It is Monday, July 20th, 2026, and welcome to the City Plan Commission meeting.

I'd like to start by taking the roll.

If you're here, please let me know that you're here.

Uh Commissioner Alison Nemek.

Here.

Commissioner Katrina Crane.

Here.

Commissioner Willie Smith.

Commissioner Runell Washington.

Present.

Commissioner Tariq Moody.

Commissioner Jesus Gonzalez.

Present.

Okay, thank you very much.

And uh Ms.

Vonseca, would you like to go through the virtual options and any other instructions that we're gonna need for the meeting, please?

Of course.

Thank you, madam chair.

Today's City Plan Commission meeting will be carried out in a hybrid format, which means we are accepting public testimony both in person at City Hall and online in GoToWebinar.

If you're joining via GoToWebinar, please keep yourself on mute until you are called.

If you would like to provide testimony during any of the public hearings, please click the raise hand function, and you can see that on the screen now.

During your agenda item of interest, click the raise hand function, and our staff assistant Chris Lee will call on you during the public testimony portion of the item.

If anyone is watching on channel 25 and would like to participate in the hearing, you will need to log into the go to webinar platform to do so.

And you can do this by going to the website at city.milwalkie.gov slash CPC.

From this web page, you can log into GoToWebinar and provide testimony during any of the public comment items.

Whether you are providing testimony in person or remotely, please state your name, address, and affiliation with the item for your testimony.

Thank you for your participation.

Okay, thank you very much.

Okay, item number one.

Um commissioners, have you had the opportunity to review the minutes from the previous meeting?

And if so, I'll entertain a motion.

I'll make a motion to approve the previous meeting uh meeting minutes.

Thank you.

A second.

There's been a motion and a second.

Any discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, please say no.

All those abstaining.

Okay, did you all take a vote on this?

Yes.

Oh, you did?

Okay.

I didn't hear you.

Hi.

Okay.

Now we did.

Okay.

All right, very good.

Very good.

Uh motion is approved.

All right.

Item number two, public hearing.

And um Ms.

Fonseca, would you like to introduce the file, please?

Yes.

Uh uh item number two is file number 260183, a substitute ordinance correcting the mixed zoning of a parcel located at 1993 South Muskego Avenue on the west side of South Muskego Avenue, north of West Rogers Street in the 8th Aldermanic District, and assigning the zoning of local business LB2 to the property.

And Kristen Connolly will present that item today.

Did you mind advancing this right?

Sorry about that.

Great Kristen Connolly, D City Planning.

Um, the site that we'll see in just a moment here um was previously pre previously consisted of two parcels.

Um, one was 2224 West Rogers Street, which was zoned two family residential or RT4, and 1993 South Muskego Avenue, which was zone local business or LB2.

In 2018, the Roger Street property was um a city-owned site that was sold to the adjacent property owner of the Muskego Avenue property.

And as part of that sale um sale deed that was recorded, both sites were joined upon sale, and because both sites had different zoning designations, it created a null or mixed zoning situation.

Um and once we became aware of this, which was recently discovered, um, we worked with Alderperson Rosemaripa Zemaripa to have the file introduced to correct the zoning of the site and assign the LB2 zoning designation for it.

Um we think the LB2 designation is appropriate given the existing commercial mixed-use nature of the property, which includes a um a bar that was um in that's actually in the process of adding a commercial kitchen to their space, and then um also given the LB2 zoning context at the intersection of Musquego and Rogers.

Um the sites within the near South Side area plan and more specifically within the plan's uh Mitchell Street District.

The plan recommends focusing neighborhood scale commercial uses within existing and new commercial corridors and upgrades to the business align with the plan's vision of providing neighborhood scale services to local residents and customers.

So the corrective rezoning of the site to LB2 is consistent with the plan's recommendations.

Um Alder Persons Maripa is supportive of this file, and the property owner is aware of the steps that we are taking um to correct the current zoning error for their site.

Um staff does recommend approval, and if you have any questions, I'll I'll try to answer them.

And if you have any questions, I'll I'll try to answer them.

Okay.

Commissioners, are there any questions?

Just kidding.

Is there anyone else to speak on this?

I don't think there is.

Sorry.

Oh go ahead.

Go ahead.

Go ahead, Commissioner.

I was just wondering if there was anybody else to present on this.

No, I don't think so.

So we've seen a couple of these recently, just from around like the 2017-2018 era where the mixed zoning was the zoning was kind of a see appears to have been perhaps an oversight.

So we've seen a couple of these before the committee, and as we um identify the issue, we just work as quickly as possible to correct it.

And it goes through the full public hearing process to do that, just like a normal zoning change.

So thank you.

And at this point, I do not have anyone who's registered to speak on this item.

So, commissioners, if there are no other further questions.

I will accept uh entertain a motion at this time.

Second.

There's been a motion and a second.

Any further discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Abstentions.

Motion carries.

Thank you very much.

Okay, item number three.

Item number three is file number two five two one eight nine, a substitute ordinance relating to the change in zoning from two family residential RT4 and local business LB2 for the properties located at 410 West Concordia Avenue and 3301 and 3307 North Velar Phillips Avenue to detailed plan development or DPD and the first amendment to the DPD known as Bader Philanthropies to add the subject sites to the DPD that currently includes 3300 North Martin Luther King Jr.

Drive on the north side of West Concordia Avenue, east of North Martin Luther King Jr.

Drive in the 6th Aldermanic District.

And Kristen Connolly will present this item today.

Thank you.

Kristen Connolly, DCD Planning.

The property at 3300 North Dr.

Martin Luther King Jr.

Drive was rezoned, as Tanya said, from R from RT4 and LB2 to a detailed plan development back in 2016 to help facilitate Bader Philanthropy's relocation of their global headquarters to this location.

And that DPD uh zoning was subsequently modified a few years ago in 2020 to allow a digital digital monument sign on the site.

Representatives from Bader Philanthropies are here to touch on the functions that occur within their building as well as their great work they do.

But in addition to the office space within their building to support their own functions, they offer significant space within their building as convening space for community organizations.

And in 2023, um Bader purchased three properties adjacent to their headquarters at that corner of West Concordia Avenue and North Vellar Phillips Avenue.

And the zoning of these three properties are currently RT4 and LB2 and previously entailed residential structures that have been cleared.

This file would rezone the site, those three sites to a detailed plan development and then amend that detailed plan development to approve the plans for those sites.

Bader intends to construct a small accessory parking lot on the north portion of the site to help supplement parking needs for their staff and vendors and to free up additional parking for guests at the near the main entrance of their building.

And the remaining portion of the site, which you'll see on the site plan along Concordia Avenue would remain as open space for the campus and the public.

Residential demolition for construction of new commercial parking lots is discouraged.

And that said, the plan also supports returning vacant lots to productive uses and promotes well landscaped open space near significant civic and institutional uses and encourages the use of permeable paving as surface parking lots.

Hopefully you've all had an opportunity to read Bader Philanthropy's thoughtful exhibit that provides a strong justification for the need for this additional parking.

The plan also provides for shared parking and to support the adjacent business.

And the use of permeable pavers mitigates the environmental impact of the additional service parking.

Also includes additional open space with high quality landscaping that'll be an amenity to the neighborhood and the community to serve.

Staff does conclude that the proposed zoning change is consistent with the plan.

And this is located within the sixth Aldermanic district, and old woman cogs is a sponsor of the file.

And I can turn that over to partners at Vader.

I think this is advancing.

Can just kind of walk you through or unless you want me to just go over them really quickly and you chime in, whatever you prefer.

Sure.

So you can see that area of the parking lot highlighted on that site plan in proximity to their global headquarters building and the existing open space that's already on the site.

And just to refresh memories, because I know we have some commissioners who might not have been on the commission at the time, this was rezoned to a detailed plan development.

Their current um their previously approved site plan, and then you can see where these three additional parcels fit into that context.

If I may I'm Frank Cumberbatch, I'm the vice president for engagement for the foundation.

If I may, if you go to the previous slide, you would see that the landscape area to the west of it is owned by the foundation.

But we during the planning of this, we made sure that we made quite a bit of that green space that we own available to the public.

And so it's um it's uh well kept, well manicured, and it's uh it takes on the same look and feel as what's inside of the property.

So we don't take it very lightly to put parking spaces, but it's uh it's very much um needed for the amount of growth um that uh that we've seen over over the decade uh or so since we've moved into um into this space.

So I'll stop there for now.

We just have a couple more images just to show their first floor plan that was part of the original DPD that shows all of the space that they um provide for convening for community organizations.

And then here the there's a parking lot plan that shows the permeable pavers and the the generous setback from West Concordia Avenue.

And then a little bit more detail on their landscape plan.

The access point would be from North Fellar Phillips Avenue.

Right.

And you can see how the open space does feed into the existing open space.

And then the small building addition.

I think that might be it.

That should be it.

Yeah.

And land here if there's any questions.

I'll pick up yes, commissioners.

Do you have any questions?

I do.

Um is there a laser pointer in your I'm trying to figure out where to ingress point egress and ingress point, I guess.

Right here on Belar Phillips.

Right.

Okay.

Um Mr.

Cumberbass, can you talk to how many people you think we use this lot?

And um if you foresee any um traffic issues with that sharp turn coming off of Concordia to make the left.

Let's talk to the traffic flow, come in north and south along uh Velar Phillips.

Um that's the first part of my question indeed.

Is there lighting that will illuminate the parking lot at all?

Yes.

Okay.

Yes.

It will be will be very well um lit.

We um uh and we don't see any issues uh coming off of um the entrance is actually on Vell Phillips.

So um uh the turn or right turn.

Um coming out of the um the parking lot would have enough space to to be aware of any traffic uh going east on Concordia, and then um a left turn onto Vell Phillips to go north.

Um I think there is enough uh street lighting and enough space um for any vehicles leaving um there now.

Now let me uh just say that uh for the most part uh the the um the properties occupied I would say for the latest 6 p.m.

Um and for that space we intend that to be uh mainly for the maintenance of the so the electricians, the plumbers, the suppliers, and that usually happens during the day.

They're done and gone before uh four o'clock.

Now it doesn't mean that we our staff wouldn't wouldn't park the, but I think it the heavy use of it would be between eight and four or so because of the amount of guests we have.

We host over 5,000 people per year at that foundation.

And so we thought we would move all of those supply trucks that are usually much larger than uh than a passenger car into that space as uh as the main use.

So we don't see any uh any any issues with it at all.

Okay, um commissioners, any other questions?

Chair Bloomingdale.

Um I was actually somewhat surprised just seeing this site plan today that you're only single loading the parking.

Um I um respectful of your um your question and the distance to the corner.

Um but I was just wondering what your thinking was of only going for the ten spaces when you're you know adding the entire area to the um the development plan.

Well, in in terms of what we um uh we designated for the parking, we we we're big on green space.

One.

So secondly, we we really have an appreciation for residential privacy.

And so the house to the um to the north um of the of the of that structure is um lived in by a senior with her disabled son.

And we we didn't feel that it would be appropriate in terms of we didn't want to disrespect um our neighbors.

And uh and so the 10 spaces we thought um was adequate for the use of the the purpose of taking these larger vehicles, uh mainly maintenance vehicles that would create enough um space in our main parking lot for our guests.

So that that was the logic behind it.

But whatever we do, we um we're very cognitive, uh uh cognizant of the um of respecting our neighbors and not to overwhelm the space with um too many vehicles and too much and too many people next to um to to the properties.

Thank you.

I'd also like to follow up about the uh permeable permeable behaviors.

Yes.

This is something that we've asked um many of the applicants to do time and time again, and most of the time they they don't do it.

Yeah.

And so I'm pretty impressed that you included that into your your plans here.

Can you tell us a little bit more about that?

Yeah, absolutely.

Uh thank you uh by the way for asking that question.

In the uh original site, if if you were to go back to that slide of the of the original uh development, um the parking lot um of the uh of the headquarters has a significant um uh retention pond with with a permeable uh spaces because again we we are very very uh cognizant of uh the runoff of water into uh the sewer drains running into the street, and um we thought it it is best that we don't have to wait for you to ask that we we know uh the importance of of holding on to that uh that that runoff and making sure it runs off at the it'd be approved um rate.

So once we know the rules, we we don't wait for people to ask us what to do.

It's part of the culture of how we work, and so we we do the right thing from the beginning.

And here in Milwaukee to make sure that we're dealing with the runoff water properly so that you know a our our lake is safe and well, ANA and our residents are safe, both both equally important in all of this, and there are things that we can do like this permeable havers in many different spots and including the other work that's being done to make sure that there's a place for all this water, uh, even though we haven't had any for a little while here, but I'm sure it will be coming soon.

So thank you for that.

Are there any other questions on the landscaping or any other part of the of the of the project?

I don't have questions on it, but I just wanted to thank you for seeing the greening that you have done and continue to do for that area because it needs it and it gives it such a vibrant push and for it to be something that residents can actually come to and utilize.

I just I appreciate what I've seen and how you continue to um utilize that space.

And then I did want to ask, because I'm I've been trying to think through that whole space, and I did take a look at it.

When you said that you're gonna share the lot, what's the neighboring business you're planning to share with or that you're giving opportunity to share?

Um we have uh it's not on the well because I yeah, yeah, if you went if you go back to almost to the beginning, we owned we own another uh building just um uh northern um uh Dr.

Martin Luther King Junior Drive.

That's called um the the Harpole Building, which we named after Ruben and Mildred Harpal.

And so there are tenants there, and uh and again to serve the community, whether it's a restaurant or the health care um facility that we have there, we wanted to again to share space for their their staff or their people that that's coming because we we we take care of the entire campus.

And so that's the sharing of uh of the of the space.

Just wanted to make sure.

Yes, thank you very much, Commissioner.

Appreciate the question.

Okay, Commissioners, are there any other any other questions?

No.

Okay.

Um seeing none, um, and I don't have anyone else here who has registered to speak on this public hearing um that we have here today.

This this is a public hearing.

I don't have anyone else that is registered to speak.

And so at this point, I will ask the commissioners at to that this is the time to entertain a motion on this item.

Item number three.

I move to a uh to approve to close the public hearing and to um to approve the item number three as submitted.

There's been a motion, is there a second?

I'm sorry, is there a second?

Second, Commissioner Smith.

Okay, and Commissioner Smith, I see that you're now here.

We will mark you as present for the meeting.

There's been a motion and a second.

Any further discussion, Commissioners seeing none, I will call the roll.

If you're in favor, please say aye.

Commissioner Alison Nemick.

Aye.

Commissioner Katrina Crane.

Aye.

Commissioner Willie Smith.

Aye.

Commissioner Vernell Washington.

Aye.

Commissioner Tariq Moody.

And Commissioner Jesus Gonzalez.

Aye.

Okay.

The ayes have it.

The item is approved.

And best of luck to you.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Thank you very much.

Commissioner, appreciate it.

Thank you.

Okay, the next item is item number four.

Ms.

Vonsecca, would you please introduce the file?

Yes.

Um, I will introduce item number five, too, if that's okay with you, Chair Bloomingdale.

Um, item number four is file number two six zero zero two nine, a resolution approving the request for a deviation from the performance standards established by the Midtown Center Development Incentive Zone or DIS Overlay to allow an indoor self-storage facility and a data set or computer processing computational research facility as permitted uses within a portion of the former Walmart building at 5825 West Hope Avenue, located on the east side of North 60th Street, north of West Capitol Drive in the second Aldermanic district.

I do want to note that for items four and then five, which I'll be reading into the record shortly, that the applicant has submitted an updated narrative and exhibits dated July 1st, 2026 for consideration by the Commission that removes the data processing computer services and computational research facility use from the proposal and limits the deviation request to the self-service storage facility use within the rear portion of the building.

The file reads with the data processing use because that's how it was introduced.

However, proposed substitute A for items four and five will be considered by the Commission that reflects this narrowed request.

An item number five is 260030, a resolution approving changes to the site, an existing building previously occupied by Walmart, located at 5825 West Hope Avenue on the east side of North 60th Street, north of West Capitol Drive, relative to the Midtown Center Development Incentive Zone DIS overlay established by Section 295-91.0044 of the former Milwaukee Code in the second Aldermanic District.

Okay.

All right.

And before we take up this item, I just want to explain a couple of things about how today's uh items will proceed today.

This item was heard at the last public uh city plan commission meeting on June 29th.

And where this item received a full public hearing.

The hearing included, as you remember, extensive public testimony.

And during the hearing, the commission heard a broad range of comments, concerns, and recommendations from the community.

At the conclusion of this item, the commission, this commission, held the item.

And since then, the applicant has resi revised the application to narrow the request, specifically that the computational computer center data center has been removed.

This item is now back before the commission today for final review of the application and to take action today.

Because the public hearing has already been held, today's agenda does not include a second public hearing for this item.

The substantial testimony at the previous meeting remains part of the record.

Commissioners are cons are considering the testimony, the written comments received, the staff report, and the revised application materials are part of the deliberation.

They will be taking place today.

Again, without the computational center for computers.

And we'll determine the appropriate action based on all of the information in the record.

Okay.

We will now proceed with the staff review of the items.

So Commissioner Crump.

Thank you, Chair Bloomingdale.

Good afternoon, and good afternoon to the fellow commissioners.

Good to be here with you again.

As we've trod most of this ground already, I'll be brief in providing a bit of context to the proposal that we're considering today.

Uh, as noted at the previous City Plan Commission, we're here to discuss a redevelopment of proposal for the former uh mid Walmart at Midtown Center, which has been vacant for well over a decade.

Today's proposal is substantially similar to the project which was presented at the previous plan commission and held for future disposition, uh save for removal of the approximately 100 by 200 foot uh computational research facility inside a segmented uh part uh area of the former Walmart.

Uh the developer did remove uh that element of the proposal, uh, which on a square footage basis uh would likely have benefited city residents through the creation of at least three to five times more uh property tax revenue, uh recognizing some concern by uh some members of the public uh that this use was somehow akin to the hyperscale data centers that are popping up in other parts of the state.

Uh so despite the fact that uh the proposed use was more akin to facilities that already exist throughout our metro area, including many near uh residential um uh uh properties uh for the sake of ensuring that this project would move forward.

The computer use has been removed.

So, where does that leave us uh with a less impactful but still quite transformative project that sits before you today, namely the redevelopment of the five acre site uh into 200 units of new affordable housing and green space, about 50,000 square feet of civic and community uses, including a proposed future Milwaukee Public Library branch, uh permanent early voting site, and other community serving space, uh, and of course, self-service storage.

The specific portion of the project under consideration today is the deviation request for self-service storage portion, uh, allowing storage in the rear of this former uh Walmart will advance the goals of the midtown zoning overlay by facilitating every other element of the project, the activation of the front 50,000 square feet of neighborhood amenities and spurring the redevelopment of the parking lot into hundred hundreds of uh new homes.

On balance, this mix of uses advances the goals of reactivating the site uh through the addition of a variety of complementary new uses while limiting this less active use to the rear of the former big box.

The overall project represents a positive step forward for the midtown center and surrounding area, not just by facilitating the reuse of a long vacant building, but also because the proposed uses all will serve existing neighborhood residents and help bring additional foot traffic to support vitality at the Midtown Center.

So again, I want to thank Alderman Chambers uh for his leadership.

I want to thank uh all of you know for your consideration today and your commitment to public service.

This is not easy.

Uh and I want to thank uh the entire development team as well, including AFS and Gorman, Trent Overhew, and Ted Madcom, specifically for steadfastly staying the course uh despite being on the receiving end of some hurtful and unnecessary comments as well as some deliberate mischaracterizations.

Uh don't know if I want to turn it over now to Tanya or Alderman Chamber.

Tanya?

Okay.

Turn it over to uh planning director Tanya Fonseca, who will go through some of the details of the proposal, our staff analysis and recommendations.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

So picking up where we last left off at the last City Plan Commission.

Here's a brief summary of the proposal that we're reviewing today for 5825 West Hope Avenue.

The owner has partnered with several entities to compile a multi-component redevelopment site, uh, redevelopment plan for the entire site.

This includes an affordable residential development within the surface parking law on the north side of West Hope Avenue, previously approved by the City Plan Commission on April 27th, 2026 as file number 252155, and that's one component of the redevelopment.

And that also includes a public park, open space, and landscaping.

The property owner AFS Milwaukee LLC intends to repurpose the vacant building, including reserving approximately 51,000 square feet within the north front portion of the building for community serving uses and allowing a self-service storage facility in the south approximately 108,000 square feet portion.

While specific tenants for the community serving spaces are not yet fully secured, the uses are anticipated to be allowed per the DIS overlay, including a proposed future Milwaukee Public Library branch, a permanent early voting site, and other civic and community uses.

The use proposed for the rear, the south rear portion of the vacant building required deviations from the DV, the DIS overlay use list from 2000.

Additionally, since the last commission meeting, the parking lot area to the west of the building has been adjusted to include enhanced landscaping along the North 60th Street frontage, new scant landscape islands, and more user-friendly parking and circulation layout based on commution commission deliberation.

Staff acknowledges a former big box building with a single tenant is challenging in the shifting retail climate.

Under the proposal, the front of the building is an impactful space within the building as it relates to the public realm and overall midtown center activity, and is reserved for community serving uses that will provide the neighborhood and larger community with access to active and engaging uses that will complement the remainder of Midtown Center.

The proposed use of the rear of the building by a more passive use, that is the indoor self-service storage, is subject to the deviation request and is situated away from the public realm and will allow this multi-component site redevelopment plan to be viable, including allowing the former Walmart's oversized parking lot to be per pre purposed for the housing, the play area, new landscaping, and the open space.

The self-service storage use is considered to be a secondary use to the other allowable uses.

The housing, the public play area, and the community service uses, including a proposed Milwaukee public library, as well as improvements within the overall site redevelopment.

Any approved occupancy and operation of the indoor self-service storage use is contingent on the implementation of the other project components outlined in the file.

The 200 housing units, the open space, the landscaping, and the public play area on the northern portion of the former Walmart parking lot, and the community serving uses within the north front section of the existing former Walmart building along Hope Avenue.

This is included as part of the conditions for approval before you today, and I'll detail that more of that in a moment.

The applicant will present the proposal shortly, but I'll give a brief summary of more specifics of the self-service storage.

It will have an office on the west side of the building, a new and oh, excuse me, a new entrance and a pedestrian walkway leading to it will be added under the existing canopy, and new storefront glass and a person door will be added.

Vehicle entrances for interior loading and unloading are adjacent to the office and will utilize the existing overhead doors that have been previously used as by Walmart as the automotive care center area.

And the facility will be staffed by on-site management office during during the hours of operation.

High definition cameras will be utilized to monitor the site, and tenant specific access codes will be used for all the entrances.

The property is located in the west side area plan boundaries, which were adopted and uh which was adopted in December 2009 after extensive public input.

At the time of the plan's adoption, the property was actively used by Walmart, so future uses for the property were not contemplated.

The plan directs that further development and redevelopment at the midtown center is a balanced mix of uses, including retail, office, institutional, and residential.

The plan also directs infill and other redevelopment opportunities to be compatible with and contribute to the existing retail mix.

For gray field uses, former big box stores and shopping centers encourage similar or compatible uses to go into vacant space.

Where the market will no longer support a retail use or a similar use cannot be reinstated.

Consider office or business services that support the commercial focus of the district or commercial corridor.

Standalone self-service storage on its own would not complement the mix of retail and commercial uses in Midtown.

However, the applicant is proposing to reuse the rear of the building for self-service storage with plans to create active community serving uses at the front of the building, contributing to a vibrant and walkable Midtown Center.

Community serving uses along Hope Avenue and the multifamily infill development with the play area will bring more people to Midtown activating the spaces and strengthening the shopping center overall.

DCD is currently updating the West Side Area Plan with this anticipated adoption by the end of 2026.

And during this planning process, Midtown Center has been identified as a catalytic site, meaning that the future redevelopment will have a transformative effect on the larger neighborhood and plan area.

The draft concept for the Midtown Center identifies opportunities for infill development, adaptive reuse of vacancies, and commercial rehabilitation.

A key draft recommendation is to encourage a wider range of uses, particularly residential, community serving, and civic uses to enliven the area and support the existing uses.

Due to the comprehensive multi-component set of uses in this redevelopment plan, the applicant's proposed deviation is consistent with the policies and recommendations of the West Side Area Plan.

And with that, I will now present the staff recommendations for both files.

For file number 260029, staff review of the proposal to deviate from the DIS use list for the indoor self-service facility indicates that the four criteria have been met based on the fact that this request is part of the multi-component site development plan.

Conditions are placed on the use that is subject to the deviation request with respect to limiting permit issuance for the self-service storage use to ensure that this use is secondary to the allowable uses that meet the intent of the DIS overlay and limiting the size of the self-service storage facility within the rear portion of the building that is not connected to the public realm.

Therefore, staff recommends conditional approval of the applicant's request to deviate from the performance standards of the midtown center DIS overlay to permit an indoor self-service storage facility as described in the official exhibits and propose substitute A of file number 260029.

The proposed conditions for approval are as follows.

One, that the commercial alteration and occupancy permits for the self-service storage facility will not be issued by the Department of Neighborhood Service Services until the following items occur.

That the portion of the site where the housing development has been proposed has been conveyed to the ownership group that will construct the city plan commission approved housing development.

And construction permits have been applied for by Gorman and Company to the City of Milwaukee for residential construction.

And secondly, that there is a binding lease or lease option for the approximately 51,000 square feet, a leasable space facing West Good Hope Avenue for community serving uses with the City of Milwaukee or other community serving entities that will activate the front-facing portion of the property, or in the event that the community serving entities are no longer interested in leasing the space with retail functions that align with the Midtown Center performance standards.

And the conditions for file number 260030 are as follows.

The proposed modifications to the building and site to support the use that is subject to the deviation request comply with the design requirements of the DIS overlay, including modifications and the updated exhibits that reconfigure the West parking lot to provide a more accessible experience and add additional landscaping.

It is anticipated that future modifications to the balance of the building and site will also be compliant and will significantly improve the public-facing realm along West Hope Avenue.

Therefore, staff recommends approval of the request to make site and building modifications at 5825 West Hope Avenue and proposed substitute A of file number 260030.

And with that, um we do have the applicant here too.

All right.

Um next we'll have the applicant Trent Overhew.

Thank you for your time and thank you for uh that introduction.

Um based on our comments that we had on the the last go-around, we've elected to pull the uh the most contentious part of the plan, which would be the computational research facility, and really focus on what we can do to activate that space.

And so with the the self-storage narrative is uh a very low impact use to that, and it allows for feasibility of that project to move forward.

So we uh I think some of the pros that we're dealing with is the the community engagement side where we will have some hopefully some wonderful uses on the front of the building that will bring the community together with the uh affordable housing.

I think that'll be a a catalyst project for midtown.

Um anything that we can get walkability and that that starts to help with new businesses that will start investing into those areas, and so I do look at this as a uh as a whole, and uh as far as our use at the rear of the building, it is low impact um and does fit in within uh these large boxes.

So we've done this quite a few times, and they they do that they are successful, and so that's the biggest thing when when looking at this.

What is something that can go in there that has sustainability and will will coexist with a library?

We have one in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, it's right next door to uh a library, and they they've been there for over a decade, and there's zero issues or complaints from from either side, and so um outside of that.

I I think it's a a wonderful project, um, especially with the uh dealing with Gorman.

I I think that'll be a uh a great component.

Um we did take some of your your parking uh suggestions into consideration.

We were able to move stuff around and still have a suitable amount of parking, and so I think that worked out well.

And outside of that, um I'd appreciate your support on this and be able to hopefully do something transformative to to that area of the community.

Okay.

Thank you.

Uh commissioners, any questions for the applicant?

I have questions in general.

Um, though um, we'll have alderman chambers as well, speak.

So if why don't we why don't we hold on your questions uh specifically or in general, and we'll have we'll have alderman chambers um speak, please.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Uh we're here again.

Um, good afternoon.

Good afternoon, CPC, madam chair.

Um I appreciate the opportunity to speak in support of this um updated midtown redevelopment proposal before you today.

Um before I do go forward, I do want to thank um some people that have been extremely intrical and to where we're at today.

Uh Commissioner uh Crump and his staff at uh DCD, most in particular, um Miss Tanya Fonseca, Dave Miski, Kristen Connolly, um City Attorney Evan Goikey and uh Mary Shanning over at the City Attorney's Office.

Um thank Mr.

Overhew and also Ted Macam, in fact Gorman.

Um this project has generated months of discussion, and I welcome that.

Um significant development deserves public scrutiny.

Uh they deserve tough questions, they deserve meaningful public discourse.

They also deserve an honest conversation rooted in facts.

Um at the center of this conversation should be the community that have lived alongside this property for nearly a decade.

The residents who drove past every who drive past every day, the families who have watched this sit vacant for a decade, the neighbors who have been waiting to see something productive happen there.

Throughout this process, there's been no shortage of community engagement.

Meetings were held, open houses were concluded conducted.

Uh residents had the opportunity to review plans, ask questions, and provide feedback.

And I took those conversations seriously.

I also want to recognize and thank the residents of the second district and those in the neighboring district who came forward at the previous hearing.

While we may not agree on every aspect of this proposal, I respect the fact that they showed up, participated in the process, spoke from the perspective of neighbors who will be directly impacted.

That's exactly how collaboration works.

At the same time, I watched a broader narrative developed that was driven largely by individuals who do not live in or around this neighborhood.

Public participation is always welcome, whether it is from neighborhood residents or advocacy organizations.

But I would ask the commission to distinguish between special interest groups organized advocacy and the broader sentiments of the surrounding neighborhood community.

They're not necessarily one or the same.

As the elected representative of the second district, I have responsibility to everyone, but I have a particular responsibility to the residents of the second district who live besides this property.

There's nothing wrong with advocacy.

There's nothing wrong with this agreement.

But there's the difference between advocating for a community and speaking over one.

The people with the greatest stake in this redevelopment are residents who have lived alongside this vacant property for years and have been waiting to see an asset become a symbol of disinvent or instead of a symbol of disinvestment.

Unfortunately, misinformation spread much faster than facts.

Residents repeatedly told this was simply an AI data center.

It wasn't.

People were led to believe that industrial operations will overtake the site.

That wasn't accurate.

Many people attended open houses, reviewed the updated plans, walked through the site plans, and had opportunities to ask questions directly of the development team.

Yet some still chose to embrace and repeat claims that were simply not true.

Disagreement is everyone's right.

Misinformation should never be the foundation of public debate.

There's a difference between opposing the project based on its merits and opposing it by promoting narrative that has been repeatedly corrected.

Are the residents deserved an honest discussion grounded in the proposal that was actually before them?

I also want to briefly adjust the comments that were made previously at the previous meeting regarding to the current conditions of the Capitol Drive Library and the timeline for its redevelopment.

Concerns about the state of that facility are valid, and they reflect years of deferred investment that this community has experienced.

However, it is important to be clear that decisions regarding that location, relocation, or redevelopment of library facilities are under the sole authority of the Milwaukee Public Library Board.

This proposal does not replace that responsibility.

It provides an opportunity to partner in delivering a modern, updated library facility as part of a broader redevelopment that has been discussed for years.

Rather than delaying progress further, this project helped move the long-standing conversation forward in a meaningful way.

What also concerns me is the broader pattern that extends beyond this single project.

Whenever meaningful investment is proposed in a predominantly disenfranchised neighborhood, there's always seem to be another reason why it cannot move forward.

If there's housing, there's an objection.

If it's a library, there's an objection.

If it's commercial investment, there's an objection.

If it's jobs, there's another injection.

At some point we have to ask a simple question.

If every meaningful investment in disenfranchised neighborhoods is unacceptable, then what exactly is the alternative?

Okay, hold on.

When I do that, that means everybody got to stop talking.

Everybody.

Just let me let because I just did this.

Yep.

Now it's my turn to talk.

So I'm gonna ask that any any any comments are directed towards the commission.

And that I would ask that people in the audience also understand that there's somebody speaking and to not interrupt.

If you need to have a conversation with someone, like your neighbor or somebody there, you can go out into the hallway, have that conversation and come back in.

But in this room, we're gonna have um people be able to speak.

So I'm going to proceed at this point.

Alderman chamber chambers, please proceed.

Thank you.

Um as I was saying, if every meaningful investment in disenfranchised neighborhoods is unacceptable, then what exactly is the alternative?

Leaving another major core commercial corridor vacant for another decade is not a strategy.

Allowing a former Walmart to continue to deteriorate is not economic justice.

Waiting for the perfect project while rejecting good projects have never produced prosperity for neighborhoods that has experienced decades of disinvestment.

This proposal is about transforming a site that sat vacant for a decade into something that serves this community for generations.

It brings affordable housing, it brings a new midtown Capitol Drive library.

It brings a new permanent early voting site.

It brings economic opportunity, it creates jobs, it returns activity to one of the most visible vacant commercial properties on Milwaukee's northwest side.

And importantly, this proposal did not arrive here unchanged.

The proposal before you today is not the proposal that was introduced months or years ago.

The development team listened to feedback from residents, stakeholders, open houses, and public testimony.

These revisions reflect those conversations, and that is exactly what collaboration looks like.

Too often we ask development developers to engage the community, and when they do, they return with meaningful revisions.

We should acknowledge that process instead of pretending nothing changed.

This updated plan reflects community input.

It reflects compromise, it reflects meaningful revisions.

Most importantly, it reflects a willingness to listen.

No project would satisfy everyone.

None ever do.

However, I believe this proposal reflects the best balance between community input, community priorities, economic realities, and long-term neighborhood revitalization.

As the alderman for this district, I would not be standing before you asking for your support if I believe this project will leave our neighborhood or our city worse off than it is today.

Leave this community stronger than we found it.

For far too long, this property has represented disinvestment.

Today it has the opportunity to re represent reinvestment, progress, and a renewed commitment to Milwaukee's Northwest Side.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

Um I'm just gonna say a couple of things so that that we all understand.

Uh at the last at the last meeting of the CPC, as I said in my beginning remarks, we had a lot of uh uh discussion, uh community involvement, and after that time, there has been a change in this file.

Correct.

And that change in this file is that the computing center is no longer part of this proposal.

So that part of the file is no longer what is before us.

Correct.

Okay.

All right.

So commissioners, I'm gonna ask you now.

Do you have any questions?

Commissioner Nemick?

I do have a couple, and I'm not I'm I think they might be a little bit more for DCD, but um uh feel free to stay put just in case somebody else has some questions for you as well.

Um there's a couple things that came out of the last public meeting that I don't know were um fully um discussed.

Um, and one is uh the need for a traffic impact analysis, and I'm I don't remember if we did discuss that at the last meeting, um, whether um DPW has done such an analysis and or whether that was the use but I I somewhat remember that it was not um necessary because the uses were consistent with kind of what is there and a huge parking lot that could have been full with Walmart people 20-30 years ago is um now a lesser lesser use.

Um but I did I don't you know I I just wanted to make sure that you know pedestrians are safe, um cars are safe, you know, there is a issue um not living too far away from um you know cars speeding through the area, um you know, taking improper turns, et cetera.

So um, you know, I don't know where this falls, but I just wanted to put it back out there.

Yeah, so DPW has been involved in the review of this entire redep redevelopment project um from the beginning.

So Hope Avenue is actually not a city street, it is privately owned, but as such, they still have reviewed that carefully.

And there have been proposed changes to Hope Avenue to make improvements to that, including added landscaping, there'll be a significantly more landscaping.

There'll also be some angled parking and loading zones along it.

You are correct right now.

There is some reckless driving that takes place in this area.

We believe it's because it is vacant and because there is an activity in this area.

Um, but certainly there, you know, should there be, you know, and they there are proposed changes and improvements to to all of this through the parking area west of the facility and along Hope Avenue.

Um, but certainly if you know there are opportunities for more once this is in the ground, that can be reviewed again.

Um the community serving uses um in the front, 51,000 square feet, still have to come back before you.

So once the final design is complete, there we'll also have the opportunity to kind of further refine the crossings and other details once we know where those entrances are to those facilities and what what may additionally be an improvement.

Um, but certainly it's not gonna be left as is today already.

There are substantial improvements, and and DPW has been part of the review all along the way and hasn't shown any concerns or call for that need, just as you had had mentioned, right?

We're going from a very large vacant site, and while we will have a lot of utilization of the site again, it won't uh bear the traffic that uh the former Walmart did at some times, just be given the nature of these uses, people are gonna be coming and going at very different times of the day.

I remember this commissioner crane, but um just piggybacking off of that.

That so I appreciate hearing what you just stated with what's happening on the site, but we did have that conversation outside because I remember bringing it up because that was one of my biggest concerns with living over there.

I see the accidents that happen at those different intersections, and so um I remember us having that engagement, but that was during the the um apartments discussion, the housing discussion.

Yep.

Um, and there was supposed to be some sort of study that was on the housing, I believe.

Right, so DPW did review that, but there are no proposed changes on this site for the housing um, nor of the area intersections, but just as any project, right?

We're always open to feedback um for city infrastructure and making improvements when when it's needed and necessary.

Okay, commissioners, any other questions?

Thank you.

Yeah, I do have a follow-up one.

Um one other thing that came up during the public hearing was the amount of flooding that happens in this neighborhood and stormwater management in general, and I'm just wondering uh what is being done.

You know, I I see that there's added green space, obviously on the Gorman side of the line, which we've already approved.

Um I'm concerned about your side of the line.

The parking to parking is a great improvement.

Thank you for p for picking that up.

There's a little bit more if there could be imperviable pavement in some of that than the the area to the to the east that is you know future parking for the um the city of Milwaukee uses.

That's a big swath of currently green.

Um, so I just want to make sure that restrictions are in place um that we're making sure that this overall this portion of the development contributes to um less stormwater and not more.

If I may um yes.

Um I think at the previous hearing that that testimony came from Mr.

Steve Wilcano over at the Sherman Park area.

Um, and the flooding that he was referring to was the flooding near his neighborhood, um, which as a commissioner of the Milwaukee Sewers district, um, it was roughly about a four-block radius where we um they're going to be redoing the sewers, uh, the sewers and the bioswalls um to reduce um the um flooding in that particular area, and that went through um zoning, if I'm not mistaken at the beginning of this year.

Um so efforts have efforts have been made to uh public works, I'm sorry, not zoning, but public works um has been made to reduce uh some of those issues.

I think construction have have started, if not, we'll be starting shortly far as that.

Now we I can't speak on what's going on with this, but I think that particular one as far as the flooding was in particular his neighborhood.

Okay, commissioners, additional questions, comments, and just a question for staff to follow up on my last question.

The parking lot to the east part of that would come back before this correct mission if it was developed.

So any everything in this red dashed line right here will be coming back before us for the the site changes.

Okay, including Hope Avenue.

Um, not including Hope Avenue, but we certainly can it's just within this red dotted area.

Um, but we we that speaks to the city uses, right?

That we'll be reviewing.

Um, but but some of these improvements can certainly be refined as they connect from some of the entry points.

This is conceptual right here in terms of where those entries will be.

Um, from my understanding, there will you know be opportunities for some activating uses along here, but of course they've not been planned.

So what's shown here may shift, and so that may um further inform some of the crossings across Hope Avenue, for instance, but um the Hope Avenue improvements are um already kind of etched out, if you will, in terms of narrowing it, adding it more landscaping already than what's there today.

Right now it is uh really just hard surface along it.

So all the green there that you're seeing is new, the loading zones, the the parking.

Certainly there are you know, maybe some additional loading zones or other considerations in front of these activating uses that we'll uh further discuss, but yeah.

Okay, thank you.

Um commissioners, any other questions, comments?

Trying to think of how to ask this question.

Because I I'll be honest, I mean I'm still not the biggest fan at all of the storage at all, but I do understand the whole overview of um when you look at the fact that this has been vacant for as long as it has and the redevelopment that can take place and the fact that throughout our city, which I stated at our last meeting that you're seeing lots of undeveloped spaces that are being black communities which have gone vacant for even longer, and I don't want to constantly see that.

But my question goes to with the storage, how do we prevent it from growing?

Like if the other two uses don't move forward, what stops it from being able to take on the rest of that in the future?

Like how do we create whatever to keep it that size and no bigger?

Well, one issue is that it would not be able to be larger than proposed here today without coming back before this body with public hearings or no public hearings?

Okay, you know what?

I've asked I've at this is gonna be my I'm gonna go like this again.

I'm gonna ask one more time.

If people have um please I I would like to not have people yelling from the back of the room, okay?

I apologize.

You're that's okay.

That's okay, it happens.

Very out of line, very sorry, very emotional.

I was in the room.

Okay, okay.

I just remember the beginning of this.

Right.

No, that that's fine.

Okay.

We're gonna just proceed.

So the question is, this um and commissioner crane was was commenting on this.

So this plan is coming in as as is presented.

If there's any changes, let's let's um review this.

And Commissioner Crump was saying that what is gonna have to happen.

Right.

Um, you know, I think this would be akin to some of the questions that were asked repeatedly, even after being answered last time about um well uh what if 20,000 square feet is approved for computational research facility, won't they be able to just take over the entire space?

And the answer then was no, and the answer now is no.

That what is approved today would be what's approved to happen.

And so the 50,000 there's not um a kind of a a clawback by the developer that if the city does not utilize the space, then they would be able to expand the storage.

We're only uh only seeking approval today uh for what is presented today.

Okay, so they would have to come back here, and um and also I don't know if it's I wanted to make sure about this this item.

There's a there's a um a what am I trying to say?

A clause, a contingency correct here that says that the public housing, the the um the playground, that has to come first, correct?

That says that the public housing, the um the playground that has to come first.

Correct.

Yes.

Before the storage.

Yes.

So we are not going to have a situation that we will have the storage but no housing.

Correct.

Because you have it written into the file.

And the community space as well.

And the community space.

Community space, housing.

Right.

And playground.

Yes.

So correct.

Um so the portion of the site where the housing is proposed has to be conveyed to the ownership group that will construct the city plan commission approved housing and construction permits have been applied for.

Um, and secondly, that there is a binding lease or lease option for the 51,000 square feet in the front of the building.

So what we're approving today is that approximately 108,000 square feet deviation for the self-service storage.

So that orange area that we're seeing here on the screen.

So if there were to be any changes, uh, that would have to come back before us.

There is language written in the condition regarding that 51,000 square feet for community serving spaces.

It is currently the intention for that Milwaukee public library to go in the light blue space on the left side of the screen.

The darker blue space, we do not have a tenants secured yet, but the city is committed, and so we will assign the lease for that space, and we are committed to ensuring that both of these spaces are activated with compute community serving entities.

Um in the event the condition says that the community serving entities are no longer interested in leasing the space with um it is possible that they be filled with retail functions that align with the midtown center performance standards, but again, that would be the city of Milwaukee's responsibility to retenant that space which means he can't go he can't go past that nor could claw back anything, correct?

We need to have this the lease um for that space, a binding lease or lease option for the 51,000 square feet, and that is the negotiations for that are underway.

Okay, I think we're all clear on that.

Can commissioners, are there any other questions comments?

And I I I do have one more one more question.

Um can you can you miss Fonseca just remind us how many how many of the how many of the units for the affordable housing, how many units are are included there?

200 units.

200.

And if I remember correctly, it was a mix of three bedroom, two bedroom, one bedroom for different sizes of families.

Yes, and income levels, yes, there is a lot of mix, and I can't speak to all those details.

I don't have them.

Um, but I just wanted to remind our commissioners um of that conversation because it was a pretty wide range of mix.

So, you know, if someone was starting out single and they ended up, you know, end up having a couple kids they can move into the one apartment to the other apartment within the within the within the apartment building.

Correct.

So okay.

All right, commissioners.

Any other questions or comments?

Can you speak to the pictures and the renderings that are here?

Um this picture.

Yeah, there's a couple pictures.

Where do you want me to start?

Um, let's see.

You can go maybe 37.

Just the I mean it's showing the actual that's the housing for the next one.

The next one.

Okay, great.

And just speak to the graining, the work that's gonna be done, like how the like this is the overall look that you're going for, or is it this would be the library function on the the front edge of the building?

So what we'll have in the back, there'll be basically where the this uh they had a a tire shop or whatever Walmart had before, we'll turn that into an office.

If you want to go back one photo, yeah, we'd have to advance further, but I do want to clarify, Commissioner Crane that this fit visual is conceptual.

We will review this facade once it's designed um by the city because we will have control over all of this.

Okay.

So this will all come back before us for review.

So this is kind of just to give you a feel for it will be activated, but it is purely conceptual.

And Milwaukee Public Libraries has retained an architect to do that design, and that will include some community engagement as well.

So this is TBD.

Um, but just to give you a feel of what it will look like with landscaping and people again, given that we don't get to see that today.

Okay.

All right, great.

And why don't you um why don't you just review the the conditions for us so that we have them okay?

So the proposed conditions for file two six zero zero two nine, which is the deviation request for the self-service storage, is that commercial and commercial alteration and occupancy permits for the self-service storage facility use will not be issued by the Department of Neighborhood Services until the following items occur.

The portion of the site where the housing development is proposed has been conveyed to the ownership group that will construct the city plan commission approved housing development and construction permits have been applied for by Gorman and Company to the City of Milwaukee for residential construction, and secondly, that there is a binding lease or lease option for the approximately 51,000 square feet of leasable space facing West Hope Avenue for community serving uses with the City of Milwaukee or other community serving entities that will activate the front facing portion of the property, or in the event that the community serving entities are no longer interested in leasing the space with retail functions that align with the midtown center performance standards, and for file number 260030.

That's the overlay site planner that site plan changes.

The proposed modifications to the building and site to support the use that is subject to the deviation request, comply that with the design requirements of the DIS overlay, including modifications and the updated exhibits that reconfigure the West parking lot to provide a more accessible experience and add additional landscaping.

It is anticipated that future modifications to the balance of the building and site will also be compliant and will significantly improve the public facing realm along West Hope Avenue, and therefore staff recommends approval of the request to make the site and building modifications at 5825 West Hope Avenue and propose substitute A of file number 260030.

And again, in that um area in the red dotted area.

Give me two seconds.

Let me get there.

This will come back before us once we have everything secured and designed for you to approve the improvements, the public facing approvements along Hope Avenue.

Okay, great.

So follow up on Commissioner Crane's question.

Um are any of the renderings in here of the self-serv source there are, yeah.

Let's go through those because that's what we're really let me get there.

Okay, so here's an example of the interior.

Here's existing and proposed elevations.

So we'll add storefront signage to the front of there and then activate that front right side.

That was kind of set up almost like a a storefront entrance, it just doesn't have the doors and windows, and then that'll fall under the overlay or the the design standards of midtown.

Okay, sorry.

And again, this is what we had at the last hearing that we discussed.

Correct.

We had the same.

Okay, any more questions, comments, commissioners.

Commissioner Nemek, do you have any other follow-up?

Okay, commissioners.

Um entertain a motion at this time.

I would make a motion to approve item number two six and zero zero two nine with the con uh proposed conditions.

You can do both if you like.

Both uh and item number two six zero zero three zero with the proposed conditions uh communicate to us by the DCD staff today.

Okay, thank you.

There's been a motion to approve item number four and five with the conditions.

Is there a second?

Second, Commissioner Smith.

Okay, Commissioner Smith.

There's a second.

Any further discussion, Commissioners.

Seeing none, I will call the roll.

If you are in favor of this motion, please say aye.

Commissioner Allison Nemick.

Aye.

Commissioner Katrina Crane.

Aye.

Commissioner Willie Smith.

I'll come back to him.

He's on the commuter.

Um Commissioner Rennell Washington.

Aye.

Commissioner Tariq Moody is absent, sorry.

Um Commissioner Jesus Gonzalez.

Aye.

And I'll come back to Commissioner Willie Smith.

He was just there.

Commissioner Willie Smith.

Believe he lost connection.

Okay.

Well, okay.

The ayes have it.

The item is approved.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thanks for your time.

And um the only other thing to do today is to ask, is there anything else for the good of the order?

And if not, I will entertain a motion for adjournment.

Okay.

Is there a motion for adjournment?

You so moved.

So moved.

All those in favor, please say aye.