Ok this is going to come off as a tad insensitive but what the heck.
Darryl Enriquez reports on a fire that damaged the Wisconsin House rooming house at the end of Main Street. Everyone got out ok, even the three sex offenders (all 3 of whom were convicted of 2nd degree sexual assault of a child) that resided there. Darryl’s post indicated that the extent of the damage is unknown. So here is where my insensitivity comes in: Last spring the City decided not to enact Ald. Randy Radish’s proposal to remove rooming houses from the zoning ordinance. Apparently the City Attorney said the City couldn’t ban them, which I think is not true but seems to be par for the course for our City Attorney (can someone explain why this is still an elected position? It should be appointed). All you have to do is create a special zoning category that allows them but never map those districts and don’t approve any rezoning requests to that district. Outlaw them in all other districts. Or even better prohibit them from any district and let the rooming houses challenge your ordinance. An ordinance is only illegal if determined to be so by a court of law.
Now here is where it gets interesting. Had the City enacted the ban it would have made the existing rooming houses legal non-conforming which means they would have been able to continue to operate until they were demolished, not used for 12 months or destroyed in excess of 50 percent of the value. So had the City had the guts to eliminate them from the zoning code this may have become an opportunity to eliminate something that is a detriment to downtown if it was damaged in excess of 50 percent.
I think if this building is beyond repair that they City should do whatever they can to not allow them to rebuild here. Maybe the City could purchase the land from the owner and hold it until a suitable proposal comes forward or maybe they could help the owner identify an alternative site to rebuild. Maybe they could raise the bar so high for architectural requirements that they cannot afford to rebuild it as a rooming house and have to look at different uses. Yes it is tragic that this property is damaged and some people are likely left without a home but from this tragedy the City may have gained an opportunity to eliminate something that has been a sore spot with a lot of downtown businesses.
—-
UPDATE
If this building is damaged to the point where all of its occupants have to find alternative housing on a temporary basis I wonder if the City could prohibit the three sex offfenders from moving back in. Waukesha’s sex offender ordinance bans sex offenders from living within 750 feet of a school, park, playground, day care center or recreational trail but current occupants are exempt from this. If thy are living somewhere else and then try to move back in I think they are violating this ordinance because Veterans Park is across the street and within 750 feet.
If the track record of our City Attorney is any indication, he will just say the City has to let them back in because they were living there before.
Fivepoints-archives 
February 5, 2008 at 7:15 pm |
Yup. The city had an opportunity and blew it.
My only concern about banning rooming houses from all or part of the city is that such an ordinance would have to be carefully crafted. You wouldn’t want to prohibit college students from renting rooms in owner-occupied housing, prohibit families from creating “granny flats” for their elderly parents, or prohibit housing co-operatives (unlikely to appear in Waukesha, but I can always dream, can’t I?).
I also think that it would be interesting to hear the police department’s perspective on whether rooming houses contribute to higher crime rates in the surrounding neighborhood. I’m guessing they don’t. But I’m sure that their presence has slowed downtown redevelopment.
One other comment: if Wisconsin House is torn down, the location would be a great spot for more condos, since it’s at the quiet end of the street and right across the river from the condos going up on St. Paul.
February 5, 2008 at 7:42 pm |
I think that any ordinance would to be crafted very carefully to avoid any of the issues you raised.
I think that if the City isn’t willing to ban them, they should think about limiting the allowable density/number of units. Maybe limit them to 5 units or something like that. That way you don’t have these places that have a concentration of people like this place.
From the 60s to the early 90s the thought with public housing was to concentrate it into large buildings and that obviously turned out to be a devastating social experiment that did nothing to break the cycle of poverty. While rooming houses are a different animal, I think they should be looked at under a similar light. Maybe having a place where 33 people can live in a rooming house isn’t a great idea anymore, especially when some of those tenants are sex offender. Maybe we would be better served if you dispersed people who need to live in a rooming house into into other areas of the City…or even better throughout Waukesha county.
February 6, 2008 at 1:37 am |
Wait until they find out that they will have to put in sprinklers and make the place ADA accessible.