Two articles this week, one about economic development in Isthmus, Madison Cozies up to business, and the other Preserve or Raze? City neighborhood groups at odds over east side homes points to the dilemma Madison faces as it wrestles with the future of downtown neighborhoods.
Many of the frame two and three story housing that was built in the isthmus between 1890 and 1930 are worn and cannot survive another generation. Little of this housing is of historic value, though collectively much of the housing provides more than shelter, as block by block these buildings constitute neighborhoods.
The newly elected alder from the second District understands the problem. From The Capital Times:
One of the buildings, a two-flat at 606-608 E. Johnson St. built in 1921, has had a second-story room added over its porch, an addition that is now "literally falling in on itself." Many of the other houses on the block, most of which were built between 1850 and 1920, have had similar alterations and are in poor shape.
"You get in these houses, and it's just ridiculous," Maniaci said.
photo: Mike DeVries/The Capital Times
There are two sets of conflicting values.
There is the desire to preserve housing that costs the neighborhoods and the city government very little. For the owner, it does not make economic sense to invest in buildings where there is "plumbing held together by duct tape, wiring that was not up to code, roofs leaking, chimneys leaking, furnaces not working,"
Then there is the longstanding Madison commitment to end urban sprawl but oppose higher densities in the older parts of the city. Little mention is made of how the proposed higher densities that come with new development will slow the sprawl and make public transit systems more efficient.
As a longstanding supporter of both the city's Landmarks Commission and the Urban Design Commission, I now question their decision making. There must be an element of reality in recognizing the value of the underlying land, the competitive market forces for the property owner, and the inefficiency, not to mention the dangers, of attempting to salvage firetraps.
The Isthmus article addresses the conflicts between neighborhoods and developers.
In Madison, says developer Bertler, much of the problem is that neighborhood groups are simply too powerful and the NIMBY philosophy dominates.
"A lot of neighborhoods have got more power than you and me in the city," he says. "It's a fight. The neighborhoods, they've got so much power they can literally say, we want the buildings to look like this, or we don't want underground fueling."
Again as someone who contributed significantly to empowering neighborhoods, I see what has gone wrong.
Neighborhoods should be at the heart of decisionmaking as to how the city grows and evolves. That said, someone has to then balance the needs of neighborhoods with the needs of the entire city. A balance of all of the interests and values is necessary. That no longer happens.
Instead there appears to be a tacit understanding that a neighborhood decision is tantamount to a veto. This, of course, is in the interest of every alder and neighborhood from a self-centered perspective. After all, if we support one neighborhood's opposition to a project today, the same principle will apply when we look for allies in our section of the city.
When Randy Alexander proposed a seventeen story building on Lake Street between State and Langdon Streets, the city answered with just as outlandish response by slapping a five story height limitation on the square mile running over to Wisconsin Avenue.
All of this is coming to a head with several city long range planning studies. If presents trends continue, there will be a lid placed on development, which will only further undermine private investment, drive up housing costs, and lead to more sprawl.
Disclosure: I continue to work with developers in the downtown area who are impacted by these decisions.