A note from Greg Kowalski - - who blogs at Franklinnow.com and Metro Milwaukee Development News - - reinforces my blog entry below (regarding Whitney Gould and Pabst Farms) where I lament the fact that people don't even know anymore what an effective neighborhood or community looks like; it's been that long since they were common.
In a post I made yesterday, I talk about the soon-to-open Sendik's at 51st and Rawson:
Now that the building is nearly complete, the missed opportunity is all the more obvious. To Rawson and 51st, Sendik's presents a nice facade. To the nearby neighborhood, it bears its unadorned rear end and a busy loading dock. The building was designed to exclusively serve vehicles, without regard to the HUMAN FACTOR - - i.e., the inhabitants of the nearby neighborhood.
What should have been a great neighborhood amenity is now effectively sealed off from a neighborhood that will nonetheless have to endure the extra noise and traffic without enjoying the benefits of a neighborhood grocer, cafe, and public space within easy walking and biking distance.
Greg noted that some "trinkets" had since been added to the bare side of the building; I replied that I was unimpressed. Greg then wrote:
"Well, in all honestly, what were you expecting them to do for the back and side of their store?"
In all fairness to Greg, - - though, as a person who blogs about development issues, he should know better - - his question reflects the gap in knowledge shared by the vast majority of people today. We have become so indoctrinated into the idea of strip malls behind asphalt setbacks that we cannot even wrap our minds around the idea that commercial buildings built in proximity to neighborhoods used to - - gasp - - acknowledge the presence of those nearby human beings and serve as an amenity to them; actually presenting a human-scaled entryway and/or outdoor cafe seating towards the people as well as the traffic.
How about containment for the loading dock and a welcoming, open area - public space - facing the neighbors?
Examples:
The fact is, these options were never explored.
So you have this (plus "trinkets"):
What you're picturing to illustrate your claim appear to be a recent renovation and development. Where's the evidence of a bygone era of such things being common? Old memories, old photos, and a drive through an old neighborhood usually show garbage cans out back, and maybe even the concrete bunker for ashes from the coal furnace.
Posted by: Terrence Berres | October 23, 2007 at 01:11 PM
Sorry John, but even those places you pictured above have a side and a back-end - a back-end of which Mr. Berres mentions garbage bins and perhaps an old concrete bunker for coal.
I encourage you to drive through alleys on south side Milwaukee - like Historic Mitchell Street for example, and you tell me if there's activity on all sides of the building.
I'd be interested to find out.
Posted by: Greg Kowalski | October 23, 2007 at 02:05 PM
This isn't complicated: When you build a commercial business that thrives on customer traffic, building COMPLETELY AWAY from the nearby concentration of homes - - and cutting off access to boot! - - is counterproductive and counter-community. Giving up the entire side facing the neighborhood to a blank wall (in ADDITION to the "back-end" loading dock) compounds the sin.
As far as showing "evidence of a bygone era of such things being common," aren't we more concerned with the fact that this can be accomplished even in TODAY'S strictly zoned environment? Heck, back in 1939 you'd build a grocery store right on a residential corner. A bit more complex now, but still VERY doable.
Posted by: John | October 23, 2007 at 02:42 PM
John - perhaps you should talk to the neighbors behind Sendik's that you are speaking for. It was the neighbors who pushed for, and subsequently received what you dub as the "Great Wall of Sendik's". The fence was not part of the original proposal.
Posted by: Raymond | October 23, 2007 at 04:43 PM
Raymond - That's part of the point I'm making:
A) Sendik's came right out of the gate with a configuration that "showed its butt-end" to the neighborhood; of COURSE they wanted screening, given what was presented. I did indeed talk to them.
B) As I've said, we've lived so long in a strip mall society, people have forgotten how nice it could be to have access - - via foot path, for instance - - to a local grocer and cafe.
C) A better - more transparent - planning process could have made the neighbors and Sendik's aware of the many advantages of configuring the store to serve the neighborhood as a true amenity, and the neighbors would have supported the project to a much greater extent.
Posted by: John Michlig | October 23, 2007 at 05:18 PM
I think we need to wait and see how the overall Fountains of Franklin project will turn-out before we start making assumptions about not serving neighborhoods and the like.
There was also an opportunity for paths to be created linking the rear subdivision with the Fountains and it's Sendik's - but once again, the neighbors refused that as well.
Posted by: Greg Kowalski | October 23, 2007 at 06:09 PM
Don't hold your breath on "the overall Fountains of Franklin project."
Posted by: John Michlig | October 23, 2007 at 08:33 PM
Well I've known for months how much you have distaste for that particular developer, but I think many of you simply aren't giving him much of a chance.
What about the Legend Creek guy - who has that land for far longer than FOF's existence.
Posted by: Greg Kowalski | October 23, 2007 at 08:56 PM
"Distaste for that particular developer"?!?
You are misremembering.
Posted by: John | October 23, 2007 at 10:11 PM