Council expected to decide on Messer project Oct. 14

The Rhinelander Common Council has given itself a deadline to make a decision on the proposed $10 million road and utility improvement project in the Hodag Park/Boom Lake neighborhood.

After hearing proposals from an organized group of concerned property owners, as well as the engineering firm that oversees road projects for the city, the council voted unanimously Monday to table a decision until the group’s next regular meeting on Oct. 14.

The project — which involves repairs and updates to sanitary sewer mains, manholes, laterals, streets and storm sewers as well as the possible addition of sidewalks — has generated considerable discussion since it was first introduced in late June. Specifically, residents have objected to the sidewalks as well as the loss of mature trees and landscaping.

The streets involved are Messer (from Doyle Street to Hodag Park Drive), Evergreen Court (from Doyle Street to Rose Street), Lake Shore Drive (from Doyle Street to Rose Street), Rose Street (from Lake Shore Drive to Thayer Street), Fremont Street (from Messer Street to Hodag Park Drive) and Hodag Park Drive (from Messer Street to Thayer Street).

The proposals, as well as a memo authored by Mark Barden of Town and Country Engineering, are available for the public to read as part of the meeting packet. 

The link is: https://www.rhinelanderwi.us/document_center/Agenda%20Minutes%20Packet/2024/9.23.24%20Rhinelander%20Common%20Council%20Meeting%20Packet%20WITH%20BOOKMARKS%20AND%20PAGE%20NUMBERS.pdf.

Alternatively, the agenda and packet are also accessible by clicking on the Agendas & Minutes tab on the city website — https://www.rhinelanderwi.us/.

The public is also strongly encouraged to view the full discussion by visiting www.hodagtv.com.

Barden described the revised concept plan as an attempt at compromise but the adjacent property owners present in the gallery indicated through a show of hands that they did not find Barden’s updated proposal acceptable.

Barden also reiterated that all of the proposed work is to take place on city-owned land (city right-of-way) not residents’ property, although it’s understood that many property owners consider the city-owned property adjacent to their property to be part of their property because they improve it via landscaping and other decoration and it’s used by their children as a play area.

“What I’d really like to do is for everybody on the city council to search their hearts in favor of their common citizens here of Rhinelander,” a resident of Lakeshore Drive stated during public comment. “As far as grant money goes, what’s money compared to what we are about to lose if any of this project goes through by adding sidewalks? We all agree streets need improvement. Utilities underneath need improvement. Let’s do that. But why encroach on your neighbors? Take away their trees, their shrubbery, shorten their driveways? That’s our main concern here. It’s the only reason we’re all here. We don’t want the sidewalks in. Fix our streets. That’s all we ask of you.”

Another speaker repeatedly asked the alderpersons to consider how they would feel if this work was planned for their neighborhood.

It was also reiterated, by both Barden and city forester Tom Jerow, that even if the council decides against the addition of sidewalks, it is a certainty that mature trees will be lost. There’s simply no way to update the underground utilities without disturbing root systems. 

 “I would also like to point out that if we (went) narrower and we eliminated sidewalk, that may save a significant amount of trees in there, but there are trees that would be lost just because the utility construction, depending on where the utilities are and where the independent services are, the sewer and water laterals,” Barden explained. “Particularly if they’re in the right-of-way, all the connections are made at the property line, we’d have to make those connections and there are times where we disrupt the roots of those trees and whether we kill them at that point, it’s always wise to pull them out, particularly if they’re in the city right-of-way because they eventually will die. Generally, when we hit the roots, it’s on the roadside, when those trees die, they will fall towards the house, so we like to get those out for safety concerns.”

All of the property owners who spoke indicated that they remain baffled as to why the sidewalks have been deemed necessary. The speakers indicated they are of the opinion that everyone is using the roadways appropriately, there is minimal pedestrian traffic, and there are no safety concerns.

In response, Barden mentioned improving the “walkability” of the city. It was also noted that there are plans to add a splashpad and a new playground equipment to Hodag Park which could lead to additional pedestrian traffic in the neighborhood in the near future.

While the neighborhood residents have been consistent in expressing their opposition to sidewalks, council president Carrie Mikalauski did note for the record that the alderpersons have heard from other city residents who want the sidewalks installed.

“To say that nobody wants sidewalks in your neighborhood isn’t totally accurate because I know I’ve received a few (emails), which I believe every council member is copied in on those emails, that they do want sidewalks to make it safer so I just wanted the general public to know that that’s also out there and we have received those comments as well.”

As the discussion continued, city administrator Patrick Reagan observed that the hard reality of the situation is the council is not going to be able to satisfy all parties no matter what decision is made.

“If you try to make everybody happy you’ll make nobody happy,” he said. “I can tell you, no matter what you’re going to choose somebody’s going to be unhappy with this, be it some certain city staff won’t be happy with it, some of the residents out there won’t be happy with it, some of you may not be all that happy with it, so just kind of understand that it’s one of those difficult decisions you just have to make.”

It should be noted that the idea of canceling the project entirely — no replacement of aging utilities and no improvements in terms of drivability to what have been described as some of the city’s worst streets — was mentioned but it was unclear whether the council members consider that a viable option or not.

What the panel committed to was making a decision on Oct. 14.

Heather Schaefer may be reached at [email protected].