HomeMy WebLinkAbout33538 / 85-01AUGUST 15 1985
# 1 RESOLUTION
(CARRIED LOST �C LAID OVER WISHDRAWN )
PURPOSE: MODIFICATION �k2 TO THE OSHKOSH CENTRE REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT AREA �kl AND REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
INITIATED BY: DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PLAN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: APPROVED 4-0 with 1 vote present
WEHREAS, the Common Council adopted the boundaries and project plan for
the Oshkosh Centre Redevelopment Project on August 7, 1980; and
WHEREAS, Wisconsin Statute 66_43 provides for modifications to the
Redevelopment Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Common Council adopted Modification 4k1 to the Oshkosh Centre
Redevelopment Project on May 21, 1981; and
WHEREAS, the Plan Commission has approved the changes described in
Modification �k2 and the attached maps.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of
Oshkosh that the changes in the Redevelopment Plan contained in Modification
�k2 and the attached maps are hereby approved.
gUHl�ITTED BY
OPPROVED
— 1 —
��
August 15, 1985
Cornmon Council members and CONCERNED CITIZENS OF OSHKOSH:
I, Harvin Miller and my partner Eugene Miller, own the property at 102 N. Main Street.
We are opposed to selling our property.
On February 4, 1982 we also informed this council that we opposed selling our property.
At that time and on July 22 to the Plan Commission members we explained our reasons for this position.
A brief review of this is as follows:
1. In the beginning we were in the neighborhood of transient rentals and vacant and deteriorating buildings.
2. Later we experienced the Park Plaza area demolition and construction.
3. Then the Main Street bridge construction with Main Street closed south of Ceape Avenue.
4. After the bridge came the First Wisconsin Bank area demolition and construction.
5, During the First Wisconsin Bank development came a tax bill of double the previous year's without any
improvement or reassessment.
6. Next the Convention Center with vacant buildings, demolition and construction.
7. At the 1982 Council meeting we were told by city manager William Frueh that we were going to be taken,
if not with the transportation complex as proposed, then further attempts until one was successful.
Each of these situations created adverse business conditions and financial difficulties. The bridge construction
was very devastating!
We neither complained nor asked for any considerations during this time.
We visualized what the future would create for our business by being in this location and of course the increase
in value to our property.
I ask, why in recent years have our assessments and taxes gone down under these circumstances and without a
city-wide reassessment each time?
During the First Wisconsin Bank development we declined a$125,000 offer for our property. Many properties
in this area sold in this range.
The reasons we did not sell were that our rental income would have met this figure by our retirement, plus we
would still have the building and have had use of it for our business.
From this tigure what would our property we worth now?
One really disappointing situation during these experiences and even now is that not once have we been contacted
by anyone. Our information is received from the paper or by gossip.
Our feelings are described in the March 13, 7985 Milwaukee Sentinel article on "Milwaukee: image in transition."
Harvey Z. Rabinowitz, associate professor of architecture and urban planning at UW-Milwaukee talking about
Lake Michigan:
"The lake is so powerfut" it's like they say in real estate, "The key is location, location, and location."
Also the Northwestern article of February 9, 1984 by Doug Buettner of Century 21 Oshkosh Real Estate,
"Being at this location has really given us exposure," Buettner said, "This is one of the three most
traveled intersections in Oshkosh. The Main and Ceape intersection, the Jackson and Murdock inter-
section and this one all have more than 43,000 cars passing the intersection daily."
And then a report in the Northwestern during July:
William Frueh, city manager, reporting on the Main and Ceape intersection traffic and his feelings for
the need for one-way streets and no street parking in specific areas in this area.
Do we have location, how is this replaced?
At the Plan Commission meeting city manager William Frueh classified this area as a blight area. Council
members do you know who owns property in this area?
f
A major developer in the center project owns property in this supposedly blighted area.
The property I see as the most blighted in our area I believe is owned by a business with their own business
property location in this area. They, at their business location, are not in this redevelopment plan but their
other property is.
I see their groundskeepers maintaining their business property daily. Either they don't feel this other property
is blighted or there is a conspiracy to make that area look bad.
I see this area in the same condition and age of structures as the rest of the downtown business area and other
similar business areas in the city. Therefore is our city manager telling the business people of the city of
Oshkosh that all their properties are a blight to the city of Oshkosh? Why are these not classified as blight
areas and why are they also not in need of redevelopment? Is not the city working with one area at the present
time for improvement and not redevelopment? Was this called a blight area?
Also at the Plan Commission meeting city manager William Frueh wanted this modification adopted as soon as
possible so that the present businesses could not find a niche and capitalize on the Convention Center.
We as printers could be a service to and benefit from the Convention Center.
What happened to democracy and the free enterprise system?
This area has been recommended as a potential location for the city's ground transportation center by the city
administration. Although there has been opposition to that spot for the project.
I ask, who was the opposition and why were theylistened to and successful?
Community Development Director Jackson Kinney told the Plan Commission:
"If this step is not taken, the viability of what is occurring now in this area would certainly be at risk."
How did this come about now, why were we not included in the Oshkosh Center redevelopment initially for
orderly planning? Were we not then satisfactory and taken advantage of until now someone else has become
interesied in this valuable property?
What about Park Plaza, they have heavy industry immediately to their west. (CEMENT MIXING PLANT)
How has this affected them and what has been done to alleviate this situation?
We're told that city planners have had the straightening out of the North Main Street-Otter Avenue intersection
on their minds for a long time.
Yet a few years ago the buildings to the southwest of this intersection were demolished and a new building was
put right in the path of this road right of way.
Why was the land not purchased at that time for the road right of way and the new building required to be
built to the south end of this block?
What were the city planners thoughts then?
Our feelings are again well described by Ruth Beglinger in a Northwestern editorial. Excerpts are as follows:
... it seems grossly unfair to me to put certain businesses out of business, or to be forced to relocate,
at a considerable cost to be paid by the local taxpayer, All of this to make the new convention center
and hotel look better. There are several properties to the East that perhaps will be next, or is that already
in the plan. Where do you draw the line?
If a private developer wants to build an office complex in the 100 block of Main Street let him deal with
the property owners and pay the price that the owners have a right to ask ..."
In conversations with many people, including business people, that is:also the feeling i have received from them.
Again I ask, what happened to democracy and the free enterprise system? I mean the F- R- E- E
FREE enterprise system!
I have been told that one relocation made from the original center project has had serious difficulties since his
move. it was set up in larger quarters with a decline in business.
� We have been experiencing pleasing growth with our present situation. Why would we want to risk changing
this?
One position with the original center proposal was: "no city of Oshkosh taxpayer dollars."
Where does the Federal Government get its dollars?
Council members I ask:
1. Were property taxes paid after the city purchased the land and buildings?
If not, this income had to be made up by the rest of the people of the city of Oshkosh.
2. Demolition of these buildings was done with city equipment and I would assume city employees. I ask, was
the city reimbursed for these services?
If not, the city of Oshkosh taxpayers took care of it.
3. City employees were used in the implementation of the project, design assistance, purchase and relocation of
property owners with condemnation proceedings and court appearances, acquisition of Federal Funds, with
visits to Washington, to pay for the project, meetings with and acquiring center developers, construction of
the center and various other necessary activities for such a project.
I ask, was the city reimbursed for these services?
If not, the city of Oshkosh taxpayers took care of it.
In closing I note the following excerpts from the Milwaukee Sentinel of August 6, 1985 titled "HOTEL financing
glut bodes ill for some in business," written by Alvin Curtis.
Thomas W. Scholl, president of Smith Realty Co., Inc., Wauwatosa, is among those questioning whether the
current growth in hotel development is market driven.
"The addition of 1,542 rooms in northeastern Wisconsin is not a direct result of supply and demand,
but rather a result of city, county, state and federal funds being made available to developers via in-
dustrial revenue bond issues, which allow the developer to borrow substantial sums of money at below-
market interest rates," said Scholl ....
"It's not fair to the taxpayer who's supporting them (developers)," Scholl said, "and it takes business
away from existing operators."
...."Hotel development has followed, in part, the burgeoning convention industry, but too many
communities are 'hanging their hat on convention centers,' " according to Scholl.
Is there enought demand? Pointing to the Milwaukee's MECCA, Scholl asked, "if Milwaukee can't
do it, how can they do it in Oshkosh?"
Many of the new hotel projects are tied to downtown renovations, and often become tied to political
egos. They're seen as a way to provide a long-term "shot in the arm" to a community.
But Scholl warns, "most current operators and the vast majority of developers are not concerned with
'long-term' and'civic' returns, but treat their hotel and motel as a business that should be run at a
profit."
Those run as businesses may be able to ride out the predicted shakeout. Those run for other reasons
may not.
I wish to emphasize that much of this presentation is not my feelings alone but quotes from people not directly
involved in this particular situation.
As council members you are elected by the people of the city of Oshkosh to represent the people of the city
of Oshkosh.
Decisions are not to be made because it's a city administration recommendation as there would then be no
need for your representation.
Council members, I now ask, do the people of the city of Oshkosh need this modification so that the city
administration can purchase properties from private taxpaying individuals to then sell to another individual
or private enterprise for their personal use and advantage when they could purchase these properties with
their own initiative?
Where does this benefit the people of the city of Oshkosh?
We would appreciate your consideration and I thank you for the opportunity for this presentation.
Sincerely,
Harvin A. Miller
ADD
II.
�sor�rrzorr # i
MODIFICATION 9P2
OSHKOSH CENTRE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA -061
OSHKOSH CENTRE AREA EXISITNG LAND USE
A. Project Area Boundaries and Descripiion
All of Block 21, of L.M. Mi11er's First Addition, including the
north lf2 of Ceape Avenue, the east 1/2 of North Main Street,
the south 1/2 of Otter Avenue, and the west 1/2 of State Street,
ail adjacent thereto, a11 being in the 8th Ward, City of Oshkosh,
Winnebago County, Wisconsin.
Also Lots 7 and 8 and the south .5 feet of Lot 6, Block 22, of
L.M. Miller's First Addition and the east 1/2 of North Main
Street, the north 1/2 of Otter Avenue, and the west 1/2 of
Staie Street adjacent thereto, ail in the 8th Fiarti, City of
Oshkosh, Winnebago County, Wisconsin.
ADD TO APPENDIX 2 LAND OWNERSHIP AND ASSESSED VALUE BY PARCEL:
Parcel No.
27
28
29
30
31
32
Owner
William T. Michels etal
126 N. Main Street
0liver Davies
124 N. Main Street
First Wis. National Bank
N. Main Street
Donald Mentzel etal
106 N. Main Street
Alberta S. Kimball
N. Main St. & Ceape Ave
First Wis. National Bank
103 State Street
—la—
Assessments
Land
Improvements
TotBi
Land
Improvements
Tota1
Land
Improvements
Total
Land
Improvements
Tota1
Land
Improvements
Tota1
Land
Improvements
Total
g 5,400
12,600
$ ia,000
$ 15,300
16,000
$ 37.,300
$ 27,400
3,600
$ 31,000
$ 3,500
10,500
$ 14,000
$ 3,000
$ 3,000
$ 4,900
1,500
$ 6,400
Parcel No.
33
34
35
36
MAPS
ADD:
Owner
Don L. Thurwatcher
104 N. Main Stree[
Harvin A. Miller etal
102 N. Main Street
Joseph D. McIrlree etal
202 N. Main Street
City of Oshko=_h
State St. & Otter Ave.
RESOLUTION # 1
Assessments
Land $ 1,900
Improvements 6,100
Tota1 $ 8,000
Land $ 2,200
Improvements 5,800
Total $ 8,000
Land S 7,200
Improvements 13,300
Total $ 20,500
EXEMPT
Duplicate set of maps to incorporate modifications.
�1�
�
6
w
a
G
0 ❑
�
O �
��
�
15 �
r-------
-----
i
i
i
�
II ❑
II
I
I
fI
1 �
1
1
1
1 �
1�
1
� � ❑
1
1�
1
1 ❑
��
I� -; N,vw ;
� ,
\\
1 `V�i' � /
— `/.. �
� 1
r.- •
l',,,_,
��
- 1C-
RESOI�IJTION # 1
-------------i
i
�
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
� /
i
i
i
i
i
i
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
!
/
/
/
/
/
�n,
r
x
--i p
z
. �
O O
2 W
P. F
6 U
E �7
h
O
a'
a
T
�,
m
�
c
�
0
m
�
�
v
�o
w
w
m
G
.�
�
.,a
N
O
�
T ?,
H 4+
N N
V 'O
C C
> >
m m
m
v
a
�
c
0
m
u
.�
w
.�
9
O
E
�
m
y
¢
�
c
0
m
J
..+
w
•ti
�
O
�
I
�
a
w
a
¢
ti
v
w
h
0
a
w
RESOLUTION # 1
--- ---�
------ ----- i
---- �
�/
//
//
- ld -
zl
0
.a
F.
6
U
H
N w
�-�
� F
O Z
z v�
l�
P. -a
6
� .a
W
a
¢
w
m
c
.�
N
m
..
P.
ti
�
C
..1
�
N
O
a
..
t
w
m
c
3
O
u
G
N
i+
l.
7
U
�
�
6
[r]
a
C
H
U
�
-�
0
a
a
RESOLUTION # 1
_----'---�' � I
� �--�---_._ ---- /
I� /
I' /
li /
1� I
�I, /
i
I�` !
li �
�mAA.. ;
i �
8 �
' a
' a
e o
` e
� o
i a
� �
e
/ /
/
/
/
/
/
/
!
/
/
/
r
�
r
i
�
i
�
i
r
i
i
� -n
//
- le-
w
�
�
r1
Ll
O 6
Z .�
W C�
6 Z
£ F
�
�
X
W
�
ro
,y
0o u
C t+
� v
� E
t+ E
P. �
� �
�
�
�
a
a
�.
U
�
^�
O
a
o.
RESOLUTION # 1
—�------'---------------' I
i —____� /
/
/
I
I
!
/
/
%
I
/
1 '
,
,
,
,
,
sbno� ,
i — �
i ` i
1i r
� ,
, ,
� ,
,
� '
� /
1 /
1 �
� � � � �
i
1
1
l
l
1
l
1
I
1
1
1
I,
//
�
h���N
1�i
-lf-
�
/
(
/
�
�
�
�Y Q
O 6
Z .�
6 �
� o
w
0
x
a
m
•N
V
{I
y
E
E
0
G
�
u
C
W
a
0
�
w
>
v
a
N
.,,
C
�
�
v
c
C
ro
..
2
�
N
c
m
E
v
>
0
N
a
�
u
.,�
w
�
�
�
�
y
�
c
c�
H
� • � ❑ 9 9N
C'
� O N C n O
rt O �'• O O •
�e h r a d v�
ro �
o y
�
o Z
�
T
1
/
!�
/
!
/
/
��'
�-'�� /
MA��
�
�� -
U%/ � I�
,
/ �1
� _—_---� I
%� � u i ; �
/
� � '
� a I � ,
/ ' 'i
!
/ � I
/
, ' I
/ I
� ❑ 1
, ��
, �
, ,
� _�
, -,
/ COURT �
i �� �, I � (
/ U �I
!
/
. / ( � li,.lj�
/
,
, ,�
,
, ;
,
, �
,
, ,
, �
, �
� _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ J
L_ _ _ _ _ _ _ � _ _ - _ _ _ _ -
- 1g-
RESOLI7PION # 1
U
�
❑r�
���
�
\�
� � 5Z.
A
�t
a�
0
�
0
o�
0
�
x
0
m
x
C)
['1
z
�
�
�
d
m
C
�
0
3
C+7
H
ro
0
�.
rn
H
A
�
�
R
¢
�
a
F�
V
{:�
�
0
a
w
F
Z
m
o�.
0
a
�
>
w
0
W
a
u
�
�
Z
�
iJ
5
�
�
x
0
r_-_ ----
� B i B W
e
a
�
9
e
�
0
e
1
0
9
a
1
�
i
�
�
7
\ ,,. � ,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
/////////////�j �I
/////////////
i' ////i�/�/��/��
J1 //�///i//i�/�� ��
�1 ii%iiiiiiiiii�
O\ i�iii:i
i5 -
�
�
//
RESOLUTION # 1
----------------------_
� -- �
/
/
/
/
/
/
�
r
�
i
i
i
i
�ilOJ i
1
!
/
I
/
�
�
i
/
i
r
/
i
/
i
� �
r
/
�n
,
,
���' \^�
� __,..-
_ � �
i
i
!
�
/
c�
2
�D Z
O
• N
O
Z 2
P. �
6 F
E N
X
W
al
v
.,.
N
.�
A
�
N
N
G
.7
�n
m
Y.
al
C
N
U
S
U
�
�
4
G
R
�
h
W
V
�
�
�
�
�
C
���mr
�' # j
'1i _
�
�
2
C
.ti
h
�
U �
n �2 �v
O L
z, N C
`y W U
�� U
a �
i
d
w
¢
H
�
w
-�
0
a
a
z
�
w
0
�
�
>
W
0
W
a
�
�
�.
Z
�
U
5
�
Y
2
O
� ❑
�
o �
�Q
�
��
%
�
�
1�
��
�
RESOLUTION # 1
r-----------------------------�.
I� �
�
�❑
!
/
/
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
n �
i lano�
i ---
I( �
I
I
I
7�
1 �
1
i
1
1 �
t
II
i� f1 �
�� -
��� O
�I
; � N�dW —
' \� /
\ �
\� �
��/
� ,
�t - � ,
1
�� ,,,,.� ,
/�
-lj -
i
r
i
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
�
�
�
�
i
�n
,
,
z
0
H
� H
H
• y
O �
Z �
a
W U
C C
E
G
z
¢
.�
�
W
�
.�
� �
v �
w �
.� ¢
a
P N
U p
¢
0
N +-�
A
� �
+! C
� 9
c c
�0 N
.-1 ..]
� D
J
�
¢
�
¢
F
U
W
"1
�
a
w
�.
z
m
w
O
�
�
>
�
q
�
a
�
a
[-,
z
m
U
2
�
0
�
O
� �
D
�
� �
Q
�
15 �
�.�
`
�, .
�
!�"
�
RFSOLUTION # 1
i-----------------------
. � -- ----'!•
� �
I �
I �
i �
� �
� �
�, i
r
i
i � i
i i
i �
i �
i � /
i
i �--� /
i - /
i lano� �
� �
i �
��a �
�� ,
;� ;
,
� �
�� � /
1 �
1 �
� �l /
1 LJ /
�I /
1 �
�� n D '
� '
�
� �---- �
� /
I � �
/
! ; n
�h',dW
� ���� � %
/
`i�...�_% /
l - �� /
1 �
y- , 1
1 _--''
- lk-
c
v
� v
� ,
z o°, °
O "
,� a
o� F .p E
�-.
H
. �
O O � .,��
z a ,,,,
h 'C w
a �-, ro
a o ro r.
� A a F,
6 �■
.�
�'-Y � {
�� G
� �� Nfi
n <' �
�� �
m ,�-_',
� �'
i: a �
�" �.> �
L`,
��
�
�
�
-�O O u
� O O � .
� � V fi �
� � � ✓' .�'
'' Z � �
. �
Z .p � �.
N � � � � �
�
7�'N'�
rr � ✓
�
J
� N�
y O
� � il�
4 O i�
� � �`
� � �
� �
✓ C�
� �
� �
�j A
fi p,
� G
✓ �
7 �
�
3
�
�