's okay. You look fine. All right. Any other anybody else that wants to give testimony on this matter?

Move to close the public hearing. Second.

All in favor?

Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Okay. Well then, I guess, is there any additional conversation that wants to happen between commissioners now on this matter?

I will put a motion out there.

Move to basically adopt a resolution granting historic designation for the reasons stated in the staff report.

Okay. Are Alderman Baumann has moved to adopt the designation for reasons F1, F5, F6, and F9 as stated in the report. Do we have a second on that? Second. Okay. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? All right. The motion carries.

Then it is designated as historic. Alright, moving on to item 251,241, resolution relating to a certificate of appropriateness for an entrance canopy on Wells Street, various secondary entrance canopies, and alterations to the north wing at the University Club 924 East Wells Street and individually designated historic property for Northwestern Mutual.

The applicants have requested that this be held to the call of the chair.

Okay. So moved. All right. Any objection? All right. Moving on then to item number 251517, resolution relating to a certificate of appropriateness for alterations related to an apartment conversion at 1135 West Historic Mitchell Street in the Mitchell Street Historic District for Amit Ray. Hopefully I got the name correct. Yes, go ahead, staff. You can start making your way up here too if you plan to speak. Sure.

So, plan is to renovate this commercial building for conversion to apartments includes several consequential and several minor changes. Placement of an old but non historic fire escape, you can see at the bottom left with a much smaller modern metal filerscape. No changes to the main commercial storefront entry. Replace windows throughout the upper levels, add windows on empty facades and enclose a loading dock on the side street. I did misspeak in the report.

There is no plan for basement parking. They simply wish to enclose the loading dock. So originally this was a speculative retail building. The first major tenant being Waldheim Furniture. However, its major fame on Mitchell Street was the forty years it served as JCPenney from 1937 to 1979.

In recent years, it has been a Foot Locker shoe store. And for the record, I will state that this building has never had any wood windows to our knowledge. They've always all been metal even according to the original drawings of which you can see a partial detail on the right. All the windows there are described as steel sash. So the fire escape is a very easy decision.

It is the fire escape that is there now is not the original in poor condition. And quite frankly, it's probably cheaper to build a new one than to bring that one up to code. And this is about a third of the size of the existing one covering much less of the wall of the building. It's attractive as attractive as a fire escape gets, why not? Also, it is worth noting that all of the windows shown on this elevation will be new punched openings.

This was a party wall For obvious reasons, they want code requires and any occupant would want more windows than are currently available. In discussion with the architect this morning, it does appear that while I had some could not quite tell if the 2nd Floor windows were original, he has demonstrated that they are clearly not. They are in the spirit of the originals, but they are I was right in seeing something in the detailing that they are decidedly not the original windows on the 2nd Floor. The 3rd Floor is steel sash. They appear to be rusted beyond repair and it's is unclear if they were ever operable.

New windows would be appropriate and acceptable in all cases due to the fact that the 2nd Floor is not original and the Top Floor is not functional. This bottom right, they are planning infill of the original loading bay with the garage door. There has been security to

lot

with of building. Building. Building. Of the building. There.

Front, no changes other than replacement windows. North elevation, These openings are the location of the original fire escape which is long since gone. They will be filled into the maximum height allowable under code for with new windows. So partial bricking in will be required, but they are adding new reopening the former exits and converting them to windows. They are proposing a Quaker metal window for most locations.

I think this is absolutely appropriate, particularly for the former fire escape on the North. I think we need more details of how it can be customized to the other existing openings. East, the firescape. The North firescape. It may even work on the East because those shouldn't perhaps shouldn't be exact copies of originals, but the Mitchell Street and 11th Or 12th, pardon me, be reasonable approximations of the originals with steel sash.

They aren't aluminum tends to be much chunkier than what was possible with steel. So these would be need to be thinner than standard aluminum if you are going to approve aluminum there. So staff is recommending approval pending further detailing on replacement window projects for the two street facades.

Mr. Ray, you want to introduce yourself and

Yes, Amit Ray, but actually there is an LLC involved. I'm not sure. His name is not there.

Yeah. I'm

sorry. Yeah. It's under a Llc. That's one part. See, anything you mentioned, I think, like,

you know,

that's already under consideration. We don't have to make any changes in the exterior. And architect Schultz, he is helping. So I think he can answer better, right?

Keith Schultz, Schultz Work Architecture, 2515 North 66th. In regards to the 3rd Floor windows, they are the original metal windows, quarter inch glass. They are a manual lever that locks them in place. Most of them are pretty well rusted and either non operable or I would not want to open them for fear of them falling off their hinges. The 3rd Floor windows are pretty much gone.

Okay. Any questions from commissioners?

This thin profile gives them an insulated glass. Is that what you are showing on the detail?

Yes.

Two panes of glass.

You essentially can't get anything commercially made that isn't double pane.

Right. Well, you could, but generally Yes. You And I think sometimes we have some problems between acceptance here and a COA and then a product that's offered accepted by the contractor. So just be real careful. Give him the cuts and it makes a big difference. An aluminum one is just going to give you too big a thickness. Yeah.

I am familiar with those and you can get a narrow line. I've worked with Tim on a number of projects. So I'll make sure that we get a narrow line aluminum window.

Do you have a motion on this item here?

Yeah. I'll move to approve as presented.

Okay. Second. Second. All in favor?

Aye. Aye. All

right. Moving on. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Tim. Item number 251500 and Resolution relating to a certificate of appropriateness for chimney removal and adding a 3rd Floor balcony at 2015 North Lake Drive in the North Point South Historic District for John and Sarah Hambrooke.

Okay. Thank you. So yes, we have got the Ida Lane House 1902 designed by Elmer Gray who worked for Ferry and Klaas in the late 1890s before starting his own firm, operated in Milwaukee briefly before relocating to Southern California where he rose to fame with a number of great designs out there, including the Beverly Hills Hotel amongst others. But this is a wonderful arts and crafts house from 1902 that was already admired in 1939. This was an article talking about how for nearly twenty years architects, Milwaukee architects, have studied the perfect proportions of the design of this English style home.

So we have got a two part proposal before us today. The applicants are seeking to create a balcony atop this 3rd Floor South Bay window structure and also to remove the west chimney and install a modern furnace vent in its place. So taking a look here, the applicant's thinking here is they I believe they have parents or elderly family members that they wish to relocate into the former servants' quarters on the 3rd Level. And to necessitate that, they are proposing removing the chimney stack to construct an elevator shaft in the building. They also wish to have some exterior access.

So they are proposing this 3rd Floor balcony here, which is a little unusual, but not altogether a glaring alteration. They are proposing a simple wood and metal railing. And then, well, here is a look again at the proposed area. I will note that some of the windows on the 2nd And 3rd Floor have been replaced after designation but without approval of the certificate of appropriateness. So there it was done multiple owners ago and the current owners have since got the blessing to retain these as long as they are in place.

But they are not historic windows up on the majority of the 2nd And 3rd Level. But you can see looking on the interior of this area, is a radiator in front of that window that would likely be removed to create access to the proposed balcony. So they're proposing metal French doors and a wooden metal balcony. And, you know, staff's belief is that, you know, to create a window opening on this upper level would require the removal of some historic material below the windows, but it could be done tastefully. These doors may not be the correct choice, and staff recommends that a set of doors, either a single door or a pair of French doors that are in the arts and crafts style would be more appropriate.

Likewise, a balcony that is either clear glass that wouldn't obscure the architecture or thin metal railing would work better as opposed to something a little bulkier like this for the balcony proposal. The second part of their proposal is to remove the chimney that sticks out of the peak of the roof at the rear and propose it in its place behind the peak, so not on the street facing side and saw just an exhaust. The applicant indicated that this was a former incinerator chimney, but it still does exhaust the boilers currently. So it is used. I know in the past HPC has approved chimney removals in the North Point neighborhoods.

In those situations, it was sort of three parts. The chimney was no longer used at all, so no longer functional. The chimneys at HPC is approved for removal were also behind the residence and not visible from the right of way. This is a prominent house on a corner and the chimney is a very large corbel chimney. And that goes along with the third point that generally when HPC has approved chimney removals, have been utilitarian, very plain, not very ornate chimneys.

In this case, it's a nice large corbold chimney that does contribute to the architecture of the building. And so with that in mind and with the preservation guidelines that state to retain decorative ornamentation, including chimneys, staff is recommending denial of the chimney removal. And because this is sort of a two part proposal under one file, the recommendation from staff is to deny both requests and advise the applicants to come back forward with just the balcony and HPC can take a look at the doors and a revised railing proposal at that time.

Andrew? Yes. I'm just looking at, some of these photos that you've attached from other houses. You you attached it to show us what balconies look like that were added at other times?

The applicant provided those just as examples of other 2nd Floor balconies. And I would note that in all of those cases appeared to be the examples that they included appeared to be original to the architecture of those buildings and weren't added I

mean like this, I can just tell you that the one on Bellevue, that was just added. That's not

Yes. There

I mean, the I think is this before this commission I existed?

A violation has been issued for one of for one of the examples shown in the file. I don't think it's the one you're referring to, though. Oh, jeez. Oh.

Why? I mean, why wasn't that been shown to

us? Location is closing.

Why isn't that being shown to us?

It's not right.

I don't understand.

We only became aware of the violation because mister Hambrooke submitted it as an example.

Talking about the Bellevue, please?

I can't remember which street it is that ended up getting a violation.

Because I can tell you that I mean, if you if you look at well, let let me ask you. This is the the these four photos that were submitted? These were balconies that were put in that are not original to these houses?

We will look more closely, Ms. Pelz.

And so to use this as an example, it doesn't make any sense. Which is why I think that you're asking for a review. I mean to not approve today.

I mean, the general concept I think is workable, though it would require some removal. You know, the guidelines recommend not enlarging openings that are visible from the right of way. In case it is visible from the right of way. It is on on the street frontage on Windsor. These

four, I would really like to know if these four were approved by this commissions or were they put in prior to when the Sure. Before. Before the commission was even established. No. Because they're they're not original.

No.

So to use them as the example doesn't make any sense. Okay.

Wall. Yeah. Yep.

Last week

I I mean, unless it okay.

You got the Yeah. I'm sorry.

Do have the photo of the proposed balcony too? I was trying to find that in my in the file here.

These balconies are problematic. I mean, the 12571 North Wall, I can't believe that's code compliant.

Yeah. Thank you. The previous photo.

That's not that one.

Yeah. Suspect that's been there since the seventies.

Well, maybe it has but if you touch it. Yeah. And I bet the original balusters were the stone. Probably. Quite possibly.

So let me ask you, are you looking at these now? Now that they've come to our attention?

If you direct us to do so, we will.

Let's investigate this. Because,

I mean, they are problematic. Yeah. But if, again, if we didn't exist, there's nothing to do about it. But if it was after, it's problematic.

Just to get us back on track here, this is the type of balcony, that's the concept of the balcony that is being requested?

Right. Which is why we're recommending denial of this particular proposal. Yeah.

Good boy. Boy.

Do we have anybody on the virtual that wants to testify here?

I'm John Hambrooke. I'm the one of the my wife and I own it. Sorry, I'm not there. I'm just finishing a clinic. So we live in 2015 Northleet Drive.

Yeah, I guess I had submitted two separate COAs, so I'm not sure why this all got into one file that has to be approved or denied as one. But I mean, in regards to the balcony, I don't have any particular attachment to door type or railing type or anything truly. My goal is just to create an outdoor space for the people on the 3rd Floor so they could sit outside in the sun and not have to go up or down three floors. Work construction. With lot new

new

19. Of of And

So, quarter

I

think a

good

So that and those are my thoughts on the and yes, I'm sorry, submitted the picture simply as it's funny like literally every house on every side of our building whether across the street or question. That's think question. Question. Not my intention at all. It just seems like they're very common in the historic Water Tower District.

And so that's why I was just providing examples that this isn't like a crazy new idea, that's all. So those are my thoughts on the upper floor deck. Don't know if I should stop there. It needs to be two separate issues. I feel like that conversation is going get very clouded. I would like to comment on the chimney as well but I'm glad to do whatever you guys say.

I think that balcony would require a 36 inches, I mean it would look overpowering.

Yes. So it would have to be a 36.

For it to be accessible, right? Yes, especially to Which

would be it would obscure the window almost completely or the door. It's

Yeah. Okay. And does any other commissioners have comments just as it relates to the balcony just to make it easier for the applicant?

And the additional photos which I just happen to see now, I would love to be able to know if these were crooked.

Yeah. Right.

I mean, that's just that's these that's there's about eight of them now. Right? Four on one and.

There's a whole lot.

I mean,

those were just very brief.

No. And I understand totally why you took the photos in terms of demonstrating that there are other places. So I got it. But but it's it's it's more than interesting.

Sure. And we can look into it.

To to have this brought to us and and actually, I thank you.

Okay.

Quick question. This is a balcony that's more this is like 2nd Floor, right?

It's on the 3rd 3rd Floor.

So it'll be 42 inches for the railing, not

30 inches.

Let's go back.

Yeah. 2nd Floor and up, like, stuff like that. That has to be 42 inch. This guardrail height, not handrail.

Okay. No. That's a good point.

Okay. That's a huge railing. Yeah.

It is.

Okay. Anybody have any other comments or questions for the first of we're

yes, funny. A I started this conversation a couple years ago with staff and it was kind of proposed to me that removing service chimneys at the rear of the home is not a huge consideration and that it likely wouldn't even go to the committee and I should just fill out the paperwork and I just very briefly again I didn't have a ton of time to think of this but very briefly I looked at the meeting minutes for the last few months and it looked like in October there was a home in the historic district on State Street that had almost an identical chimney with corbelling at the top that was taller than my chimney that. See that it was at 70 approval, so it just seemed odd to me. Yeah, I and again, I don't I don't have anything against Jimmy Gardin paid to talk point it, you know, as previous CEO showed, but I just had three different elevator contractors in my house and that's the only place anyone says that an elevator shaft could be put on our home, which is just kind of what our family has needs for, which I won't go into.

So yes, so that was my thought. Really surprised. I mean it's really only it's not viewable from the front of the home at all. It's only viewable from the rear of the home. It really doesn't change the sidewalk appearance of the home at all because it's obviously four stories up and in the middle of the roof. So yeah, I guess I'm not sure what else to say about that.

And staff suggested to in our staff report and without delving into the feasibility of it, but if it's possible to maintain the exterior chimney stack, if they are building an elevator shaft underneath it, that could support just the exterior shaft while removing the interior chimney. Staff would be

supportive of that. Have you considered that as an option yet, sir, just retaining the exterior chimney facade, if you

will? I asked if you the contractors have been involved in this elevator shaft and they all kind of laughed me off and said, you don't understand how much brick weighs, sir. So I know if there's good examples of that, that people know that people have done that successfully. But when I asked, that's actually when I approached the committee about two years ago because I sort of thought, having been through chimney issues in the past is rebuilding and stuff and knowing how detailed people are about them. I kind of didn't think this would ever be allowed to come down.

So I reached out to Tim that I've worked with the past and say, do people build fake chimneys, what do they do? And then I was encouraged, we'll just submit the paperwork to this is not a big deal as an accessory chimney. It's so so yes, any sense your specific question. I have approached that with a few people and they made it seem like that was not a possibility. They said we could create like a fake chimney with like half bricks, but that seems like it's just asking for trouble, I guess, to put something on the top of your home that's decorative like that, but it's a possibility.

Yes. Mr. Chair, I have a question.

We're talking

about removal like from the roof up. You talking about removing the whole brick stack?

Whole brick stack.

The whole stack would go down But

the floors frame into that. That's sure the not water infiltration tuck point. They just want to remove it. You remember that, Tim, a couple of years ago. It was a couple blocks away.

But that was just because of a water problem and an unused chimney stack. And I think we you got to go in and tuck point it. They didn't tuck it properly. Do you remember that, the flashing? Anyway, that's not the problem that's talked about here. The problem is removing this thing to do something else. That's a kind of different issue. When I'm with you guys, the guidelines are pretty clear that these provide an architectural component that's important to this style, a kind of cementitious stucco. Know these things were well considered very durable and part of the architectural features. So I think we have to be very careful about saying, you know, sure, we can take them away.

And the guidelines say it pretty clearly. Right. So I'm with you, staff.

Does anyone remember the discussion in October? I didn't look back at the video, at 3028 State Street, and it's the to my reading of the minutes, it was like the exact same issues, same chimney, corbelling at the top for eight courses. But to the other point, it is not structural. So we have over our seventeen years living at home, we've pulled every floor apart to the studs and we have pictures of the way every floor is basically framed like an attic opening basically where this chimney has nothing drilled into it. It is not structural.

Everyone has agreed with that fact that it could come down without needing to put in big beams or anything like that. So it is I I think it's beyond the point of this discussion anyway, taking the whole stack down is not the problem.

Until it's a problem.

I personally don't recall the facts around the 3028 State Street matter, to be honest with you. So okay. Does anybody else have any other comments on this or questions? Okay. Do we have a motion on this matter?

I'll move to deny certificate of appropriateness based on the fact that they're lumped together in one file request.

Okay. So, motion is to deny the certificate of appropriateness for the balcony and for the chimney as included in this one item, correct? Okay. Do we have a second?

Second. Second.

All in favor? Aye. Any opposed?

All right.

So my question to chair is

You said this is

my question. You want him to come back with separate applications?

Think whether it's one or two items isn't really important, but the balcony has to be better thought through in the very least. So we've got to take another look at that. Talk it through with staff on design, kind of the concept photo you presented definitely would not make it here. And so I think the balcony piece has to be better thought through and the chimney I think is what it is at this point. So, but of course you're welcome to strategize with staff and come up with options.

So Okay.

All right. Moving on to oh no, I lost my place here. Item six, there we go. Item 251527, resolution relating to a certificate of appropriateness for a rear addition at 2546 North Summit Avenue in the North Point North Historic District for David and Karen Hecht.

Okay. Thank you. So we have got the HJ Newman investment property, 1923 Colonial Revival with Prairie Style accents. The applicants are wishing to construct a two story addition with a full basement at the rear facade of the existing house. The applicants are proposing approximately 1,100 square feet above grade with a full basement, which would consist of approximately four fifty square feet, most of which would be finished as well.

So you can see taking a look at the site plan, the existing house as it is now on top and with the rear sort of L creating an L in the rear sticking back from the northeast elevation is what they are proposing. Of note here is just the removal of the rear dormer, which Tim and I both agree maybe we can't tell if it was original or the proportions just seem a little weird on the existing dormer anyway. But that would be proposed to be removed and sort of a new dormer created in the L with the addition. The applicants indicated that a dormer is necessary to create headroom for the stairs to get up to the attic level. The floor plans on the 1st Floor of the addition would be a guest suite along with a full bathroom and a half bath.

The proposal also includes reconfiguration of the existing kitchen, which would necessitate the infill of one existing window and a partial infill of another, and we will take a look at those when we get to the elevations. On the 2nd Floor, the addition would be the primary suite. So that would be located on the addition. The four existing bedrooms would remain on the primary historic portion of the house. And then this is the roof plan.

So they would tie in the roof with the existing plane on the north facade and tie in architectural shingles to match what's already there. So it should look like a fairly seamless transition between the two. The rear addition will match the finishes that are found on the historic portion of the home, including the brick veneer on the 1st Floor, true stucco on the 2nd Floor, a soldier brick course to match the existing, which is located just below the 2nd Floor, so right on the top of the brick, flared stucco corners on the 2nd Floors, limestone windowsills, the dimensional asphalt shingle roof to match existing. All new windows are proposed to be solid wood Marvin windows that are either six light or six over one that would match the pane configuration on the historic portion of the property. Of note here on the existing, you can see one of the window window bays would be infilled in the remodeled reconfigured kitchen and one of the other bays would be partially infilled.

This would be visible from the right of way but not highly visible. Is pushed back. The house is backing off from the sidewalk and this is further back on the elevation that it won't be super noticeable. And they can get the brick to match the existing. Taking a look at the south elevation, there would be an exit proposed in the L portion with a side light and a six light door, a metal roof with scroll supports that can kind of match what is existing on the rear facade.

The dormer is proposed up in the top with the L of the roof. No work is proposed on the historic front facade. And then this is the rear facade. So the L portion is sticking out on the right hand side. There would be an egress window well, so that would require going down into the ground a little bit for access for that window.

And I will note too, on this facade, where at the connection between the new and the old, there is an eight inches retreat just for a portion where they are bringing it back to differentiate the new and the old. They're also changing the brick bond. They're doing a Flemish bond just in that recessed portion, but that will differentiate from the running bond that's found both on the historic portion of the house and the addition. So just this little recessed area is going to be an example of where the new meets the old on the addition. Taking a look at some of these renderings, can see the new addition ties in well, approximates the materials and design of the historic home.

Staff really didn't have any major concerns with the addition, recommended approval with conditions that are pretty straightforward, just a standard window and door schedule. The plans did call for LP, facial board and trim. Staff is recommending that no LP be approved, just be natural or have strong the the for

we

association? Hi, Keith Barnes, And architect with KCB Architects, 400 East Wisconsin Avenue, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Michael Dindorff, Lakeview Remodeling Contractor, 5009 North Hollywood Avenue.

Okay. Cool. Any comments about the staff's report there?

Tim and Andrew were great to work with. One of the comments when we first reviewed the concept design with them was to the goal was to make the addition look like it's always been there. But at the same time, there's historic guidelines about wanting to make sure that the house kind of tells a story of how it's evolved over the years. And so this idea of making some we played with the geometry of the house to create this recess to distinguish the new from the old. And I think while still keeping the roof lines coplanar because it's a very simple, clean, hipped roof and that was one of the that's one of the beautiful things about the house.

So we wanted to maintain that in the addition. And I think that suggestion was a really nice suggestion and I think it really accomplished the goal. So yes, I don't have anything to add. There's no issues with changing the LP smooth, which does look just like wood. It is very hard to tell that it is not wood, but we don't have any issues with changing to wood from LP.

Awesome. Any comments from the commissioner?

Lot of closet space. I'll grant you that.

It's true.

I mean,

half the addition is a third of the addition is closet space.

Yeah. And you guys have done these houses plenty.

I know.

The plumbing on the exterior wall, not an interior wall? Plumbing when I look at that?

We're not sure.

Is that for the two bathrooms?

We made a wall to run the plumbing stack so we actually don't interrupt the insulation.

I know

these houses too, man, they get breezy off the lake, even a well insulated house. Certainly. You see that and that's what you're doing, that's fine. A couple of questions now. Can we go to where we see actual picture, the photograph of the existing house from the front elevation, which was right at the beginning, I think, That's one of the first that 2nd Floor stucco from 1924, when was this built? '24, thirty one something? '23. '23? Okay. Is that that heavy cementitious stucco on the like you see on these houses?

The addition, I suspect you're not going to use the same technology they did one hundred years ago. Have a pneumatic blown on cementitious stucco. You're going to use a contemporary

Yeah. We work with wood plastering. They do all our stucco work on all these old homes.

Yeah. Do a wonderful job. I

the exact technique compared to the old school, I'm assuming it is different. But the consistency of new versus old is

it looks looks really nice. The difference is the lathe that you use. Now they use expanded metal.

Now they use the metal.

Well, don't know. It's pneumatic process back then but there was a hundred twenty years

still ago. It's still done by hands.

Yeah. It is done by is

texture. But, Matt, to Commissioner Jaros to answer your question, it's not a real deep texture. It definitely has a texture but not as heavy as others that we've seen.

And, I don't know, those guys had something going those years ago because it's very durable. I know this. I have it on my house. Can't believe how durable this stuff is.

120

years old and I think I have one little hairline crack, so it's really good stuff. Nice. And I was looking quite closely then at what people call the hyphen, you know, where you have the little back, so that you don't have this stuff hitting, which I don't think you will. In the other case, it's an inside corner.

Right. Correct.

With obviously a movement joint and so forth at that point, particularly inside corner. You're going have a problem with that. But I think architecturally, you've done the right thing without trying to do that with either that cementitious taco or the brick. Right? The proposal is brick on the 1st Floor, right? Yes.

Correct.

And you're going to find you talked about the running bond and the Flemish bond and so forth. And you're going to find something that's compatible. And my only last comment is when we do do these things and get these in the future, just a request to the staff to have on the site plans the adjoining houses, and I don't see that on that plan, it helps helps me a lot to see how exposed this stuff is from the public right away. A lot of cases, they aren't. And I can see a house there, and, you know, okay, fine, you can't or see this even from the back back street, which would be what's this?

Lake? Hackett. Oh, yes. On a you know, to show us, which I think for the record and maybe you did, do you have like a bigger site plan with adjoining We

had an aerial view map included on the

Right. I'm not going to make a motion depending on getting it. So, but in the future, let's try to do that. You guys remember the issues we had on terrace at the houses right by the hospital, those three new houses on terrace. Oh, sure. It became a neighbor conflict about heights, elevations, viewing, and stuff like that.

Because the front

facade was the issue, the setbacks. Yeah. Right.

But, still, the driveway to the existing historic house and the third, the very northerly house, had some kind of, you know, contour mix up. The point being that I think it is good in the future now when we get these kinds. And you guys did stuff off of Reservoir Park and so forth, the garage addition and so forth. So that makes it a lot easier for us to kind of make a decision about how visible or not visible, you know, this stuff is. That's my comment.

Who's your contractor again?

Applewood. Applewood? Yeah. Yeah. They'd be great. Oh, I'm sorry.

Wood what? Just Applewood?

I think it's Apple. They do interior drywall work, unit insulation, but they also have another division of their company. I think it's Applewood. It might be plastering and stucco or Applewood stucco.

Well, they don't do interior wet plaster.

They might, to be honest. We've been working with them for a long time. It's a great family run business.

Yeah. This this will continue to be a single family home?

Correct.

Uh-huh. Okay.

Okay. I think it's so interesting. The cost to do this, this type of construction project on this house is probably not much more expensive than if you just went out and bought a whole different house, but now you get to kind of do it the way you want to do it. So it's that's nice. And when you need more closet, you need Yeah, exactly. Other houses on All the kids' bedrooms are small.

All the So, kids' bedrooms and all that sort of

with that, I hear a motion on this matter.

Sure. I'll move to approve as presented.

With the conditions of the staff report.

Of the LP? Yeah. Yeah, what clearly states it in the staff report. Yep.

I second that.

Okay. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Nice

work. Thank

Thank you.

Appreciate it. Yeah, that's awesome.

Very easy to butcher a project like this.

Yes. The hard part begins now.

Thank you.

Yep, have a good one.

Okay.

We will do items seven through 15 as a group here all at once. Staff approved COAs. Okay. Yeah. Item seven through 15 will approve or will make a motion to approve.

So moved. So moved. Second.

Second. Alright. All in favor? Aye. All right. Motion carries. Local local government government review review of the National Register of Historic Places nomination for Saint Benedict of the More Roman Catholic Church at 924 West State Street in the 4th Aldermanic District. And Steph, could just for our edification, could you tell us what this resolution is doing, why it's

Okay. Yeah. So two years ago, we applied for and received a grant to place two churches, two historically black churches in the city on the National Register. We hired Justin Miller here of UWM to fulfill that. There is a required public participation and we must hold one public meeting on the matter. All National Register listings

in

the city have to go through this committee anyway. So we thought we'd just have bring him here and have him do it rather than the staff.

Okay. Excellent. All right. And sorry, what was your name again?

My name is Justin Miller. I am from UW Milwaukee. So as Tim just said, so we have these two nominations. I'll move through them kind of quickly. There's a lot of information in the nominations. You can read that at your leisure because it's Thank all you.

Appreciate that.

So the first one I'm going to talk about is St. Benedict the Moor, constructed in 1924 as Milwaukee's first purpose built church for a black Catholic congregation. Throughout its history, it has worked to promote the welfare of the black community through social service programs, medical care and education. Next slide. Because of its association with those three areas, with the history and welfare of Milwaukee's African American community, it is being nominated for listing Register under Criterion A in the areas of black ethnic heritage and social history.

I do want to point out that the church already has a local designation. It was locally designated in 1998. Tim, I know staff and members of this commission have been working to receive National Register designation for this church for a while, so we are glad to help make this happen finally.

Could you go

to the next slide, Tim? So the church is also located right next door to St. Anthony Hospital. It actually physically touches the hospital. The hospital was also listed in the National Register in 2017. It was listed previously as a tax credit project. And so the church is sort of bringing in the rest of the complex into the National Register as well. So let's just walk through the elevations. Next slide. This is the State Street side.

Next slide. There's the northeast corner. It's on a pretty dramatic site. So there's this staircase that leads up to the front. You can keep going, Tim. This is wall that is visible. Here you can see both stories of the church. There's a basement level parish hall and then there's the upper level sanctuary. The back of the church is pretty much enveloped by additions that were related to the hospital that were put on later in time. So you can't really see the back elevation of the church.

Next slide. Here is just a basic floor plan of the sanctuary. It's a very straightforward church designed by Earhard Breilmeyer. He was known for his church design. This was one of his, let's say, lower cost commissions.

It was completely funded by Ernest Miller who was the president of Miller Brewing at the time in the 1920s. Next slide. Here is a historic photo of what it looked like before the 1960s. In the 1960s, as happened with a lot of Catholic churches, they were modernized following the Second Vatican Council. And so those two side altars were removed and the altar rail that runs across the beginning of the sanctuary that was also removed.

The pews were configured. And then I believe in the early 2000s, late 1990s, it was somewhat restored to its original appearance. So I'm going to talk more about that altarpiece in a couple of slides. That's one of the key elements of this church. Okay, next slide. Here's the vestibule that leads in. Those are those stairs that mitigate between the differing levels of the street and the sanctuary up on top. Next slide. Sanctuary is fairly straightforward. It's a large open space, has these the vaulting that spans across it.

These are relatively simple stained glass windows. I know there was talk earlier about stained glass, so we're going to be looking at those critically. Next slide. And this is looking back towards the vestibule that we just came in. There's also an organ loft and there's a rose window at the front.

Next slide. And this is the lower level parish hall that is used for some of the social service functions. Let's go to the next slide. So on the outside there are a couple elements that are significant to the church because of its identity with its black congregation. The first one is this idea of St.

Benedict the Moor. So as we know, Roman Catholic congregations often choose their names based on specific attributes associated with saints or holy figures. This church is dedicated to Saint Benedict the Moor. He was born in Sicily to enslaved African parents in the sixteenth century. He was a Franciscan monk.

He eventually became the leader of his monastery. He was declared a saint by the Catholic church in eighteen o seven, and he is one of the best known black Catholic saints. So he's used a lot for Catholic churches and parishes that are predominantly African American. Next slide. The other element inside the church that really celebrates the parish's African American identity is this pretty amazing altarpiece.

This is original to the church. It was installed in 1924. It was produced in the Tyrol region of Italy, Italy, Austria. It depicts Old Testament scenes at the very bottom. Then there are Old and New Testament figures in the middle.

And then in that top arch part, it depicts a group of Catholic martyrs known as the Uganda Martyrs. They were Catholic converts that were killed in in about 1887. And four years before this church was built, that group of martyrs were declared blessed by the pope. So they were sort of in people's consciousness as a group of holy people. What is really remarkable about them is that they have dark colored skin.

The skin is painted naturalistically in varying shades of browns instead of being what you might expect in a Catholic church where everyone is lily white Northern European. This was original to the design. It was also a conscious way of showing them to be an inspiring model and a source of racial pride for the buildings.

The oil on wood panel, the oil on canvas?

It's three-dimensional wood. It's carved. It's a wood panel. It's carved? Yep. It's a three-dimensional carving.

Who did that

work? You know, I haven't been able to find the producer, but it was it's in the nomination, the two ladies who paid for it in Milwaukee.

Who are those?

I don't remember offhand.

Brillmar did St. Josephont's and to finish it off, they had to get artisans from Italy to come and finish the interior. And I wouldn't be surprised if there's a connection to the Italian artist said he was using these I relief

mean, that altar painted by itself would be

The yeah, the altar is it's pretty amazing both as a work of art and because of what it represents related to the identity of the congregation. Ironically, the building is being nominated for criterion A history, not for architecture.

Really?

Under the National Register criteria. So let's go to the next slide, Tim. And I'll talk through why the nomination is looking at criterion A specifically. So in the areas of black ethnic heritage and social history, there are sort of three sub areas that the parish is significant. First, because of its social service programs secondly, because of its educational component and third, because of its medical care.

So throughout its history, St. Benedict's has worked to promote the welfare of the black community through these three areas. The school was recognized as one of the most significant coeducational African American boarding schools in the Midwest. The healthcare ministry

Is that building still standing? That yes, see, always wondered about that because I've heard about this boarding school, but I didn't Yes. The one

at North Forth.

Yep. And I actually have a photo, a couple a couple slides.

Yeah.

North Forth and what do you recall?

No. It was adjacent to Yes. This, wasn't

So so the school so the the school, Alderman Baumann, that you're referring to, that's not there anymore. Right. Okay. That was directly across on the other side of 10th Street. Oh. And Matt, the

You mean where that secured pension facility

is now?

Yep. Where the Wasn't

that the

Marquette, original Marquette University building?

It was, yes. It was the Marquette High School.

So that's what they converted that Marquette building to

You're the boarding getting ahead of my slides.

Spoiler alert. Spoiler alert. We're looking

at the 1910 Sanborn map, which is fascinating as you can go back and forth, current historic, fascinating Right. Yes. And I noticed that Marquette Building.

Yeah. To answer the other question, this fourth this was the historic address was 904th Street, which was a little bit like St. Paul ish maybe.

Yeah, right. Okay.

And that building is no longer there.

Yeah, Huron Street or Sunset.

Yeah. Let's go to the next slide. So the school, The school was really the pride and joy of this parish. The education had always been a part of St. Benedict's community outreach. In 1908, they started a Sunday school. In 1912, they turned that into a day school. In 1913, it became a boarding school when it started taking in homeless students. And then by 1920, it was the only coeducational African American boarding school in the North. It had 140 students enrolled and there was a yearly waiting list for students trying to get into this program.

Was this high school or K-three?

It started as a grade school. And then in 1924, I believe 1924, mid-20s, expanded to be a high school program as well. So during the 1920s, it really expanded its enrollment. This was tied to the Great Migration where there were a lot of African Americans coming Milwaukee from the rural South. And schools like St.

Benedict were recognized for their ability to help these new coming students learn the kind of skills as well as the intellectual skills, both social and intellectual, that would enable them to cope with urban life in a white northern society. So at the same time, the church is also establishing social services. Some of those, very briefly, in 1910, they started a sewing circle that allowed black women to sell their handiwork without having to deal with a retail store and deal with the potential racism of a retail store. In 1913, St. Ben's started a daycare.

Around the same time, they started offering recreational activities for black women and girls, and that expanded in the 1920s to employment services as well for a lot of these newcomers who were coming to Milwaukee as part of the Great Migration. All of these social welfare programs helped bolster parish membership and it also provided economic, professional and social support for members of the African American community. The social services continued well into the twentieth century and they continue to the present. In the 1960s, St. Ben's hosted meetings for civil rights groups.

They also offered space for Alcoholics Anonymous. In 1970, St. Ben's started the first large scale free meal program in Milwaukee that continues to the present. And in the 1980s, they hosted the first chapter of the Parents and Friends of Lesbian and Gays, a support group as part of the gay rights movement. Many of these social services continue to the present and reflect St. Ben's long held commitment to social welfare. Next slide.

That's a Yep, here Marquette University. On the left.

Yep, so on the left is the old Marquette University In High nineteen twenty five, St. Benedict's Parish purchased that building and moved its school program. 1925. Yep, 1925. Also, had a request from Ernest Miller, who provided the funding for the purchase of the school building as well.

So the school enrollment peaked in the 1930s. It was at about two fifty students at its peak. And then by the 1950s, it was down to about 70 students. In the early 1960s, the grade school closed and then the high school closed. And then the freeway came through and they tore down both buildings, which leaves the church as really the only resource that illustrates the educational component of St. Ben's long term ministry. So also in this hospital, also in this image we can see St. Anthony's Hospital at the right. That building is still there. Next slide, Tim.

I assume this

is a postcard somebody dug out?

Yeah. It's from the Marquette archives. Okay. Yeah. Okay. They have all the Catholic stuff there. So St. Anthony's Hospital, part of the healthcare component of St. Ben's social services, In 1915, they established their first parish nurse that grew to be a full time infirmary. They did some fundraising and then this hospital that we're looking at was built in 1931 with three later expansions.

From the start, the hospital's mission was to offer care to all creeds and races at a time when racial discrimination limited medical care options for many African Americans. The hospital staff was integrated as well. It offered African American doctors and nurses the opportunity to practice medicine at a time when that ability was limited elsewhere. Hospital closed in the 1980s. And as I mentioned before, it was listed in the National Register in 2017, and it is being it's undergoing adaptive reuse into residential housing.

Next slide. So just to summarize the nomination. St. Ben's is locally significant under National Register Criterion A for its association with the history African Americans in Milwaukee. Established in 1908, St. Benedict the Moore worked to promote the welfare of the black community through social service programs, medical care and education. St. Ben's is recognized as one of the three primary historic African American congregations in Milwaukee. And of those three, St. Benedict's Church is the oldest surviving historic structure that was built to house a black congregation.

Because of its association with the history and welfare of Milwaukee's African American community, St. Benedict the Moor is considered eligible for listing in the National Register under Criterion A.

All

right. Do

we know what building they are sitting in front of?

So the the parish also owned a number of houses on 8th is it 8th Street or 9th Street? That's East.

Those are still there.

There some are there. Some have been torn down. And I think the one that they're in front of has been torn down. But they owned a lot of buildings around there.

That was like four when I was asking you North 4th Street, like the 400 block, which would put it pretty far south.

Yeah. Yep. Yes. That would

be pretty far south. Right.

Those so the

and that's

that's on 8th Street. It's like

four houses on the west Beautiful. Side of the

Alright. Any commissioners have any questions on this item?

Who is the most notable member of this parish? Oprah Winfrey.

No kidding. Really? Yeah.