I'm deeply disappointed by this development. I think that an auto parts store is a terrible fit for the neighborhood. In another article on the subject, I read that the auto parts store may be a conditional use for that location. If this is the case, wouldn't the plan be subject to design review and public comment? Even if we can't stop this particular tenant from moving in, we could influence the appearance of the business.

I understand that the landlord is claiming that he was unaware of the East 'Tosa plan. I don't believe that this is the case as I'm aware of at least one neighbor who contacted the landlord after Blockbuster vacated the building. I suspect that he did know and just didn't care. In any case, perhaps this is a wake-up call for those city officials interested in seeing an improved North Avenue trade district. Is there a way to alert other landlords to the fact that we do have a long range vision for the neighborhood in which their property is located and that we'd like to work with them to ensure that we're working toward a common goal?

What do you expect. It's not the landloards problem, If I owned that building I'd lease it to anyone that wanted it. The longer the city drags it's feet, the more north ave will crumble. I've seen the plans and they look amazings.

You know, I'm frankly sick and tired of attitudes expressed above by Bobby Pantuso. What would he rather have in it's place? An empty lot? An abandoned building? Yes, everyone had this "wonderful vision" of what North Ave. would become with the "master plan". But here we have a business that wants to immediately come in and fill the void, and the building owner must be thrilled, and I would be too as I see For Lease signs out everywhere in the Milwaukee Area.

If members of the city council don't want "that type of business" going in, then I suggest they put their money where there mouth is and start their own business and build something themselves. Don't just sit on the Council and complain about those that try to open a retail business and then whine about how nobody else wants to come in with the right type.

We moved to 62nd St 28 years ago and the "Blockbuster" site was occupied by an auto body repair shop not a collection of boutiques...We're just glad not to see it standing empty.

Add some landscaping - and hold them responsible for the grounds. Should be OK. Better than being vacant forever. I remember when it was the used car lot for Tosa Imports, so it has a history of automotive use. Blockbuster didn't attract the glamour crowd either.

Once again the people of Tosa selling out for the lowest common denominator...can't we aspire to more than the same old same old on North Avenue?

I agree with the negative comments above. Shame on Alderman Pantuso for having a vision and wanting a better North Ave. I want average places with motorheads working in the lot spilling oil and brake fluid. But most of all I WANT LOWER PROPERTY VALUES!!! I want cheap rentable housing that turns east town Wauwatosa into a slum. If you can't beat em' join em'!

It is sad that this business is not quite what the neighborhood had in mind, but to be frank, the entire process of starting a small business in Wauwatosa (as in many communities) is overwhelming. Small businesses like boutiques and cafes start up on shoe-string budgets, and the bureaucracy required from them and their landlords is almost smothering. The city does not make it easy to open a small business!! Because of this, I'm sure it's so much easier for a landlord to accept the first offer for his property, rather than re-develop it according to some future plan.
If the city made the process easier and more streamlined, maybe landlords on North Ave, and even in the Village, would be better encouraged to modify their properties to support small local businesses. (Ask me how I know...)

If you look at the other Patch Article regarding this (http://wauwatosa.patch.com/articles/auto-parts-store-leases-former-blockbuster-building) - You'll see that the current property owner has been trying to find a new tenant since 2007 when Blockbuster started having issues, and O'Reilly was the only interested one.

So with that in mind, exactly who does everyone envision coming in and creating this marvelous "mixed use" development that everyone seems to be dying for? Is one of the Alderman going to put their own money down, and buy the property and do something with it?

And frankly, given the tepid success of Wauwatosa's other mixed use development, I'm not sure its something we even want more of. Sure, 92nd and North Ave. has a nice Alterra, but parking is so scarce, that no other business has been able to thrive in the other parts of the building. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the rest of the commercial slots in that build remain vacant because of the parking problems.

If you look at the original plan for the Blockbuster site in the "Master Plan", you'll see that it calls for claiming some of the property for a small public space, and the rest for a mixed use development. Well, if you take away the space for the public space, the land that's left will be about the size of 92nd and North Ave, and will likely have the same parking problems, and therefore the same problems with keeping tenants.

Why do we want that?

Why wouldn't we?

I remember Jitterzz, my daughters loved it! And I heard some awesome young local talent there, too. I guess the sad truth is it takes a lot for an individual to succeed in a start-up, and it's a whole lot easier for an established group or chain to do so. A lot of that has to do with the willingness of the owner to take a chance on the lease, and then there's all the hoops the city makes you jump through – which you covered in detail. I like Pizzeria Piccola, but I liked Jitterzz, too, and I miss it.

Exactly, Jim. I agree a mixed-use building with some green space would be perfect for North Ave, but is there an incentive for the landlord to do that?
Anyway...thanks for the kind words about Jitterzz. It was fun while it lasted, and we miss it as well.

I made the effort to speak with the landlord. As someone said earlier, he has been looking for new tenants since he realized that Blockbuster was not going to make it. According to him he had a couple of potential tenants but either they could not get financing or they decided against it.

For me I am just glad that the building is not going to be empty. Nothing would bring down East Tosa than building that is a whole block long and empty. All of our property values would go down. Crime may increase...it just would not be good. I also spoke with the planning department and learned that the landlord is intending to put on a new roof, put in a new parking lot and new landscaping. As hard as it is to deal with the economy has hurt Tosa as it has the reat of the world.

So O'Reilly's .....Really??? Better an improved site that is full, as opposed to a rundown empty building. Welcome to reality!!!!

So, Ald Pontus, what did you do to try to recruit a business to that location that better fits your “vision”?

I live on 62nd St north of North. There have been recent armed robberies at the Radio Shack (again) and at the bus stop at 60th and North. Where was your Patch article about this? What are you doing to make it easier for small businesses to invest in our area? You can have all the “plans” and “visions” you want. But crime and rising taxes will kill a neighborhood. If you want evidence of that, I’ll take you on a tour of the neighborhood in Milwaukee on the northwest side where I grew up. I bet the neighbors near the Mill Road Shopping Center would welcome O’Reilly’s rather than the numerous vacated store fronts.

When I heard Blockbuster was moving out, I was afraid i would have to look at an empty building every day for the next 3-5 years. Also, I was relieved it wasn’t Cheech and Chong’s Garden Supplies or Tommy Lee’s School of Rock. Thank you O’Reilly’s for taking a chance and putting your dollars into our neighborhood. Thank you to the landlord for finding a tenant and paying your property tax bill every year.

It is pretty sad when a reputable business decides to invest in our neighborhood and is welcomed with a negative attitude by its alderman.

Hey, Aldercritter Bobby...

Perhaps you should listen to Mr. Mitt, who has just explained to you what "vision" means to the political hacks at city hall. The business folks who succeed here do it in spite of guys like you. Have you ever been to Tosa city hall, Bobby? There is a palpable "lack of energy." The folks there never seem busy, and there seems to be twice as many of them as we need. I think they get graded on arranging the paper clips on their desks, finding ways to control the local free market, and how best to pick our pockets with new taxes and regulations and fees. Crime here is out of control--that's Milwaukee's contribution to East Tosa. Why don't you take some of the energy you spend on "vision" and use your enormous influence to get the Tosa police to show up once in a while. "But I'm from the government and I'm here to help!" Yeah, yeah.

Another thing about "Aldervision"--

Bobby, you forgot to tell the class that none of your East Tosa vision is FUNDED. It's a lot of hot air with taxpayer-funded six-figure consulting fees paid for pie-in-the-sky concept studies with slick renderings, in a city that can't afford to have its street lights on at the same time. Even the inner city businesses here are dropping like flies. Guys like you want us to think that "government vision" makes things happen. No, Bobby. Private capital, low crime, private sector vision, and a minimum of harassment from city hall makes things happen. You just need to stay out of the way.

By the way, as a condition of its business license, City Hall could require O'Reily to ban any car repair activities or loitering in its parking lot. That's something for you to work on.

@pupdog1: That's Mrs. Mitt.