|
240402
| 1 | 2. | Ordinance | A substitute ordinance adopting the Growing MKE Plan as the Housing and Neighborhoods Element of the Citywide Policy Plan as part of Milwaukee’s Overall Comprehensive Plan, and directing implementation.
Minutes note: There is a Proposed Substitute A version for consideration by the commission. Proposed Substitute A version adopts the Milwaukee’s Comprehensive Plan: Housing Element as the housing element of the Citywide Policy Plan as part of the City’s overall Comprehensive Plan, and directs relevant City departments and agencies to consider this Plan in matters related to land use and development and work toward implementation of the Plan.
Appearing:
Sam Leichtling, DCD Deputy Commissioner
Amy Oeth, DCD Planning
Deputy Commissioner Leichtling and Ms. Oeth gave a presentation pertaining to definitions (policy, zoning codes and maps), rationale for the plan (provide diverse housing types, market trends, population/density change), overview of the planning process, engagement, themes from engagement, benefit and harm analysis, key priorities, feedback, summary of changes to neighborhood housing diversity, related policy updates to neighborhood-scale housing, near-term strategy, policy updates, commitments to support Milwaukee's housing system (legislative advocacy, intergovernmental collaboration, home ownership, anti-displacement), plan name change, recap of updates to the plan and goals, acknowledgment of various contributory groups, recommended adjustments, and adoption process.
The commission held the file last July 2024 to allow additional engagement with the community and consideration of a benefit and harm analysis. Those tasks had occurred prompting the file to be before the commission today.
There was discussion on engagement process going forward, lessons learned from other cities, conditions (further recommended adjustments), and potential additional changes.
Public testimony:
Ald. JoCasta Zamarripa, 8th aldermanic district, testified as cosponsoring the file, having attended many of the community input sessions, having the goal for this file to address the City's housing crisis and costs by providing a diversity of housing options.
Ald. Mark Chambers, Jr., 2nd aldermanic district, testifed as cosponsoring the file, that the plan does something unique and creative and that engagement from DCD has been transparent.
Ald. Sharlen Moore, 10th aldermanic district, testified as cosponsoring the file, that there was sufficient engagement, and the plan needs to be adopted now (as opposed to trying to find perfection) to address the issue of housing affordability.
Ald. Peter Burgelis, 11th aldermanic district, testified that he was encouraged by the new plan, did not hold a position in either support or opposition, and that the plan does not appear to reflect any community representation from his aldermanic district.
Dr. Eve Hall, Greater Milwaukee Urban League, testified in support of the plan's commitment to homeownership, tenants, anti-displacement, and intergovernmental collaboration.
Melody McCurtis, Metcalfe Park Community Bridges, testified in support, that the plan and engagement process have improved, lessons were learned, they have additional recommendations to strengthen the plan, and for the City to invest in having more robust engagement going forward.
Danell Cross, Metcalfe Park Community Bridges, testified in support and that the engagement process has improved.
Mark Foley, Historic Watertown District resident and homeowner, testified in advocacy of single-family housing and being opposed to the plan, which he believes will invite and allow absentee rental housing, such as from ADUs, into single family housing districts such as his. There should be homeownerhship choice and an exception made to historic district neighborhoods.
Amber Miller, AARP Wisconsin, testified in support of ADUs as middle housing for the elderly and senior citizens.
Allen Witt, engineer, testified that an internal ADU needs to be changed from a permitted use to a special use in order to protect neighborhoods, comprised of homeowners, against an influx of absentee rental housing.
There was discussion on ADUs related to homeownership occupancy requirement, HOAs, historic preservation and design review, and possible future modification of the plan to address unintended implications.
Cade Gerlach, east side resident, testified in support, that he was disappointed by the removal of tri-plexes and duplexes from the plan, that an increase in housing variety will benefit all neighborhoods, and that the plan will result in construction job opportunities.
Pam Frautschi, east side resident, testified in support for more housing variety, more job opportunities for residents, historic preservation, and greenspace. She concurred with the same concerns about ADUs.
Dujuan Shepard, resident and landlord, testified in support of the plan and ADUs, that there should be a case-by-case consideration of every individual property, and that landlords like himself should be permitted to install an ADU.
Dan Adams, Milwaukee County Transit System, testified in support of the plan's cohesion with MCTS public transit routes and access points regarding the type of neighborhoods that will be developed.
David Walla, Halyard Park resident, testified in support of ADUs, multi-plexes, and that increases in housing supply and zoning variety will decrease housing/rental costs.
Jenny Tasse, 1000 Friends of Wisconsin, testified in support of more rental and accessible housing.
Amy Horst, east side resident, testified for there to be further consideration of local control and to distinguish duplexes from tri-plexes and four-plexes.
JoAnna Bautch, VIA CDC, testfied in support of the plan, engagement, more housing options, and more homeownership.
Montavius Jones, Uptown Crossing BID #16, testified in support; being disappointed by the removal of duplex, tri-plex, and four-plex; and that existing zoning is too restrictive.
William Schmitt, Rooted and Rising, testifed in support and advocated for more safe and affordable housing.
Sy Smith, Five Points resident, testified in opposition. Despite improvement, the plan is inadequate. The plan risks gentrification and displacement for senior citizens, middle-aged, and disabled homeowners. The engagement was still lacking for some. She advocated for stabled neighborhoods and homeownership protections. The plan is too broad, fails to address various specifics, and lacks review by the Equal Rights Commission.
Kevin Kuschel, Clarke Square Neighborhood Initiative, testified in support and that the plan will help improve housing affordability and density.
Kevin Germino, east side resident, testified in support and that the plan will help improve homeownership affordability and flexiblity.
There was discussion on the plan being translated in other languages, limited use standard (as opposed to a special use) for an ADU, Equal Rights Commission review, monitoring and reporting of harm and benefit impacts of the plan via future annual housing reporting analysis and other measures, BOZA variance pathway for a landlord to pursue an ADU, and future zoning text changes to follow after adoption of the plan.
Staff recommends approval and with further technical recommendations, as previously stated, to be made to the plan prior to Common Council review.
Commissioners commended DCD staff for the improved engagement process and work achieved.
Commissioner Smith moved approval conditionally, seconded by commissioner Moody, of Proposed Substitute A. (Prevailed 7-0)
Conditions:
1. Add additional acknowledgment and thanks to community groups who invested time, provided advocacy and feedback, and distributed information
2. On page 6, add additional text to show linkages between Housing Element and neighborhood development, job creation, and community safety planning and policy initiatives
3. On page 25, add further explanation of the units lost over time – highlight impacts of predatory lending and sub-prime mortgage foreclosures on vulnerable neighborhoods
4. On page 40, adjust language in policy II.A.1 to reference access to capital for development activities at a variety of scales
5. Clerical edits – spelling, duplicate text, and adjustments to formatting as needed
| APPROVED CONDITIONALLY | Pass | 7:0 |
Action details
|
Video
|