WaukeshaNOW.com
search all things local
     
Blog Home |  Email Author  |  About this Blog       Welcome to MyCommunityNOW - Blogs Sign in | Join

Practically Speaking

Kyle and her husband moved to Brookfield in 1986. She became active in local politics and started blogging in 2004. Her focus is primarily on local issues but often includes state and national topics, too. Kyle looks at things from the taxpayers’ perspective in a creative, yet down to earth way, addressing them from a practical point of view.

Couldn't agree more...

By Kyle Prast
Tuesday, Oct 9 2007, 03:34 PM
I noted Cindy's blog referral to the comments on Brookfieldnow. I missed them too. It looks like many of us are on the same page!
 
My Alderman, Lisa Mellone, requested comments about the fire stations on Sept. 24th. The following were my comments to the city:
If we are following what the Task Force recommended, then why are not the other 3 possible Greenfield locations being discussed? I believe they should be brought to the table too.
I still strongly believe that our station is already in the right place. I can see that a location on Greenfield between Moorland and Calhoun might speed up dispatch to easterly district 7 locations and destinations to the west too. (It does not help the Brookfield Square/hot zone or interstate calls though.) There would not be any need to negotiate pulling out onto Moorland from Hackberry or from Moorland onto Greenfield, if it already was on Greenfield.
 
The NW corner is really a mistake if we are trying to aid dispatch to the north via Calhoun. There is no easy way for a NW corner property to dispatch trucks northbound from a busy boulevard intersection! Since this was one of the main reasons that Chief Dahms gave for favoring the new alignment (when I met with him), the NW corner seems to be the most inferior station location for this purpose. Placing it on NW Calhoun would also cause some delay for calls to the east because the light/intersection must be taken into consideration as well as the greater distance. If we are truly trying to balance response times, these two locations, NW Calhoun and NE Calhoun, fail miserably. 
 
It is my nature to "Never say die". If there is something that still can be done to look at this again, I am all for it. The encouraging thing is that 7 aldermen voted to NOT place the fire station on that NW corner. 
 
 
 
My Two Cents, seems we are thinking along the same lines. Lessons from History: United We Stand, Divided We Get Density! 
 
 
 

 

Comments

grumpy   

I seriously think that if the people whose homes are condemned and the neighborhood at large can get something going, a lawsuit could be filed showing that eminent domain here is clearly lacking in merit.  This is NOT the ideal location for a fire station, in fact, the ideal location is where it is NOW.  Even the city's waste of dollars on studies showed that station #3 was perfect right where it was and should stay.

I see it like this.  The city has already mandated some grossly overly huge widening of Calhoun Road between Bluemound and Greenfield, and cannot even wait for it to happen later rather than sooner, although this stretch of Calhoun should NOT be turned into some sort of gross highway due to the nature of what is currently there.  

Moving the fire station completes the issues of mandating widening Calhoun, and then, the VK project at Ruby Farms gets more merit, and next you know it, we have interstate off and on ramps going in as well.  Then Swanson School will be deemed to be at too dangerous a location, and that will be sold off and exchanged for some horrible alternate site as well.  

I foresee Speaker's ideal for southern Brookfield as being some maze of town complexes fed by overpriced condos and lots of rental towers.  Hey, I have nothing against condos or rentals, but, at the same time, isn't the market a bit saturated already with the already approved projects that Speaker and his lackeys seem to see everywhere but where it is on their own home turf? (The NIMBY syndrome.) I can remember all too well the nightmare that Brown Deer faced back in the seventies and eighties when it ran amok with development, and guess who WANTS to move to Brown Deer?  No one.  It is an urban wasteland up there.

As far as the plan for 2020, Brookfield is NOT going to have a residential population of 75,000 to 80,000.  Where do they come up with these numbers?  I suppose they have the numbers and then seek solutions on how to achieve  reaching this?

October 9, 2007 5:53 PM

My Two Cents   

One of these days, Brookfield will unite to fight the cancer that is spreading through it.  Each neighborhood has an issue like Capitol Heights, Village of Brookfield with its garish lights and elevations, sidewalks where residents don't want them, roundabouts, wider roads, relocated fire stations and on and on.  If only we could think of each issue as if it was in our own neighborhood, maybe we would ALL call our aldermen and tell them how to vote. After all, we're all paying for this waste. It is really pathetic when citizens speak up and call city hall and are continually ignored.  

October 9, 2007 7:53 PM

Leave a Comment

Please Sign In to post comment.

Posts

Your browser must support javascript to use the posts pager. Please enable javascript or return to the home page to page through posts.
Newer Older

Tags

How the other half lives

Search the Blogs