I have been a citizen of Brookfield for 24 years and a member of the Brookfield Common Council for eight years, including two years as president. Many blogs in the past have contained false and distorting info about public affairs. I will provide truthful information and maintain an influence on city policy.
This blog was first written on October 19. As I completed the last sentence, the system deleted my entire text. I contacted my software engineer friend Scott Berg who told me how to master the system. Anyway, the common council will be voting on a change in the zoning code to accommodate a development proposed by Target near 126th and Bluemound. Some years ago we effectively voted big-box retailing out of Brookfield. I still support this in principle. However, we are in the throes of a serious recession. This land needs an expensive environmental clean-up. And current zoning requires this mixed development zoning to include residential units. The developer claims that a development here with housing is not economically feasible now. Probably so. The dilemma here is, do we play it safe and change the zoning to accommodate a strictly commercial development, or risk losing Target and having a brown field for ten years or so. Elm Grove has redeveloped the property north of Bluemound into a first class boutique type strip mall that would complement the Target area. I think that because of its proximity to Elm Grove, our common council and panners could exact some more upscale features for the big box. However, a connection with the residential neighborhood has been recommended.as part of the plan. I strongly recommend that this feature NOT be included. This poses all sorts of problems for the residential area. Traffic speeding through the area will be bad enough to keep a police officer occupied. Citizens should oppose this feature vigorously. On balance, I think the Common Council should approve a change to the neighborhood plan to accommodate the plan presented for Target.