Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel: city lacks formal periodic structural-inspection program for parking decks; item held for further work
Summary
Department of Neighborhood Services staff told the committee there is no formal periodic structural-inspection program for parking structures like the facade ordinance; city-owned parking structures receive five-year inspections but private structures rely on life-safety, fire or complaint-driven inspections. The committee held the item for the chair's call to allow staff and LRB to draft options.
Department of Neighborhood Services (DNS) staff told the committee there is no formal, periodic structural inspection requirement for parking decks in Milwaukee comparable to the city’s facade-inspection ordinance. During discussion of File 251702, DNS deputy Mike Basmian and commercial manager Giovanni Cheatham said life-safety, fire and elevator inspections occur annually, and city-owned parking structures receive a five-year structural inspection automatically, but private parking decks are often inspected only after referrals, complaints or voluntary engineering reports.
"There isn't something similar to that related to parking structures," DNS staff said, characterizing the current system as largely complaint-driven or reliant on inspections that focus on life-safety systems rather than structural evaluation. Staff noted that where private owners submit facade or other engineering reports (often for insurance or redevelopment), those reports can prompt a referral for deeper structural review.
Members raised examples of recent failures and asked whether local ordinance could require periodic structural reviews. DNS staff noted a proposed state bill that would require a five-year periodic inspection statewide had been reintroduced after failing in 2024; staff said the department could develop an ordinance framework in coordination with LRB and other stakeholders but warned about state preemption questions and the need to align with maintenance codes.
Given the technical and legal issues, the committee moved to hold the item to the chair’s call so staff could return with a proposed ordinance framework and any legal analysis needed for a local approach.
