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

Good afternoon, everybody. We will call to order the meeting of the historic preservation commission for Monday, 07/07/2025 at 03:02PM. I'm Alderman Baumann, also chair of the commission. Please call the roll.

And Pete Bricer Brown? Here. Sally Peltz? Here. Lucas Robinson?

Present.

District Keating Khan? Excused. Matt Dros?

Here.

Sorry. No. Sorry. I said president.

Jordan Corales?

I was okay.

Bob Obama.

Is Jordan up there? No. Okay. So, excused. Okay, very good.

First, some housekeeping announcements. Item 11 which relates to the hearing on the creation of the historic district for the Avenues West or the West Avenues West West Avenues West Historic District roughly covering West Wall Street, North 25th Street, North 26th Street in the 4th Automatic District. That's not going to be heard today. It's going to be placed on file because the nominator has applied for a new designation which will be significantly larger than the original map that was submitted that will basically pretty much cover the entirety of the Avenues West neighborhood which I think is a more appropriate way to proceed. I think that better reflects the intent of the nominator.

So, when we get to that point in the meeting, that item will be placed on file which means it won't be heard unless there is a sentiment to take testimony anyway. What's your

I believe we still have to hold the public hearing.

I don't think so. No. Do you? I don't know why.

I mean, people I think might be here for it.

Except it's gonna be placed on file.

It'll be would recommend it's placed on hold until after the new No. It's actually we're we're

killing that that file and then a new file gets created.

Correct? There is a new file in place and new application.

Right. So it's not being placed on hold. It's being placed on file which is basically

You're moving

it from Yep. Right.

Which case if I went to the testimony?

Yes, I'd advise it if I wouldn't have to take No. I don't think you'd have to take testimony so long.

Pardon? Would you the nomination? The Jew, the designation. No. They would do it.

I think it's been withdrawn. Okay. He's here.

He can with come up and withdraw it if that makes these things easier.

Well, that is easier. Yeah. Yeah.

Jim? I'll withdraw.

No, come up with me. Gotta do that on the record here. Who's here on this item anyway? Oh, two people, three people. I guess it wasn't that big a deal. Okay.

Well, maybe more. It's the eleventh item. People come later. They don't sit here for the whole meeting.

Wait until later too.

Yeah. You wanna wait till later?

I don't I don't think these folks wanna just sit here for their health.

Yeah. Just come up and withdraw it if that's Yeah.

We'll get

with that. Just do it.

Don't wanna get anybody upset. Withdrawing an item on file and there's a new file that's been created. Okay. So so you're withdrawing the nomination that created file two five zero three six five and you filed a new nomination for a larger district encompassing not only this area but additional areas. Correct? Correct. And that'll be heard next I

mean, state your name.

Oh, okay. First name, Jim or James. Last name, Dieter. 2432 West Kilborn, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Okay. Yeah.

And and that file will be heard next cycle?

Yes. August 8.

What's the date of that?

August 4. August 4.

And that was kinda extended because it incorporates already houses that have been previously nominated one by Bob Baldwin. No, know there's already historically designated properties within this district. That's correct. There's at least two that I'm aware

of. Yeah.

Alright. Including your house. Right. Okay. Alright. Very good. So then we'll just call this item ahead. It's scheduled item 11 filed two five zero three six five. The motion by motion is there a motion to place this item on file?

So moved.

Is there a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. Aye. Alright. That's out of the way. So anybody here on this is you're welcome to stay or No. You're free to go. There'll be no further See

you next month. Thank you. Thanks, Jim. You're welcome.

Okay. Starting at the top, item one, file two five zero one one nine, resolution relating to certificate of appropriateness to replace the neon lighting on the Pats Bridge sign with LED rope lighting at 1203 North 10th Street in the Pats Brewery Historic District for the Prairie Neighborhood Improvement District Number 1. Anybody here on this item?

We did, receive notice from the applicant that they're still working on a mock up so they ask that this item be held at July for August.

Is there a motion to hold this or call the chair?

Move to hold.

Is there a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye.

Aye. It's

held. Okay. Item two, file two three zero one one one. Resolution relating to a certificate of appropriateness for retaining vinyl windows installed by a prior owner at 2658 North Grand Boulevard in the Grand Boulevard Historic District for Patrick Betts and Jessica Holly.

Okay. They said they would not be in attendance. They sent photos. This is a mothball update. This is the before up on the screen.

And territories. Yeah. And they've made the they've gotten first three windows done. We'll keep making progress. Okay. So, then the

motion is to hold this and call the chair. Is that correct?

Motion to review again in six months.

Two three two resolution related to a certificate of appropriateness for a pergola at 124 West Lloyd Street in the Brewers Hill Historic District for Evan and Amanda Lindbergh. Anybody here on this? Come on down. All right. What do we have here?

So this is relatively unusual in that the way this yard is laid out, this pergola will be extremely visible. Essentially this property only has a side yard. They are proposing a pergola of this style with it will not have the top lattice. They are going to have a canvas cover built

for it. You can sit on if you want. And

it will be adjacent to but not necessarily attached to the garage. Yes, recommend approval condition that the fabric cover be a woven fabric, which I believe is the intent anyway, but putting that

in writing. Okay. Is that all good? Yes. All right. So then there is a motion to approve the basically to approve the file, improve staff recommendation. There's There's second.

Second.

All in favor say aye.

Aye. Alright.

Very good. Item four. File 250353. Resolution relating to a certificate of appropriateness for replacement. Brick siding at 501 West Historic Mitchell Street and the Mitchell Street Historic District for the state's Saint Stanislaws Properties LLC.

Anybody here

on this item?

Come on down. All right. So we have two buildings that are attached via party wall. The Paul Noe building on the corner is constructed in 1888, designed by Alfred Koss. The investment property at 505 West Mitchell, designed by Ferry and Koss in 1904.

The two properties are located on one tax parcel. And Saint Sanislaw has recently purchased the properties and is undergoing a rehabilitation project to use them as a parish center for the congregation, which is located right across the street. In undergoing the renovation process project, they are taking a look at the exterior brick of the property, the exterior cladding, which is a cream city brick that at some point has been covered with a cementitious material, slurry material, and that has subsequently been painted. You can see these 1980s photographs. Only a portion of the building on the corner had been painted at that point with an advertisement which faced east.

We had photographs in the COA file from 2002. The buildings had been long designated by then. Again, at this point, only the advertisement portion of the building had been painted and the remaining brick was not yet covered with the cementitious material. Sometime in between 2002 and 2007, that exterior material was added. The entire structure was painted without a certificate of appropriateness.

There is nothing in the file indicating that a violation order was ever issued to the then property owner. And so the brick has been covered with this cement and that material is cracking. The building is falling. The exterior paint is coming off. As part of the renovation project, Holton Brothers undertook a spot removal on three elevations to take a look at the condition of the present brick, the actual brick that is behind this cementitious material.

You can see the building. This is a recent Google Street view. So all the masonry has been covered. The entire building has been painted this gray with some darker spots, which I think we are covering up probable graffiti. These are some of the spot locations that Holton Brothers had uncovered, taken off the concrete and taken a look at the condition of the actual brick.

It's their determination that all the external brick, once you take off the cement and the paint, it is not salvageable. It wouldn't last as an external material. I did go on-site and I took a look at the exterior, this actual wall with them. And the face of the cream brick is all gone and it's just crumbling. So again, they did take a look at three elevations, the east, north and west elevations.

And you can see the original brick material doesn't have a face left. There's not really a great way to remove the cement with being able to maintain the face of the the hard face of the cream brick. So they're proposing to remove one wife of brick from the exterior. It is a solid masonry constructed building. It is not a brick veneer.

And reface it with this brick that is a new brick that approximates the color and condition of an older cream brick structure, cream city brick. The preservation guidelines for the historic district state that unpainted brick or stone should not be painted or covered. Obviously, this has already been the case. It also states to retain painted masonry surfaces because removal of the paint could cause irreversible damage to the masonry. And that does appear to be the case here, but also the cementitious outer application is already failing and it looks terrible.

The preservation guidelines also say to repair or replace deteriorated material with new material that duplicates the old as closely as possible. Obviously, the sections that have been removed on the exterior, what you're seeing is going to be much brighter, much more yellow than something that's been weathered and that's been out in the elements just because it hasn't been exposed to one hundred plus years of environmental conditions. Staff acknowledges that a salvaged Cream City brick would probably be a closest match to the original brick, though salvaged brick can vary widely in condition, also in color. And Holden Brothers has indicated that availability would also be a problem. They are not sure that they could even find as much salvaged brick to face the entirety of these two buildings.

So with that in mind, staff finds that this does reasonably match both the aesthetic and the color of an original cream brick material. And as unfortunate as it is to remove the historic material, it doesn't seem likely that leaving it in place would be best for the building or that using a salvaged cream city brick would be the best option in this case. So staff is recommending approval with conditions and the conditions just being that the new mortar match the historic mortar, the standard masonry conditions regarding matching mortar and not using abrasive cleaning methods on the masonry material. And I will say that this is part of a larger rehabilitation project. We will be seeing in future months other aspects of this, including an addition, a proposed addition at the rear.

This month we are solely looking at the exterior brick of the two buildings.

Any questions or comments? You guys have anything to add? No, we do have the physical sample here. If you guys wanted to see the physical sample. Owen, if you want to hold it up just so they can

see it. I know the pictures are great but.

Well,

those are, that's full size brick you're going to. Yeah. It's about as close.

It's it's a manufactured brick

that is made to mimic Cream City brick almost to a tee. Obviously, like Andrew said, the patina is going to be a little brighter. It's going to look like a new Cream City brick instead of a weathered Cream City brick, but it's going to look like a Cream City brick at the end of the day. Okay. Where is that from? That's from County Materials.

Where is that located?

There is multiple locations here in the Milwaukee area. There's one down on Ross and there's one over in Butler here. So we're able to source the amount of brick that we need for that building to be able to not only do existing building but then potentially the addition down the road. All right. Is there a motion to adopt and approve the COA consistent with staff recommendation?

I so move.

Your second? Second. All in favor?

Aye. Thank you. Okay.

Next item, item five, final two five zero three five seven. Resolution relating to a certificate of appropriateness for demolition of an attached garage at 2415 East Wyoming Place in the North Point South Historic District for Doug Rose. Anybody here on this aisle?

Alright. So, on the screen is the housing question. It is could not find a construction permit. It appears to be 1960s or 1970s construction on Wyoming Place directly facing the water tower. Staff finds that it is of no particular architectural consequence recommends The

garage now. Yes. Okay.

Just the garage.

All right.

Yes. Staff recommends approval of garage demolition.

So that is an odd looking garage.

Yeah. I couldn't find a permit and the construction quality kind of shows that.

And then what's the plan when you take this down?

That's the next item.

Ignore that question.

All right. We will read that in too. I didn't realize. Okay. Item six is file 250358 resolution relating to a certificate of appropriateness for construction of an attached garage at 2415 East Wyoming Place in the North Point South Historic District. All right. So the two items are in front of us.

Both will do them both.

Doing them together?

Yes.

Mean you are move for a demo permit in the event we don't like what they are putting up.

That is why I did the demo permit separately so that it is clean motions. Sharers' choice. Okay. So we have a post replacement garage. As you already saw, the current one is architecturally underwhelming.

More details of the garage here. Like I said, probably early 70s. It is attached to a 1903 Howland Russell Arts and Crafts tutor home facing the water tower. Two car garage, 21 by 23, four eighty square feet. Total roof height just under 20 feet and a set 10 feet behind the neighbor's proposed replacement garage.

It will be coming up that these adjoining houses are doing a wall garage because of the very tight lot lines in the area. Their current garages are almost touching and it makes more sense to just actually share the wall. And they are in the process of adjusting the property line to do so. Here is proposal. So there are a bunch of usual criteria for additions and streetscapes and new construction.

The design is largely visually harmonious and does not overwhelm or obstruct the primary building. A hidden detached garage is technically possible on this lot. There is room to shove it entirely behind the house. However, you are just going to end up with a 100 foot driveway if you do that. With that alternative, having it faced directly onto Wyoming Place and being visible is clearly preferable.

Siding, appropriate and similar to existing conditions, it will be set farther back from the present garage. Given the layout of the property lines on the block, no other location for a driveway is possible. This is the only street frontage, spare street frontage they have. And this is where the existing driveway is. Scale, this garage takes strong cues from the house in proportion and scaling.

It sits well recessed from the front wall and it is just over half the height of the primary structure. Dormers are modeled after the house's 3rd Floor and connect visually with the similar roof overhangs as well. With regards to form, dormers, overhangs and material profiles borrow directly from the house. Materials architect has stated an intent to find matching brick, match the house roof's current asphalt shingles, rafter tails and windows will match detailing on the house. Overhead and service stores will be modern materials with a wood appearance of a character appropriate to a carriage house.

Construction details, final view, details of the construction details on the house and selections for service doors, overhead doors and lighting. Staff is recommending approval with a condition that a detailed window schedule be provided and that the windows be non clad wood with simulated divided lights and internal spacer bar in the proposal. The windows are proposed as fiberglass.

I am curious. You have an awfully big backyard, it looks like.

Unique for the area, yes.

You really could put the garage in the back there theoretically.

It would be a really long the main difficulty would be the length and then, of course, getting the snow out because it's tight coming out. There's no other place to put it.

Okay. You know, we're we're just in the process of amending the zoning code to permit accessory dwelling units. Your backyard would be ideal for that. I mean, basically, a two story coach house, garage in the 1st Floor apartment on the 2nd Floor.

My wife likes to garden so she might have a different opinion but yeah, that's possible too.

Yeah. But you would you would foreclose that with that garage because there'd no way to get back there. I I. With a vehicle.

Candidly, can't imagine there

are

houses literally all around the backyard.

Can you speak into the mic?

Sure. I'm sorry. There are houses literally all around the backyard. It would be a little awkward for someone, I think, even as a secondary living unit. Okay. People peering in like that.

As large as the lot is, that is a really tightly spaced block.

No, I know that. I am surprised there is that much space back there. Okay. All right. Any other questions or comments? Okay. On item five, the application for certificate of appropriateness for demolition of the existing garage. Is there a motion to adopt that file? Second. All in favor say aye.

Aye. Aye.

As far as item six, the new garage, is there a motion to basically adopt that resolution consistent with the staff recommendation?

Move to approve.

Your second? Second. All in favor say aye.

Aye. Alright. Good.

Okay. Thank you all. Thank you. Thank

you. You

guys have got something else

too? Yeah. Are the

next Item seven. 50360. Resolution relating to a certificate of appropriance for demolition of a garage. The next. At 2429 East Wyoming Place in the North Point South Historic District. Oh, and then we have the new garage again. Alright. Oh, same. Okay. Number eight, file 250361. Resolution relating to a certificate of appropriateness for construction of an attached garage at 2429 West East Wyoming Place in the North Point South Historic District for Jeff Koenig. Okay.

So this is immediately next door. You can see the two existing garages nearly touching at the far right of the photo. This one I did find a permit for 1980. Again, no particular architectural consequence. And regardless of any opinion on the replacement garage, it is aesthetically better.

So staff recommends approval of the demolition of this present garage.

Okay. Is there a motion to adopt that recommendation?

Move to approve.

Second. Second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Moving on to item eight then would be the construction of a new garage.

All right. So this is the really truly tight lot. There is effectively no yard at this house. There is a little bit of frontage on terrace, but that's pretty much it.

This has the

similar situation of yes, there is no other place to put a garage of any kind. It cannot go behind. There is no behind. Details on the house. This is also a 1903 house by Alexander Eschweiler in a Jacob Ethan revival style in red brick, also facing directly on the water tower.

It will be a party wall garage with the other garage you just approved. Setback variances are required for both garages. This one also, however, requires a height variance. The maximum height of a first story and the zoning code for a garage is 10 feet. This one exceeds 16 feet.

So this is a big garage.

Yes, sir. I own a construction company, sir.

Put your dump trucks in there?

No. I do own heavy duty pickup trucks there. And it's a nine bedroom house. So the challenge was and maybe the architect will elaborate on it.

What is your name and address, please, for a second?

Jeffrey L. Koenig. And I live at 2429 East Wyoming Place, the subject property. I bought this house obviously because I'm probably one of the higher end contractors in Milwaukee. We work on these homes constantly.

And I have a love for this neighborhood. And I've chosen to locate my business here as well as my residents here. And obviously, I'd love to have my truck inside so that it's warm when I get into it, but also be able to have a garage that's appropriate for a nine bedroom home. So I looked at the fenestration with the architecture team and we tried to strike a balance which was approved by BOSA on the height. And then we said how can we fit enough cars in here to make this worthy of a modern family and how can this house work for a family where there's not horses, are cars.

I was talking to the architect, 80% to 90% of the cars are either crossovers or SUVs at this point that are sold in the market. So we looked at a two car tandem, which is obviously not preferred, but that seems to be the only option with a lot that we were given. And that's why the distance is needed the depth is needed. And then we looked around the neighborhood to make sure it was appropriate, made sure that we were if you look at the side detail on the west elevation, there are we are not interrupting any of the fenestration. Initially, I believe there was the previous owner had started with some demolition of some brick to plan on doing this, which I guess was probably permitted at the time And it had a rooftop deck, which we didn't feel was appropriate given my neighbor.

Just trying to be respectful and I'm not a party kind of guy. I just want a garage for my family. So I think that this is the best we could do. I know that the gentleman to my left don't think it's a little bit too big. But given that this is an almost 11,000 square foot house and we're talking about SUVs for our family, I thought that this was the only way to do it appropriately while getting the garbage cans off of the street, while getting, you know, four people able to park in there comfortably, getting a slop sink and then attaching it so we don't have to go outside.

There's been significant crime problems because of that. Fountain has attracted unfortunate issues. The city is out working with us to rectify it, but an attached garage is now in my budget and what I'd like

to So basically it's a two door, four car garage.

Yes, it's two car tandem. Yes, So four cars.

I thought about because I know I've seen garages with this height where they have lifts inside the garage. The cars can be lifted one over the other.

So we do have that as an option.

That would fit in here.

That would fit in here at a very short height. Smaller cars. It's not in the initial plan, but we did plan it so that that's an option in the future.

That looks great. You'll do the work yourself, I assume?

Yes, sir. But also not only for the lifts, it is also, I believe, appropriate based on the chimney, I believe, is almost 60 feet, I want to say. So the stretch was to make it in scale with the home, not for any other resident. I agree. And Boza did agree as well.

Just a question. Is this occurring because of the neighbor?

It's occurring in concert. We decided we had some security issues. We both have garages that aren't so great. And because we have to build them with a party wall, I'm actually gifting my neighbor as a courtesy a foot and a half.

Two and a half feet.

Two and a half feet. I'm really getting generous

today. Getting a variance?

It already approved. It was approved by BOSA. So I'm gifting him the land so that he may also have a garage that works for his family.

I see. I see.

And hi, my name is Keith Barnes, one of the architects working on the project. So as Jeff, the owner, stated, we did model this from a massing standpoint in a few different ways. Luckily or fortunately, the Board of Zoning Appeals agreed from a height standpoint that when we drew this at only 10 feet high, it looked dwarfed by the house. It's a very large house.

No, I agree with you. It looks good.

Yes.

Thank you, sir.

And then and from a depth standpoint, I know the gentleman from staff have a concern about the depth. And we have done a little bit of research of other historic homes in the neighborhood that have similar attached garages. And I've brought an exhibit because we received the report from staff this morning that I'd like to share with you of a few other historic properties where there's precedent for a beautiful attached garage onto a larger home where the front face of the garage on a corner lot nears the side street, the sidewalk of the side street. So I don't know if there's a way I could share this and cast my mind onto the screen. Yes,

you would have to give me a drive.

Okay. Or maybe I could just turn this around and show it to you. But here is I'm sure you are familiar with 3000 East Newberry.

Another

example of an attached garage, single story. It needed to be taller, obviously, than 10 feet. And you can see it actually this is also a corner lot. This is on the corner of Newberry Boulevard and Lake Drive. And it actually gets closer to the sidewalk than the house does.

And this is in the North Drive local historic district. And the square footage of that garage is sixteen seventy two square feet. Again, our proposed garage is 1,003 let me just double check that. 51 times 26. Thirteen twenty six square feet is the size of the garage that we are proposing.

This is directly kitty corner to the site. This is on the corner of Lake Drive and Wyoming Place. Another example of this is a two story, kind of like the historic carriage house that you were mentioning earlier. It's now going to be allowed to be built under the new zoning code. We're excited about that.

But here's another example where this is on a corner lot and the garage actually approaches the sidewalk or the side yard closer than the actual house does. And then this is on the same block as our proposed project. This is another one at 2221 North Terrace Avenue. Again, a two story attached carriage house.

Great. That's a whopper.

Yes. So this is, again, a very large carriage house with the garage below that is also on a corner lot. And it just fronts right up to the side yard setback. So we worked very carefully on the planning. We drew multiple iterations of how to find the right balance between meeting the owners' program requirements while making this garage look historically appropriate from an architectural detail standpoint and from a massing standpoint.

And we think we've struck the right balance because it's actually you can see it in the plan here on the right hand side, the proposed garage is actually about four feet eight inches back from the face of the existing garage, the main face of the existing house along Wyoming Place. So it's not getting any further towards the street along Wyoming Place than the house is.

Is the existing garage attached to the house or no?

It's not.

So so how how does that all work in terms of historic house and then getting it at the cash to the home without is that part of Yes.

There are detailed drawings in the file. I would leave it to Matt to actually explain them, but there are detailed drawings in the file of how to perform, like how the connection will be made.

And staff, you feel that this works I did. The attachment.

That's the least of my concerns. Yes.

I think that's more an engineering question than architect. Mean, but yeah, you got to do some surgery to your existing house to make this work, including that chimney. That chimney kind of

We believe that it's going to be there will be no demolition of the Really?

It looked like there were some archways or some

They will be incorporated into the interior. So

we well elevated the roof so they're visible on the interior.

So part of my schedule part of my part of the brief to him was to not interrupt the I wanted those archways preserved, not stripped of brick, no interruption of any existing window in the property. And I wanted it to stop short of interrupting that. And this was the only this is the way he designed it to meet my requirements. I always felt very strongly, since it is an Eshweiler, not to change the lighting conditions in the property. And the room affected would be the dining room, which is used at night.

And I do not believe through a light study that anything would be affected on the interior of the home or there would be any negative consequence to neighbors whom I'm cooperating with on this project.

I wanted to just ask you what you stopped short when you said that this is at least to my concerns.

I don't entirely agree with the architect and the owner on the height issue. But mostly I would say it's there is a little room to push the back garage back a little farther if you delete a work area. In the garage?

Yes. A work area?

Yes. Inside in the garage?

Yes. Like a little workshop area.

Yes. Benches.

There is probably five feet of wiggle room if you lose the workshop area.

It was just storage. I have no intention to work on any

Because this garage is 50 feet long basically, right?

Yes. Correct.

51.

Yes, sir. We build are now since our discussion of SUVs, our standard garage is 24 deep is our so yes, there may be a foot or two, I would concede, but not five feet. But I mean it's a storage for I mean it's a huge house, but if you're you welcome to take a tour at any time. The 1st Floor has no storage in it, which

This afternoon, you've martini going on.

I don't drink and I've got a bar full of stuff. So you're welcome to come

over to my house. But

there is reasonably no storage inside the home and it would be nice to be able to have the intention is to have built ins like garage storage like you would see in don't know, like you see on TV.

Did you have a basement?

Not a great one. If you've been I mean, it was the real omission on this house. It's got like a seven foot basement.

Oh, wow.

It's not like I don't know why on such an expensive house they don't have a 10 foot basement like the rest of the use. But yes, I mean it's a few feet. Yes, maybe we could give it up. I would appreciate not having to give it up for and I don't think it affects architecturally. I'm as sensitive to this as anyone. I was on the border of Villa Terrace with my neighbor Doug. We both were we both care deeply about this community. We wouldn't do anything to harm this home. I understand my responsibility as a caretaker to this home. I don't believe that the extra two feet is going to create any sort of harm.

And we could ask for Various to push it back against the neighbor's house, but then he's looking I don't think that that's fair. And that's more pose of work and more time. And I just I'm not sure that pushing that back to pick up those two feet is the only way I can think of. But one foot six

inches is Mr. Not a good

Chairman, I have a couple of I questions, if I think maybe two, and it's sort of related discussion is going here. I mean, in general, with garage additions, I think we can all admit that we'd like to kind of have them a bit understated. Let the house, the main historic thing really be the star of the block and let a garage and a garage addition, although we've all accepted that. We have to have that. We have cars, eighteen hundred, twenty years ago and so forth. We accept that, but we do like to keep a little understated. So, relative to that feeling about this architecturally, two questions. Number one is, and I think it was said that this won't be an accessible flat roof

over the ground? It will not, sir.

Correct. Okay. Because then you'd have to deal with rails and things like that, which would be obviously another architectural feature for us to consider. But secondly, when I look at, Tim, you had the correct sheet up, that 102, A002. All the way at the beginning. There we go. Stop there. When I look at that, I can see it a little bit better on my tablet here, colors and so forth. But I think that kind of shows it a bit that there's just very simple true brick arches. You guys know, you live there.

It's like a true brick arch. Yes, sir. Keith, did you consider that as being the expression at the garage doors? Because like I'm looking at your laptop right here and I can already see it's like a stone. Got a turn your laptop around and take a look at it. You've got a really expressed stone. Yes. Really expressed stone thing. And in general with Eshweiler and these other kind of buildings and houses in this nature, the main thing was the entrance. That's oftentimes where you deviate a little bit, add something special.

Your entrance looks excellent as it originally was intended to. And then some of the other window openings are there's no stone heads, there's no stone sills. It's really just the beauty in some ways of the I can see some stone sills there. But any that's a kind of long explanation, Keith, to did you consider just a nice deep sort of understated arch opening for these for the garage doors instead of that stone?

That was I my can address it. I'm happy to go with the brick. Keith actually originally it was much more significant and I asked for it to be paired back because I do believe that the entrance way should be the focus of the property. It is Indiana limestone, and it is quite substantial. Originally, it was Keith had drawn something that was much more ornate.

And, I did ask for it to be more understated. If you do desire it to be all brick, then I'm happy to make that change for you. It would be less expensive, but I did think that that was a nice detail while still being more subtle when compared to the height of the limestone used in the primary entrance.

Also, when I look at the wall construction, Keith, you have CMU as the backup and then you have a brick veneer, correct, on the whole thing?

Correct.

Which also starts to be a little which is fine. That's when we construct things. But at points of opening, then that's revealed that thinner face brick as opposed to the historic construction bearing walls are three, four wide, you get that just rich, thick, beautiful look of the brick proper. So I think I'm just offering that to the commission here to kind of think about that, particularly as it kind of sits out there, which we've been talking about now for 10 about it, the fact that it kind of sits out there further, we're talking about, can you push it back a bit. And then you showed us some garage doors, looks good, you'll get a really good looking beautiful arched garage.

That all seems fine. So that's I guess what I'm offering up to the commission, should it be a simpler expression.

Let me ask you a question as long as you're going down that route. I mean, there is a photo in here of the west side of the house Yeah. Where the connection, I think it will take place. Above juncture.

Above that that arcade walkway. Correct. That area that you're looking at will actually be encompassed within the garage.

Within the garage, right, which is what the owner wants. He does not want to lose those. They don't

want to use those. It would give me more space, but I don't feel it's appropriate. And that's where the major surgery would occur. We'd have to put a piece of steel in there to take that load. So you could hypothetically knock this down and restore it back to exactly the way it was with maybe a little scarring on the brick.

Page three of the plan shows that. And

for the record, I am not opposed to the brick opening. To have someone who is as thoughtful as you to suggest that, I'm happy to do it. I mean, I'm just a humble builder.

Yes. I think it would be I think it would look beautiful with the brick replacing the stone around the arched opening. I think thinking from a design standpoint, you can see on this image is it starts to even though it is a little more subtle and not as decorative and pronounced as the front entrance portico, the front entrance has a lot of stone at the entry. So the idea of tying the two in from a material standpoint by just introducing a little bit of stone around the surround of the garage door was the thinking. But I think it would look beautiful with just the brick around the arched opening.

I think you're both right. I think it's just the columns are too much. Okay.

And I understand what you're saying and that's fine. I think it's good that we're responsive to have this kind of subtle language, the very old, the new, so that there is not such an abrupt deviation from the We old model to the here.

She is on the fly modeled it for you. You can see the side to side comparison.

Bit? No. Yes.

And I say that in part because I don't know your first name, the owner. I say that in part just because Jeff Koenig. Jeff, to see the arches that you want to preserve, it's off the screen now, but at the top right of those photos Yes. Is that

So originally, we thought to do this because the criticism from I guess maybe I was in a seminar somewhere and they were talking about historic preservation. And the thought was that you should build something that's appropriate but it should not look like the original architect designed it, which was the I thought that that was the state's position. And so I thought about that with Keith. And there are some very unique bricks around the windows, which you can't see the detailing, where they've almost done an OG. So there is some ornate detail around the rest of the brick.

So I think that Keith and I were originally thinking to put this stone here so that we could tell that they tied together but not create an exact copy. But she has modeled it here. I have no problem with either one. Whatever the board finds appropriate would be fine with me.

You still have a little bit of concern, you said, about the height, right?

Yes. I can it drop a foot or two and you lose then the yes.

And all the proportions get screwed up as So that top kind of gets it kind of, in some ways, forced to that height. And as long as the guy before you was okay with it, did he leave?

I think it is a solid argument for the house is so big. The garage cannot look diminutive compared to the I rest of the

think it is in proportion.

Yeah. And I have no problem with the brick, if that's your suggestion.

And you could match the brick pretty well?

Yes, sir. We do have the previous owner, if you've seen this board, did some that upper right hand picture did some demolition of the existing brick and just plywood it over. We believe that we can find a very good match for it, sir. And we will use that brick on the front face scattered in the new brick.

You have to get a very you have to go to zoning? You are too close to the front yard setback or?

We got the variance approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals already for the side yard setback to allow for the party wall construction and for the height to exceed 10 feet. The Board of Zoning Appeals agreed with the position that the garage needs to be taller than 10 feet here for this scale of house.

And you have no issue with the front setback anyways? You're back far

enough. Correct.

Yeah. It's all part of the zoning code for the setback.

Any other questions? Is there a motion to approve?

I'm going to move to

Go ahead.

I'm going to move to approve the application.

The modification of the archways?

With that modification of simplification of the arch

I second that.

You think discussion? All those in favor?

Aye. All

right. You're good. Thank you, Board.

Thank you. It is quality work.

Thank you, sir. Thank you. You're welcome to the talk tonight. Is a beautiful house that you should see.

It's really a gem. No, I am. I am curious actually. Okay, that brings us to item nine, file two five zero three six six. Resolution relating to a certificate of appropriateness for construction of a sculpture at 626 East North Avenue at the top of Kilborn Reservoir Park an individually designated historic properties for the City of Milwaukee and Millennium LLC on behalf of Framing Wisco 2025 project. Oh boy, a big crowd here. Alright. Alright.

So this is a kind of citywide art installation that installs kind of photo frame selfie kind of installations around the city at primary viewpoints. This will be an 8x12 artist design structure at the south edge of the hill. On the screen, you can see the park. It will be right up against the track around the park on the south end.

Roughly

here if you can make out the tiny mouse.

So

the criteria for this are a little weird for a sculpture because our guidelines really only contemplate regular old buildings. So guidelines call for avoiding things being in the right of way. This is a public park. Everything is

in the public right of way. There

you can either see it or you don't build it. Siting. Guideline emphasizes the maintenance of sight lines and views of existing structures. The structure will be distant from any historic surface features in the park and will not obstruct views of them. I do have one concern here, especially with the proposed swing on it.

If it goes outside the track loop, basically you move lean backward on that swing and you fall down the hill. So I am proposing that it go inside the track loop instead. There is no fence. And if it goes that extra five to six feet back, it will be much less visible from North Avenue. The goal for this thing is not for it to be seen but for it to frame views.

So it shouldn't matter if it's not particularly visible from the bottom of the hill. Scale, staff feels that a horizontal orientation would be preferable, but that doesn't work for Instagram. So I understand why they are doing portrait orientation.

Is this permanent or is this going to be a temporary installation?

That is not clear in the application. I have asked them to address that.

My name is Joe Franchi.

I'm an

attorney for applicant. So next to me here is Drew Formantini and Reagan Anderson. They are happy to speak on some of these questions and concerns.

I'll turn it over to you.

Can you repeat what the specific well, first of all, these photos that you're seeing up here are from our pilot last year. So a lot about this project is different this year. We're really leaning into community engagement. And so the frames that will be designed this year, we just received initial submissions for. We have about a few different applicants.

And they will look like these frames in the sense that they will be 8x12 frames with Milwaukee on top. But they are not they're going to have a more special design that is specific and unique to Kilbourne Reservoir Park. The values here are supposed to be culture, collaboration, community, emphasizing that. And it was emphasized in our request for qualifications you as

have those specific designs yet?

We have the qualifications. We don't have the specific design.

Because pardon my Neanderthal nature, but I don't get the point of this at

all. What did you say?

I don't get the point of this at all. That's what it's going to look like?

No. Those aren't the designs for this year. That was the pilot project of last year. So this year's designs will be much more involved, meant to showcase the historic and cultural nature of the park. Last year we were only on the lakefront, we're moving past the lakefront trying to be within Milwaukee's neighborhoods so that we can showcase our neighborhoods, showcase the great parks and historic areas of Milwaukee, Kilborn Reservoir being one of the parks in Milwaukee that has some of the best views, some of the richest history. So really mission and vision aligned with this project. Could

you explain more about the Who you represent?

Yeah. I'm with Framing Wisco or Millennium LLC on the application. I'm a team member with the Home Group. And so we are one of the two founding partners with this project. It would be our group as well as Visit Milwaukee. What

is your purpose?

The group.

It's a non for profit, I take it.

We're a local organization. We

have a membership. A non for profit?

A non for profit?

We're not a non for profit. We don't have non for profit status.

You are not.

It's a for profit

organization that in this partnership with Biz in Milwaukee is building these frames that you are seeing and allowing artists to submit their designs to be able to frame, pardon the pun, to be able to outfit the frame with something that is historically and culturally relevant to that location. We have selected Cobalt Reservoir because of the view and how we can put our city in a beautiful light as part of how we can

What else have you done? Then I'll shut up. Sure. What else have you done? In Milwaukee.

From a frames perspective, this is what we did last year. We installed these at South Shore Park and at Bradford Beach.

In Bradford Beach.

Correct. Those are the photographs you are seeing here. Our idea this year in partnership with Visit Milwaukee is to build physical frame and then be able to allow artists to be able to outfit it.

And it stays forever. It's a piece of art or it's temporary? Was a question somebody asked.

The intention is for it to be permanent. We do see that there are conditions here that came from the commission that we're happy to consider and discuss.

Isn't this Milwaukee County Parks that you would know that you would be

No, this is a city.

This a

city park.

Because it's still technically property of the waterworks.

I see.

So if I may, Mr. Chair, Tony Snell Rodriguez from Visit Milwaukee, Director of Community Engagement and Inclusion. We were excited last year with these two setups at the North Side and the South Side. It drew visitors, it drew people from different neighborhoods to explore something new and explore different destination. And to your question, Mr.

Chair, what it does is like a frame. So you'd get a picture, for example, and you'd be in the frame and in the background you would have a beautiful vista. So when you're sharing that on your Instagram or on your social media platforms, you're engaging people from not only across communities and our neighborhoods, but across the world that would want to come here and visit and then take a picture there because that's the engagement we're seeing with leisure travelers from all over. They want to go to a spot and they want to show and they want to connect and they want to tag it. And then it goes like try to go viral where people can see that.

We want people from different neighborhoods to explore other neighborhoods. And Visit Milwaukee has been doing more work in that area. So to come to Reservoir Park, enjoy it, take a picture, show off the city so that more people will come. On top of that, this is an inclusive project in that it will engage local artists, community artists and also we're going to seek feedback from the community. They'll be voting on the different proposals.

So the community and the neighborhood is involved. And obviously with the 6th District with Alder Woman Cogs then Alder Woman Brower Alderman Brower is right next door there. It really bridges, if you look at Brewer's Hill there, River West, Harambee. So it really offers a real good flavor of communities coming together. And that is authenticity.

And when we market Milwaukee to the world's visit Milwaukee, we market authenticity now more than ever. Because when people see things like this, they know they belong. When people from different communities see it, they know they belong. And when they know they belong, they want to come. And we want more people from different demographics to come enjoy this city. And I think it's appropriate also that we're engaging these wonderful artists in the community and it's all organic and it's beautiful.

The other ones that you've done are under the auspices of the Milwaukee County. So

Am I correct? I can

oh. Am I correct that there are the other ones are

Milwaukee County? The two we did last year was a pilot. So those were temporary installations that we did through the Milwaukee County Park. Yeah.

They and the Milwaukee County approved it. Mhmm. And they're down now. I mean, since they're temporary.

Yep. Those ones were temporary.

Yeah. I see. Now you're into another phase. Mhmm. Where you now want to try it at a city park, which I guess I don't know. How many city parks are there?

Potentially a lot.

This is

There are a lot. This is probably the one of the biggest.

Okay. Joe. So

I'm happy to speak to that. I'm Joe Goldberg. I'm the manager of our city parks for DPW.

Okay. So, how how many city parks? Just just educate me.

Yeah. Have 52 city parks scattered all throughout Milwaukee. They're totally separate from the county. It's an MBS facility.

Totally understand which I understand why you're here in term. Oh, I guess that's that's I sort of lost my train of thought of this, but I I I also am a little bit confused as to permanent temporary. I'm understanding the big picture now that you are describing it as a place to take a photo. It's a frame. Mhmm.

With the vista behind it.

It's something that is either apparently, you guys really believe in this and think this could be permanent. But you're not sure until you actually do it, I guess. And then

right? And then we would maintain it. It's almost like the Rainbow Crosswalks, right? When there was a permit for that, for example, you have to have some organization to maintain it and continue it. It becomes permanent, right? So at first, these were initial ideas in the county parks. But now they were so popular and they gained so much traction that we felt we wanted to take it in other parts of the community.

Why did you take them down if they were so popular?

The problem I have here, this is being done. This application is on spec. They don't have specific

understand. They don't have the artist.

They don't get that until the August here.

That's

correct. We get a So why

are we even here? We don't even have a specific design.

I assume because you don't want to move forward with cost for the artist until you have an approval.

Well, the artist is a competition. So I presume the artist

But are these are this is a for profit organization that's going to have to spend more money. And I guess it's paid through they are paid Is

the loan group that's paying for it? Where you raise money for it?

Visit Milwaukee is our sponsor on this project. Do you want to speak

to that?

Okay. That makes sense.

I've got a quick do we get to review the final design? Or if we approve this, I mean, is it now I mean, the city art is mostly beautiful, but there's been some real stinkers out Okay.

I don't want if I could jump in,

Chairman. Go ahead. Tim, if you

don't mind me asking, was our application letter submitted or circulated?

It's on all their iPads.

To me, this is premature

because the application acknowledges we don't have the art now. We are requesting conditional approval and we are happy to come back and get that approval over the final design.

The design is so important. I don't understand how we

can engage

with you on this.

Assume so.

You want conceptually to be able to do something in the park. I don't know how we can give you I do

not agree to conditional COAs. When you have a design They are

kind of meaningless. There is no

The truth to it at range of outcome is so vast. You could get a beautiful sculpture like what we have at the end of Sherman Park or you could get the city's reckless driving car. You just don't know what's going to turn up. So it would be hard to conditionally approve something with such a wide

I'm a no vote, absolutely unqualified no vote.

It's not that. What's the budget

approved by the zip Milwaukee? The artists will receive. So we have artists who have already applied for this. And we did a request for qualifications from them. So they have submitted interest about why they are qualified, all of that good stuff.

Then we will select two artists out of those who have applied. They'll get a $250 honorarium to complete a full proposal. Those full proposals, upon approval from you all, upon approval from our other partners, will go out to a public vote. So that is the other layer of community engagement that we're bringing in is that we want to make sure that the rest of the community who will be visiting this park and all the tourists who will come and see, we want to make sure people are on board with the design as well. We don't want it to But be

who's going to pay for the actual

construction of the piece? We have in kind partners who are

And what's the budget for that? The entire

installation will be done in kind by partners of ours. Construction will be the partner who will be supporting with the build and anything else.

This isn't going to be a cast bronze thing. It's going to be something what's it?

You don't even know. So what

we will be building is what you see to a certain extent of just the actual frame that we are also taking into account the conditions and then handing that off to the artist that is approved, whichever artist is selected from our competition. Hence what Joe was saying was we're not asking for a blind approval, rather to move forward to get to the two artists that we select and then present those two designs to the Commission for consideration. If those are approved, we will then move forward based on the Commission being able to see specifically what those designs are. In our request for qualification with artists, we were very clear this is a historic space and to keep that in mind when the two selected artists build those designs to be considered.

Okay. But the fear might be it's going to be plywood and 2x4s. And so we don't know.

So the wood frame is what we are going to provide as a frame as the canvas, if you will, and the artist will be building upon that. Those designs are coming into us and we will, through the RFQ process, identify the two artists that we would like to move forward with. They will submit designs. We at this point would like to get the okay to move forward with project understanding that we were happy to come back in front of the Commission to provide what those two designs look like. Nine of the 12 artists are local Milwaukee. They are very clear and historic component of the park. We They

are local Milwaukee people?

Nine of the 12 artists that submitted RFQs are Milwaukee based.

What about the rest of them?

They are all Wisconsin based, not Milwaukee, outside of the city. This was an RFQ open to any artist. And

they get paid is $2.52

$50 we are paying to the two artists that are selected for their time to build the design. One of those two will win and they will be granted a $7,500 budget to use that as part of their build and or their compensation. See. When we talk about this being a community project based in collaboration and the fantastic support of Visit Milwaukee, it's exactly what Tony was saying, where we want to highlight the city, the skyline, the park, the artistry and this type of cooperation.

I understand conceptually what it is that you're attempting to do. But I also feel that this is too early. I mean, it's an interesting idea.

Yeah, I agree with that. And I think that if you told us this was something that you want this year, next year you'll do another one. And so it's temporary, it's not permanent, then it would be much easier for us to say, oh, well, it's kind of a cute little, like a tent. Put it up and take it down. But if you say it's permanent, then it's really difficult.

What does a conditional COA get you at this point? What benefit is that of you if we have to approve the final design anyways?

The ability to move forward and install the frame and begin the entire process of engaging with community, engaging with vendors and working to highlight the park and this Highline in partnership with

our friends

who visit.

For them to understand. Do you have another site you could put that frame on and then move it there? Like does BJS have a site?

How are we

going to do this on city properties? Is there a separate lease or license agreement being entered into with the city of Milwaukee?

Yeah. Joe Carlton with the city of Milwaukee Parks. We've discussed different opportunities as far as like how we will outline responsibilities moving

That's forward in your predicate condition. I mean, you're planning to plop down a private piece of art on city property and there's no agreement, there's no lease, there's no license, there's no nothing.

I mean, that's true, but that's something that we can have No,

that would have to go to council.

That's accurate. Yeah. There is precedent for that in other parks that we have had.

But we just did one with That's what we do with the Catalina. And Erie.

Yes. We're working on a very similar thing with Catalano Square. Okay. And just for I see, Ann, just for a minute here, just to also kind of clarify this, I think we're very careful in the third word here and so forth of precisely what words we use on this. This is asking for a certificate of appropriateness, I believe, right? I'm reading that right. Resident We certificate of do have items in the 3rd Ward from time to time, maybe not every month, And think think that's very point. I very

And And

questions here, not the least being for Joe on the park and permitting and so on. It also would be helpful, Joe, to talk to bid to, to talk to people in the historic 3rd Ward on the review board there because you go to 3rd Ward, they have art everywhere. And it is a funny point where it's a public right away, it's not architecture, it's not building. I mean, how do we review these things? But we have a track record of doing a third board. We're doing it right now at Catalina Square. When those sunglasses are gonna go up, I'm not sure. But eventually, they're gonna Well, those things yeah. Sunglasses are gonna get there.

I mean, I appreciate this information. Design, it doesn't come here.

What's

that? I'm saying these examples that you're writing Correct. In regards to with the design group. I mean, your design review board.

That's right.

It doesn't come here.

Correct. And that's kind of why I'm saying it's a little bit less frequent here at the city level. It's more frequent in the third board because we do have those things around. But I already see four or five questions. Number one, check on the permitting and the position, what you have to go through with the council. And I want to know about like what is the contractual deadline? Is it a one year review each year? Things falling apart? We have the right to say get it out of here? Those kind of questions.

I'd love to see the aldermen that are like in these adjacent districts be here with you. I mean, they're the ones ultimately

But we're probably not the deciding body.

I'm saying they would bother. Well, you know, did reach to That is a point, but I it sounds like you've discussed it with them and that they're excited about it. Otherwise And I think it's or my idea.

Right? They're excited about it. The description of having a picture, you know, if you're from France and you come here and you get whatever. It's a cute idea. But I don't think we're the appropriate body for it.

What the city is going to give you question.

I permanently

flop this thing on city property, no way they're going to agree to that.

Yes. No, that's accurate. I mean, the idea that we would there's a few different approaches to doing this. One is to accept this as donation, as amenity that we install as a Which part of

was probably a day or an hour or ten years. Correct.

And which would which to my understanding probably would not even require approval for the And so like I said, we are here also just as a courtesy because we like we want to be partners and good partners in this effort. Like we think it's a really unique opportunity to activate a public park. That's a really unique space for us and is managed collaboratively by DPW and Waterworks. And there's some other really interesting momentum in that park, in that space right now. And so this is just another opportunity.

And so like you're absolutely right. There are criteria to still be ironed out as far as what the city's long term responsibility or defining the term of our responsibility. And that's absolutely something we would work on as part of this. I think part of it because this is a new process and a unique consideration, we did want to get some opinions as to like again, just the comments you've made so far have given us an impression of like what you feel would be appropriate and some of the criteria that you would probably insist upon, which is really helpful for us in drafting a more formal agreement, absolutely.

In order to a basic tenant of historic preservation when you're working with existing buildings is reversibility, to be delicate, not to make anything that really is going to be problematic or expensive to pick up and move that you touch the property in a very kind of simple and delicate way is also just a part of kind of consideration.

Mr. Chair, I may please, I think this has been a really good discussion. Everybody's asked really good questions. You've given really good proof of that. And I'm just going to make a jump here and say, I don't think we can give a CLA because we don't know what we're proving but if I want their shoes, I would want to at least come in and say, hi, to use your word informational.

Yeah. This is what we want to do and if I'm on your shoes, I wouldn't be going out there and saying, here's two sculptures. What does the public think? Connect to put it in the park and then up here, when I, what do you mean? So, is there some way we can use our feedback and say, we appreciate the information. We have had these questions and before it, this matters in your way.

And does it does it ultimately come back here once

the decision made? And that's what I'm feeling too. That will be part of just saying, I don't know. We hold that over until they have an actual something to bring to us to prove. There's nothing for us to prove today but we are aware of it. They know all questions.

I think another important point on this whole matter is this, and we think about that a lot in the third world. We think a lot about that. What kind of floodgate you have 52 parks. All right, here you can put how are we going to stop anybody else from this concept of putting private art in another? And I don't need an answer, but I mean that's what it does. You've got a lot more park. This is a kind of a one off approval thing. And I could see other parkway and other parks around the city going, loved it, it was great, let me do this thing. So we set a kind of precedent a little bit with this, which we shouldn't be scared of, but we got to keep that in mind as we make our deliveries. And

for what it's worth, too, this is a unique park for like the other 51 parks of ours do not look like this. This is a unique park for the city of Milwaukee that we manage, the majority of them are elsewhere. But like I agree with you.

We've all

been I mean, that view of the city. I take people over there, that soccer field, sit down, eat the sandwich, look at this Avli, you know that restaurant, you sit there. That is a killer view of the city. So I'm with you. That is a beautiful view of the city.

We'd like to share it with the world in a very unique way. And I think to all of your points and to everyone here, was supposed to be community engagement conversation and I think we've initiated this and I've written several things here today that we can bring back to the team because I think that's what it's important. We want buy in across the board. We want buy in from the city and the parks and your commission and just and the alders and everyone because this is something that belongs to everyone and it belongs to the entire city and we just appreciate your time. Thank you.

Chairman, is it the official opinion that no COA is required? I think that is

No, no, No. A COA will be required at I'm some just saying I don't believe we can provide one today. We don't know what we're proving. So my suggestion is that we hold this until such time as you have something specific after you've trundled down your process of selecting the two audits, putting it out there for public opinion, figuring out how you're going to work together, fund it, maintain it, and so forth and then come back. And then hopefully, that'll be something that we can approve. Is that something that we can do today? And it's no.

Yes. Is is this yeah.

Just one thing I'd to hear, interject.

Yeah. Nick.

Nick. Yeah. Go ahead.

Sorry. One thing I would like so one thing I like to interject, I do a lot of community engagement. I think the issue with everything that you said, it sounds great. The only issue might be we would weigh in way too late. So I would think that once the artist develop, you know, their initial designs, just like it's being shopped to the public, it should also be shopped to us in one way, shape, or form so that we can actually give input to the artist at a point in which they actually do something about catastrophically have to, you know, redesign things or not now go with something that the community isn't okay with.

I think if we're integrated within that process, you know, just as everybody else is giving input, that could almost eliminate, you know, if we say, hey. Don't use this material. Then they just stop designing that material. No one ever gets to give comments on designs, you know, that have that material because it's not approvable. So I think from, you know, obviously, the other side of the table, they just want to proceed with confidence. I have a lot of clients that do that. They're like, you know, how do I even know after I expend all this effort that this is even worth it? So I think what they're looking for from us today is to say, is there a path where we can make sure that this happens so this all isn't for naught, and we're not selling the community and our donors and everybody, you know, a pipe dream. And I think the way we can do that is say, listen. We're gonna review this with you.

And, obviously, we think it's a, you know, it's a good idea in general. Now there's ways of going about it. There's things to be written up. There's if we don't have an actual outline process already for this, maybe this is a precedent where we can just document what is needed. And anytime in the future, someone comes with this, can hand them a sheet of paper like they do at the city of Milwaukee. We need a site plan or an architect that say, hey. This is the sheet of paper. You read it. You go find that, you know, person. So this is a process or something to that. But I think they just want to make sure that they can proceed. I think there's a way we can give them that saying, we're not gonna prove anything we don't want. You know? But there is a we're we'll give you feedback early enough for you to do something about it. Maybe that's kind

of I I would say, though, that we're just neutral on it. Well, you have you've done an FYI with us. You've given us the information, and now we're neutral.

I mean, we just don't have we have any final approval in

the end? Information?

Do we have any final approval? Do we have a do do we have to give an approval at some point along the process in order for this to happen? Like, at the end? When they show us something, do we have to approve it?

Public art is No. We don't have to approve it, and that's the interesting point. Your process, we went through this with this city flag and it was a fiasco. Because the public is not the final arbiter here. In the case of the flag, the common council is the final arbiter. In the case of this issue, it's this commission and then again potentially the common counsel that's the final arbiter. So you could have the public vote and I don't know how you intend to do that logistically. It was a fiasco. It was all private social media stuff. Very little of the real public was ever involved. It was a very self selected public, and they came up with their selected design. And when it came to the council, it hit a brick wall. That could very

well be

what happens So you're having a vote.

That's that's my point.

The your your so called public may vote on option a. It comes to us and we say, no.

Bob, that's my point.

Yeah. And then what do do?

Thank you. That's my point is I'm I'm

sure.

I'm

acceptable on our side, we literally just stop

sure. Designing it. Yeah, I can do not So with the values

of this project being community, collaboration, culture, coming here first before we had these designs out and into the public was really important to us. We wanted to make sure we were being good partners in this. We wanted to make sure to have this conversation. And I believe it's Nick Robinson is the name I'm seeing. Everything he's saying I'm resonating a lot with. We want you all to be partners in this process. Before we put two out into the public, we'd love for you all to review those so that we can put them out. They're approved by you all. We have your consent for either one of these designs to be appropriate in this park. And so that is really, I think, the ultimate goal and the reason why we're here today.

You know, you also have, I see, a letter of opposition that was in this packet. Am I correct?

Yes. So as far

as I'm aware,

out there's one letter of opposition. In the public and it's all theoretical and it's all lovely. But I am telling you that you will get lots of commentary if it isn't processed properly. And we make a recommendation. And if and if it's not the record, not a recommendation that you want, will they go to common council regardless, Bob?

Well, that's so funny. That's why this is a very strange setup because normally, the property owner, in this case the city of Milwaukee, would not be the one appealing. Presumably a private entity with no interest in the real estate would be appealing. So I am not even sure what standing they have to ask for a COA the more I think this through. They're not a tenant. They're not a property owner. They're not they're they're just volunteers. I'm not even sure they have

to be a

owner, ask for a COA to alter your property. You are asking for a COE to alter somebody else's property. In this case, the city of Milwaukee with whom they have no agreement, no letter of intent, no nothing.

Right? Jeff, want to?

Yeah, that's fair. It seems like it's just so I can kind of try to clarify like the direction that you're asking us to head with this is that it seems like this body would prefer that the first step in this process is to have that an agreement in place that is council approved to install something on the property. This to be perfectly honest, like the idea of installing amenity in a park, like we don't go to the council to request that generally, right? Like if

No. You put your own pirate ship in and you put the design. But that was approved, wasn't it?

Mean, that's like our

mural parts?

Yeah. Yeah. Well, I mean, the common council doesn't review the specific designs of all of

our Not parks down to that level of what size the deck is, what what right.

Yeah. No. So, like, in us to for me to install an amenity in in a in a city park doesn't require interaction with the common council.

The rule

that I agree. What amenity? Like a bench?

Bench. Yeah.

Yeah. A bench. Know, a a play feature, something. Yeah. Exactly.

But these are functional. This now goes into the whole realm of art. I think is in in you know, that's how I'm seeing this thing. This is public art.

Fair enough.

So, anyways, it's more than interesting. There's ceiling for

your house.

Yeah.