Fighting for history ... or renter dollars?

This is surely picking nits, but there's a difference between historic and pretty.

Everyone likes pretty -- although our definition of pretty is fluid over time. There was an era, not so long ago, when "painted-lady" Queen Anne Victorians were seen as hideous and torn down without a thought.

I find the Ottawa House (better known as Wax Paper Books) at Sixth and Water to be quite a handsome building -- it's unquestionably historic -- but not everyone would agree with me about its looks, I'm sure.

It seems like people are worried about the historic 400 block being torn down (Pioneer, Racy's/Nucleus, Starr's Sisters, etc). That seems unlikely.

The rest of water street, barring perhaps places like the Joynt, are somewhat of an eye-sore, and lack any historic notability as far as I can SEE (perhaps there's a hidden history in The Pickle that makes it worth keeping). I think people are forgetting that Water St. isn't just one block. It's damn near nine. Keep that in mind, folks.

The proposed ordinance change does not mean historic buildings will get torn down. That's a separate issue. The "historic" argument has to do with preserving the area's historic integrity during new construction. (There's plenty of non-historic space to build on.) Personally, I'm pretty sure you could build a 4-story structure that matches/complements the better-looking buildings that currently exist. There are plenty of limitations and rules you can install to ensure historic-ish facades and so forth right?

That said, I'm not exactly in favor of large student housing complexes on Water Street.

I agree with halvorjr. Eau Claire has never cared for the historic and architectual gems in this city. The city leaders and planners only care about making way for progress, ie. now defunct bread factories and parking lots. Having lived in Eau Claire my entire life, I've seen the wrecking ball take down many unique and historic structures. I would love to see Water Street become the "State Street" of the north, but given the history of this city, I doubt very much that will ever happen.

I think this is just sad. The buildings on Water Street have a good deal of character (did anyone bother to look at the picture). Knocking them down to create a high rise would further ruin the Randall Park neighborhood. I love Eau Claire but the city and planners make so many stupid mistakes--changing an interesting historic city into a sprawling disgusting city eliminating most of the historic buildings to create shitty apartment complexes. I think Mogenson is one of the few who recognize the character in the buildings. I really do not know why so many people hate the historic buildings in Eau Claire. A good example would be the old YMCA downtown and the 'new and improved' one that currently stands. It is a total trashy dump that looks like it is from the 50's. It would be like tearing down all the buildings on State Street in Madison to put up high rises. It is really just tragic.

Historic value? The majority of the buildings along that strip are ramshackle shotgun shacks that are not even old enough or architecturally significant to justify the designation. A wholesale land clearing a la the Phoenix Park area with VERY few exceptions-namely two blocks, would only be a concern to the rats that would be displaced. A week ago I posted in defense of John Mogensen. Now I see why so many people equate him with the self-serving destructive antics of John Menard. Tear it down!

Charlie,

I hope you're aware of the irony when you say Brothers had a "fantastic environment" without the frat boy/college student feel.

Brothers is a chain of bars located in college towns, adorned with, what the locals here call "white hats", otherwise known as frat boys.

Also, you're clearly a Water St. expert, having visited it twice. Please enlighten us with more powerfully complex insights. Maybe some life-changing experiences at The Pickle you could lay down for us?

Must have more buildings unadorned with Mona Lisas.

@pookums-
I didn't say experienced, I said "patronized". I have driven down Water Street many times, but only stopped off twice.

Maybe it's because I got paired with a roommate that enjoyed making sardine quesadilla at 1 a.m., but I moved across the river to get away from anything that even resembles a dorm, which includes 'students housing complexes'.

You can't tell me that would get built looking any more aesthetically pleasing than a prison.

Elaborate on it? A little... In 1984, the Pioneer Block building got an extensive makeover: remodeling the exterior to bring it more in line with its original 1882 look, including new windows (sized more like the originals, at least as closely as 1980s building codes would allow), and work to stabilize the deteriorating brickwork. A couple of years later, the City planted new trees and re-did the sidewalks in brick and the streetlamps in replica-vintage style.

Part of the money for this came from a Federal grant. During the last pretty big recession (spurred by the Seventies oil crisis and the Shah's expulsion from power in Iran), an early-eighties Jobs Bill reinstated development grants. Some of the money was given to the Wisconsin Historical Society to fund historical renovations, and Eau Claire got some of that. The city worked with the State, the Feds, and the business owners to git 'er done. I don't think Water Street would have attempted the project if it weren't for the Federal money.

Now this might be a great time to try something like that again. Got ourselves another recession, another stimulus, and another interest in the Water Street Historic District.

Frank, could you elaborate on the renovations that the 400 block of Water St. (Pioneer, Nucleus, etc) underwent in the 80s? (or was it early 90s?)

Couldn't the old "historic buildings" just be expanded by a historical architect?

Fire engine house: meant southeast corner, of course.

Not here to comment on the relative sense of the proposal, or what's historical or monotonous or monopolized, but Mike asked a question at the end of his piece, and I'll try to weigh in on that.

I can't think of any four-story building ever on Water Street; in fact, I can only think of a smattering of three-story buildings:

The Acme Milling Co (around 1890, near the northwest corner of Water and Third) was three and a basement. The original Pioneer Block -- which burned in 1882 and was replaced by what we now think of as the Pioneer Block -- was three stories with attic space above. Schwann-Seyberth Manufacturing (horse collars! and shockingly stayed in business into the Fifties!) stood in the 200 block on the south side of the street (where the Human Sciences and Services building is now) was three. And, of course the Haas Fine Arts Center has three-story sections.

In the 1870s, a fire engine house at the southwest corner of Fifth and Water (where the metered lot is now) had a tower about the equivalent height of a four-story building. I understand fire hose hung in the tower.

LOL.. Brother's and The Pickle is your only experience with Water Street and you're calling it a drunk-filled shithole? Time to do a bit more exploring there, Charlie.

Water St., IMO, is a drunk-filled shithole, anyway. In the almost FIVE years I've lived hear, I've actually patronized Water Street ONCE. And that was well before Happy Hour. Of the two establishments I visited, Brothers and The Pickle, I was only impressed with Brothers. FANTASTIC amount of character in the structure, without any Frat Boy/ College Student feel.

er, I have severe doubt's Eau Claire WOULD develop it in a "smart" manner.

good points, AgentPendrell. I suppose I just have severe doubts that Eau Claire wouldn't develop this very "smart". You have definitely given me something to consider. Thank you!

I completely agree, Joe, that character and maintaining identity are important. But we are not talking about bulldozing Water St. to erect a mini-Edina - we are talking about refreshing what's there.

You either continually improve, or your stagnate. It's physics - buildings wear out, and under the current rules, the only potential replacements will be more Burracho's style strip malls. If we allow for more vertical building, we can keep the area dynamic while keeping the character.

When we talk about the character of a place, I assume only a very small fraction comes from the physical appearance of the buildings. The landscape, people, culture, and events, I assume, are way more important than the number of floors in a building down the street from another building that has "historical" value.

Destroy Eau Claire's character and you destroy a major reason people move here. Water St. and downtown help balance out the odious Oakwood Mall and various other strip malls around town. I always go to the former, never to the later. Yeah, getting tax revenue from drunks is important and helps the bottom line- always has in WI. Of course, getting new people (tax-payers) to move to your area and perhaps start a family REALLY helps the revenue. Do you want to starve Eau Claire of new families (and yes, students) moving here? A good place to start is to make it look like the cities and suburbs they are moving out of in the first place. The don't want to leave the 'burbs to find a city that looks just like what they left. It's true for me. Without Eau Claire's historical buildings, downtown improvement project, farmer's market, low skyline, and natural beauty- I wouldn't be here. I wouldn't have gone to college here. I wouldn't have moved back to "settle down" now that I'm of that age. Scrap the Water St. historical properties and where do you stop? Next thing you know Eau Claire is Woodbury. No, thanks!

Jesus.. I need to reign in my temper.

I say go for it...

Did someone really say they find Water Street pretty and unique? Srsly? There's no cohesive style, it's just a bunch of flat-fronted buildings that don't really match. That's pretty? The road with the brick in the middle is nice, and the colors on the top halves of the buildings are pretty, but you can put a pretty color on a turd and it's still a turd. My half collapsed tool shed also has character, but if you wanted to build me a new tool shed, that would be just fine.

And all you people that are crying Waterford, are you dense? We're talking four stories, not thirteen. We're talking the caliber of building in the North Barstow development, which everyone is seriously horny over.

And no one is arguing against this because of not liking John Mogenson - we're arguing because of the ways Johnny and his friends run their properties.

Many times, it seems like hindering downtown development in the name of "historic preservation" is just another way of saying, "we want to keep the status quo".

The last time I checked, there were plenty of buildings over three stories high that were built before whatever arbitrary time period they're referring to as "historic". If done correctly, mixing buildings of varying heights and styles makes an area more aesthetically pleasing.

Frankly, this sort of reactionary bullshit sets my teeth on edge. Don't even get me started on the Menomonie fucking city council. This building has been for sale for years. When a group of investors from Eau Claire wanted to drop millions into it, making a new nightclub/bar, city council denied their request for a liquor license because, like Eau Claire, there are "too many bars" downtown. Never mind that this place would have provided income in the form of TAX REVENUE for the city. Meanwhile, it still sits vacant, like most of our downtown.

Assholes.

There are countless examples of great urban design where a taller structure was built in an area that historically was low-rise. If done right (not like the boring, parking lot facing Water St., and without character new development with Burrachos), it would add to the neighborhood and increase density, which is what people have wanted to improve the vibrancy of downtown and Water St. I think five-stories would be too high, but personally, I would be disappointed if any new construction was two-stories or shorter.

Um, just b/c Morgenson sucks- doesn't make opposing this idea a good one either.

Finally, take a look at the picture attached to this article- it's pretty. It's unique. Now go to the almost abandoned Waterford Complex at the end of Main St. Do you really want to replace historical buildings (that may look alike but) that have character w/ THAT? Speaking someone who has lived in a dense urban environment surrounded by condos and crap like that, I say NO WAY! It's not why I moved to Eau Claire. It's not why students come to Eau Claire. Finally, the students want cheap rent. A new apartment building overlooking the river- that's going to be cheap? Doubt it. It would end up as abandoned as Waterford. It's a bad idea folks, especially in this dreadful economy. Just b/c someone you don't like is against it doesn't mean that the opposite is a good idea. That's not logic.

Is this the same John Mogensen who bought the old school house on 5th (quite historic) and turned it in to craptastic, over-priced and neglected student housing? The same student housing that is always the last to have its parking lot plowed in winter and whose safety railings are nothing more than metal poles waiting for someone to slip and impale themselves on? Whose interior stairwells are falling apart and becoming safety hazards?

That John Mogensen?

Sort of like when Mogenson was arguing against Dooley's liquor license because "there are enough bars on water st."?

There's nothing all that historical-looking or cool about water st. IMO. Let's grow upward instead of outward for a change

Tell the students they can go rent an apartment at the Waterford complex. Maybe the city should try and fill that "awesome" property first before even considering something like this. like Waterford? Ugly crap like that will be Water St.'s future. Eau Claire will lose it something special and unique if they do this. It will be replaced by dime a dozen "urban developments". In the process Eau Claire will lose one of the the few things it has going for it- character.

Amen, pookums, amen. I've lambasted the slumlords of this city before, and this is exactly the kind of thing they do to keep competition out and keep housing in the area shitty. And I would like a see a source on how students bring down property values, because I suspect attractive student housing would increase property values.

Besides, what the hell is "historic" worth? It means that Water Street will never, ever change, never modernize, never be allowed to attract new types of businesses or clienteles. And to once again repeat pookums, it's not like Water Street is home to any attractive types of historic buildings, architecture of note, or other worthwhile history.

Build four story buildings. Build eight story buildings. It's called progress, growth, environmentally-frienly urban development. Save the history argument for EC buildings that actually deserve it.

"Historical aesthetic" = monotonous row of monopolized buildings.

Open the gate, Water Street will become awesome.