I am already expecting a great building out of this proposal. What kind of building would you (as in the people of this forum) like to see at this site? Do you think they should build something extravagent, or something more ordinary? Do you think some unique tower would fit in Milwaukee (like Calatravas Turning Torso, or his NYC one, or SwissRe/TorreAgbar)?? Am I expecting too much by naming some of these buildings? :)

Lake Point, if built, will probally have astronomicaly (for Milwaukee, not NYC or Chicago) priced condos correct? It will also have a hotel. Do you think a good design is crucial to attract people to live in a condo with that kind of pricetag?

It MUST be sexy. Milwaukee needs a sexy, large, unique Tower that sets it skyline apart from the rest...

I'd kind of like to see a sexy building kind of like Capitol Place or w/e in Philadelphia (although much smaller) or something. Maybe having it be a rectangle is best for our skyline though, but it needs to be unique and not so damn bland like the original.

I gotta admit I am looking for height and a modern design. I would love to see this thing just a touch taller then its twin and have it be the signature building our city needs. Couple this project(I know I have my hopes way to far up), with the UCT and KT and we may actually have a skyline that people will notice outside of Wisconsin.

It's exciting to have a proposal like this, but I'm a bit disappointed in the placement. The lakefront skyline is finally starting to look even with KT and UCT balancing out USBank...but with another 600+ foot tower right next to USBank, it's going to be south-heavy again. I worry that it might look silly to have our two tallest buildings - which are both head and shoulders above everything else in the city - right next to each other with nothing next to them. And the skyline from the north will be virtually unchanged. The southern view will change in terms of there being a new building in front of USBank, but the shape of the skyline won't change at all.

That said, I hope that the design for Lake Point is kickass...if it's a cool enough building, my negative feelings about the placement might be cooled a bit.

I like lake front skylines... and another bank building would be awesome, I would want it to be 50-100 ft taller than its sister.

I am a new poster, but have following this thread for a while. As a long time Milwaukee resident, I thought I would throw in my two cents.

First, about Pabst City. I have to be honest and say I am not at all excited about any aspect of the project right now. I think the location is all wrong for the amibitions of the devoloper. The site is very isolated, bounded by a county buildings, a jail, and a freeway. There is simply no reason to be over there. I think the best use for the site would be office space and parking ramps. That way you get some street life during the day, alleviate parking problems, and then the area can just go quiet at night, like it should be (its not Water or Milwaukee St). Might be nice to replace the annex parking structure with a ramp in PC for that purpose. As for the historic buildings there, I really don't see much worth keeping. It is well known now that they are in sad shape, and the cost to renovate is not worth the expense. Maybe just pick the best old building to renovate, and demolish the rest. I also think the name Pabst is worth associated with the site, and the old sign over Juneau would be cool to keep somehow. The rest can go to the wrecking ball for all I care.

Also, as for the casino going downtown, that would be the worst thing that could ever happen to downtown Milwaukee. Proof is at the current Poto. The casino is best in the valley, where it can keep the Poto crowd hidden and out of site. Bringing them downtown, will kill any hopes of quality residential in the Park East area. Milwaukee ain't Vegas, and the people who go to casinos here, generally should be spending their money on better things.

As for the new USBank tower, I am excited to hear something might happen. My concern is with USBank having too much of a hand in it. As an employee of said company, I can say I don't expect them to splurge on design or construction. Take that as you will. But, I will withhold final judgement when something final comes out, if ever.

That PC/casino post reminds me - there's an excellent article in the current Shepherd Express (which also contains the full Summerfest '05 Guide) that says several of the things we've all been saying, and does a great job of connecting both issues. You should all check it out if you get the chance...if it winds up on their website I'll make sure to post it here.

Btw, speaking of Summerfest...

CG,

You inspired me to pick a SE (which I usually avoid) to find the article you mentioned. The article is called "Slutting up Milwaukee", and it is a short article about what might happen if Milwaukee tries to build too much downtown too quickly. Their biggest concern is the casino moving downtown, and they basically use the same reason I did. This may be the first time I agree with the SE on something.

Sorry, I don't have the link, I picked up the print version.

I am already expecting a great building out of this proposal. What kind of building would you (as in the people of this forum) like to see at this site? Do you think they should build something extravagent, or something more ordinary? Do you think some unique tower would fit in Milwaukee (like Calatravas Turning Torso, or his NYC one, or SwissRe/TorreAgbar)?? Am I expecting too much by naming some of these buildings? :)

Lake Point, if built, will probally have astronomicaly (for Milwaukee, not NYC or Chicago) priced condos correct? It will also have a hotel. Do you think a good design is crucial to attract people to live in a condo with that kind of pricetag?

More than anything, I would put design over height. I agree that two towers at exactly the same height very close to each other may look silly. We will have to wait and see on how Kilbourn Tower and UCT look to have an idea on that one.

However, that being said - Lakefront property and views are big bucks and in order to get the most money on your return, a larger building (height/Sq Footage) with multiple uses (office, condos, hotel) may be the way to go. If there is no big time hotel interested or tenants for the office space, another 30+ story high priced condo building (especially in this location) may not get off the ground.

I myslef would want to see something here that defies what Milwaukee already has. Even if it is shorter, something truly unique to Milwaukee and no where else.

I'd prefer that it not defy what Milwaukee has, but rather work well within its context. Yes, let it be original, but make it Milwaukee. It's no use having a major landmark building if it doesn't fit in with its surroundings at all...there's no connection to the city then. That's the reason that I find buildings like Calatrava's condo tower in Lower Manhattan, or OMA's CCTV Building in Beijing (hell, most of OMA's buildings), while very intriguing pieces of architecture, to be somewhat dissatisfying. They're cool, but they don't fit. And as Calatrava's MAM addition proved, it is possible to create a fascinating, beautiful, innovative piece of architecture that still fits in with its surroundings.

Luckily, the Shepherd article I mentioned earlier is actually a column, and they post those on their website. Hurr 'tis.

Slutting Up Milwaukee
By Joel McNally

Think of it as the kind of shocking transformation your grandmother would go through if she suddenly started having an affair. After years of presenting the same stodgy, slightly outdated appearance to the world, the face of downtown Milwaukee is changing.

The real challenge now is to somehow convince the old girl not to slut herself up too much with exotic eye shadow and bright, red lipstick.

Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett is the beneficiary of years of under-appreciated planning by the administration of recently departed Mayor John Norquist.

The clearest link to Norquist is the emerging development in the cleared path of the demolished Park East Freeway on the northeastern edge of Downtown.

Norquist took all the heat as an anti-freeway terrorist without getting to stick around long enough to be appreciated as a visionary for creating a huge swath of wide-open land immediately adjacent to the city’s business district.

He also laid the groundwork for major developments now blazing through the Third Ward warehouse district on the southeastern edge of Downtown and arising from the decaying Pabst Brewery on the northwestern edge.

Concerns About PabstCity
In fact, so much high-end development is projected all at once on those three fronts that many people think it’s too good to be true.

Marc Levine, director of the Center for Economic Development at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, raises legitimate questions about the developers’ rosy projections for PabstCity, an entertainment, retail and housing project envisioned for the abandoned brewery.

Levine is an extremely thoughtful critic of economic development that steals from the poor and gives to the rich. His warnings deserve to be taken seriously.

Less convincing are those champions of the status quo who object to anything getting better in downtown Milwaukee because it might provide competition for their own entertainment businesses or restaurants.

Restaurants, bars and entertainment venues come and go. Some of those who are currently bemoaning possible competition from a House of Blues at PabstCity could be long gone before any such development ever becomes a reality.

For all the challenges PabstCity faces, the biggest attraction is the possibility of turning a crumbling hilltop castle from another age into a modern entertainment district targeting, for the first time in Milwaukee, younger professionals and multiracial audiences.

So far, the proposals on three sides of a growing Downtown promise some pretty classy upgrades. All that could change as a result of the misguided effort by some particularly dull-witted civic leaders to try to lure the Potawatomi gambling casino Downtown.

It’s an indictment of a lack of civic imagination that anyone would even propose relocating a gambling facility that already is in a much better location for all concerned.

The Potawatomi casino was built on the kind of land, the absolute dregs, that we usually leave to American Indians. It transformed a former stinking, industrial pit into a thriving tourist center, minutes from Downtown. At the same time, gambling is physically removed from Downtown. That’s a good thing.

The Potawatomi run a first-class operation with a fine restaurant and an intimate venue for performing artists. But there is good reason why casinos, racetracks and other gambling venues usually are located on the outskirts of any town.

There’s no getting around the fact that gambling itself isn’t a very pretty sight. Gambling halls are stocked with senior citizens and others without much disposable income disposing of it just as fast as they can.

Money Clouding Judgment
Politicians overcame their moral objections long ago, bought off by the enormous revenues gambling provides in lieu of taxes. Gambling revenues are like a siren call the weak-minded can resist only by tying themselves to the mast.

Civic leaders who lack imagination or any real vision for the future can easily allow their minds to be clouded by dollar signs, creeping sleaze be damned.

Proposals have arisen to move the lucrative Potawatomi casino to the Park East, to PabstCity and even to the Bradley Center.

The late Jane Pettit may have thought she was building a civic sports center that would stand forever as a lasting monument to her father, but as soon as she was gone some people began plotting to desecrate that dream by turning the whole joint into one whopping, big gambling hall.

Unbelievably, 17-year-old sports arenas are now considered worthless pieces of junk. We need to build brand-new arenas every couple of decades with more expensive seats to put more money into the pockets of a few dozen millionaires who own professional sports franchises.

The Potawatomi aren’t even seeking to move. Barrett has allowed himself to be wooed, saying he’s open to anything that brings more money to the city.

Somebody needs to show a little respect for a grand old lady undergoing a high-class makeover that could put her back in the game. Don’t blow it now by painting her up like a cheap strumpet.

I'd prefer that it not defy what Milwaukee has, but rather work well within its context. Yes, let it be original, but make it Milwaukee. It's no use having a major landmark building if it doesn't fit in with its surroundings at all...there's no connection to the city then. That's the reason that I find buildings like Calatrava's condo tower in Lower Manhattan, or OMA's CCTV Building in Beijing (hell, most of OMA's buildings), while very intriguing pieces of architecture, to be somewhat dissatisfying. They're cool, but they don't fit. And as Calatrava's MAM addition proved, it is possible to create a fascinating, beautiful, innovative piece of architecture that still fits in with its surroundings.

Sorry, maybe "defy" was not the best choice of words. What I meant is get a totally new design. Most of the buildings in Milwaukee don't offer the "wow" factor that you get in many places. An all glass skyscraper doesn't seem like it would fit in with what we have in Milwaukee - but we have semi examples in the Chase Tower (a.k.a. Bank One Tower) and to a lesser extent Cathrdral Square. When those were built they somewhat broke the mold of what people were seeing here in Milwaukee, yet today there they are a part of our skyline. So I guess what I was saying is a building that maybe lets Milwaukee take a step forward in design would be something I would like to see.

Chicago (I know, extreme example) has evolved with the times and has a great mix of traditional, modern, and ultra modern designs. I just think, a signature building (tallest) or because of the proposed highly visible location should stand out and say "wow". Make any building in downtown Milwaukee right now 700', and I don't think you get that.

My opinion.

Sorry, maybe "defy" was not the best choice of words. What I meant is get a totally new design. Most of the buildings in Milwaukee don't offer the "wow" factor that you get in many places. An all glass skyscraper doesn't seem like it would fit in with what we have in Milwaukee - but we have semi examples in the Chase Tower (a.k.a. Bank One Tower) and to a lesser extent Cathrdral Square. When those were built they somewhat broke the mold of what people were seeing here in Milwaukee, yet today there they are a part of our skyline. So I guess what I was saying is a building that maybe lets Milwaukee take a step forward in design would be something I would like to see.

Chicago (I know, extreme example) has evolved with the times and has a great mix of traditional, modern, and ultra modern designs. I just think, a signature building (tallest) or because of the proposed highly visible location should stand out and say "wow". Make any building in downtown Milwaukee right now 700', and I don't think you get that.

My opinion.

agreed... :)

Right; and I'm saying trick it out as much as you want...just make it fit.

Chicago (I know, extreme example) has evolved with the times and has a great mix of traditional, modern, and ultra modern designs. I just think, a signature building (tallest) or because of the proposed highly visible location should stand out and say "wow". Make any building in downtown Milwaukee right now 700', and I don't think you get that.

My opinion.
It'll be hard for Milwaukee to come up with a building that makes a statment in design. Chicago has these buildings going up left and right every year but Milwaukee has them going up once in a life time. Chicago can put up highrises by the dozens every year but in Milwaukee major chunks of time has to go by before anything is done.

After University Club tower is built what does Milwaukee have in the works? Nothing. That's right, zero.

It seems disillusional to me to be talking about a new tallest when the city and it's players can't get it's shit together. 700'? that's a pipe dream that will never happen. Let them build their stupid Ovation Tower at 15 floors and make us all think theirs some kind of a boom going on. The fact is Milwaukee will not ever get anything taller than the US Bank. Milwaukee had it's chance when Firstar bought out Us bank but we all know what happend in that deal don't we? The question of why needs to be honestly addressed.

I thought at 500 posts the thread was supposed to end and a new thread begin?

Oh well...

It'll be hard for Milwaukee to come up with a building that makes a statment in design. Chicago has these buildings going up left and right every year but Milwaukee has them going up once in a life time. Chicago can put up highrises by the dozens every year but in Milwaukee major chunks of time has to go by before anything is done.

After University Club tower is built what does Milwaukee have in the works? Nothing. That's right, zero.

It seems disillusional to me to be talking about a new tallest when the city and it's players can't get it's shit together. 700'? that's a pipe dream that will never happen. Let them build their stupid Ovation Tower at 15 floors and make us all think theirs some kind of a boom going on. The fact is Milwaukee will not ever get anything taller than the US Bank. Milwaukee had it's chance when Firstar bought out Us bank but we all know what happend in that deal don't we? The question of why needs to be honestly addressed.

It's not fair to compare Milwaukee to Chicago. Of course most cities will pale in comparison. We're not putting up highrises all the time, but that doesn't mean we're not growing and heading in the right direction. A boom in Milwaukee would be tantamount to a blip in Chicago, but that doesn't mean it's not a "boom."

We'll see what happens with the two highrise proposals on the table right now. They could very well amount to nothing, I personally believe it's about 50/50 that neither of them will ever be built, but I will continue to enjoy living here nevertheless, because I don't need a stunning skyline to be proud of my city.

I don't think it's a pipedream to speculate about a new city's tallest. Premature, maybe, but not a pipedream.

It'll be hard for Milwaukee to come up with a building that makes a statment in design. Chicago has these buildings going up left and right every year but Milwaukee has them going up once in a life time. Chicago can put up highrises by the dozens every year but in Milwaukee major chunks of time has to go by before anything is done.

After University Club tower is built what does Milwaukee have in the works? Nothing. That's right, zero.

It seems disillusional to me to be talking about a new tallest when the city and it's players can't get it's shit together. 700'? that's a pipe dream that will never happen. Let them build their stupid Ovation Tower at 15 floors and make us all think theirs some kind of a boom going on. The fact is Milwaukee will not ever get anything taller than the US Bank. Milwaukee had it's chance when Firstar bought out Us bank but we all know what happend in that deal don't we? The question of why needs to be honestly addressed.


I do hope they build Ovation Plaza at 15 stories or like has been documented, 20+ stories. Personally, maybe not a supreme high rise but it would give the central downtown area another building with size and replace a parking garage which if you give me the choice of a 20 story tower vs. a parking garage - I'll take the building.

To be honest with you, there is a boom going on. It may not be on a grand scale like Chicago or Minneapolis - but there is. Kilbourn Tower, University Club Tower, Cathedral Square, 875 East Wisconsin, 1522 on the Lake, The Sterling, City Green, 601 Ogden, First Place on the River, 3rd Ward Development, Beerline Development, Park East Development - Should I continue?

As this development continues, more and more parcels will be occupied with new development leaving less and less for future development in the CBD. When that occurs, we will see more and more proposals that factor in height to satisfy market conditions - whether it is condos, office space, or hotel development. With more and more condos being developed (at a high price), soon the demand will be there for more essential retail needs, and with a stable affluent population - the office demand and location may shift towards downtown again as well. This will not happen over night, but at some time - even with the economy the way it is.

Obviously the prime location of the Lake Point Tower leads us to believe that a new tallest is a viable option. And if it doesn't occur, there are plenty of others kicking ideas around that could change the face of downtown Milwuakee in the near future. The key is not building for the sake of building, tallest or not. If the development "mini-boom" in Milwaukee contines with new development and interest that we haven't seen since the late 80's early 90's - I'll be happy with that. I'll take quality, occupied space, and success over height anyday.

That being said - it is nice to dream. I would rather have Milwaukee with a taller building than Omaha and Des Moines. Some day in my lifetime - I will see that. Until then, I'm content... :)

^ Actually, as far as I've seen in the way of numbers, Milwaukee is actually building new residential units faster than Minneapolis. MSP may be going taller, and the rate of construction may be changing, but over the past few years Milwaukee has been booming...um...bigger, I guess.

Neph, what the hell did you smoke dood? You sound like all of the mentally handicapped noobs we've been seeing in here recently. ;) Seriously though, I don't know why you're so down on the city's prospects. Saying that Milwaukee isn't in the midst of a boom just because we're not building a 700-foot tower yet seems kind of silly. Honestly, I'd rather see a hundred CityGreen-like developments all over the city than a new tallest building downtown. As long as people are moving into Milwaukee and bringing their money and ideas with them, I'm totally cool. And yes, I call it a boom. We could never build another thing over 600 feet again and I'd be fine with that, as long as the economy was healthy, the people were happy, and crime rates were low.

As for what we have in development after UCT is finished...well, first off, UCT won't be done for another 1-2 years, so developers have time to get the ball rolling on new projects. On top of that, there's the potential for a huge corporation (Manpower) to move thousands of jobs downtown, which could be cause for a new 'scraper. And the USBank kids are apparently serious about this new project, so we just may be getting a new tallest building...and while I consider that a long shot, the point is that I'm actually considering it. Had it been proposed five years ago, I would have laughed it off and never given it a second thought. (Remember the random proposal reported by the BizJournal to turn the Port into a new highrise district?) More and more people are starting to take Milwaukee seriously...why is a long-time fan falling out now?

I hate to be the one to bring you all back to reality... but as I've said before, USbank does not plan on building another 42 story building. It will be smaller, they have said that point blank. Not that I wouldn't love another building that tall, I'm just not getting my hopes up that they will do a complete 180 from all their previous statements.

I've heard same height, but where did you get "smaller?" I'm not saying that it wasn't said...but if it was, I missed it.

And get off the horse. There's no need to "bring me back to reality," as I never left.

I just mentioned it b/c everyone is discussing it being as large as the current usbank building. I've talked to someone who was directly involved in the talks of the new tower, and my info was confirmed a few weeks later by an article in the Journal that was posted right here in this thread.

And geeze relax, don't take it as a personal attack. I'm just thinking our discussions would be fruitful if we discuss it in the terms for which are most likely going to happen.

Ya'll are getting busy on this thready lately, I leave for a couple of days and I've got pages and pages to catch up on (I'm not complaining though, this thread is harboring some great discussion). I'm going to continue to just read them, because my opinion is usually covered by one of you guys, no need to re-post anything.

I do have a question though. First off, I'm a huge fan of the summerfest line-up this year and I'm happy that Summerfest has let go of some of it's previous mainstream headliners. But is anyone else worried that Summerfest isn't competing as well as it can be in its market?

With Lallapolooza kicking off this year in Grant Park (with some kick-ass bands--my friends and I have already rented a hotel), I'm worried the festival is going to lose a large share of it's audience. Summerfest and Lalla. are messing around with some pretty similar genres in music, I'm debating which one is going to suffer, and crossing my fingers it won't be Summerfest.

Am I off base?

With Lallapolooza kicking off this year in Grant Park (with some kick-ass bands--my friends and I have already rented a hotel), I'm worried the festival is going to lose a large share of it's audience. Summerfest and Lalla. are messing around with some pretty similar genres in music, I'm debating which one is going to suffer, and crossing my fingers it won't be Summerfest.

Am I off base?

Interesting point. I think Summerfest only risks losing out to Lallapolooza with respect to those people who would go to Summerfest solely to see the marquee bands but who decide to go to Lalla instead. There are still countless others who go to Summerfest for other reasons, e.g., to wander around and eat food, get drunk, see fireworks, etc. (me, for example). I don't think the presence of Lalla will divert them away from Summerfest.

^ Actually, as far as I've seen in the way of numbers, Milwaukee is actually building new residential units faster than Minneapolis. MSP may be going taller, and the rate of construction may be changing, but over the past few years Milwaukee has been booming...um...bigger, I guess.

Neph, what the hell did you smoke dood? You sound like all of the mentally handicapped noobs we've been seeing in here recently. ;) Seriously though, I don't know why you're so down on the city's prospects. Saying that Milwaukee isn't in the midst of a boom just because we're not building a 700-foot tower yet seems kind of silly. Honestly, I'd rather see a hundred CityGreen-like developments all over the city than a new tallest building downtown. As long as people are moving into Milwaukee and bringing their money and ideas with them, I'm totally cool. And yes, I call it a boom. We could never build another thing over 600 feet again and I'd be fine with that, as long as the economy was healthy, the people were happy, and crime rates were low.

As for what we have in development after UCT is finished...well, first off, UCT won't be done for another 1-2 years, so developers have time to get the ball rolling on new projects. On top of that, there's the potential for a huge corporation (Manpower) to move thousands of jobs downtown, which could be cause for a new 'scraper. And the USBank kids are apparently serious about this new project, so we just may be getting a new tallest building...and while I consider that a long shot, the point is that I'm actually considering it. Had it been proposed five years ago, I would have laughed it off and never given it a second thought. (Remember the random proposal reported by the BizJournal to turn the Port into a new highrise district?) More and more people are starting to take Milwaukee seriously...why is a long-time fan falling out now?

Please take what I wrote as a rant out of frustration. LOL, I wasn't smoking anything but did have a few High Life's.

I know downtown Milwaukee's residential market is going through a boom. I really didn't mean to talk about the residential side of this though. When was the last time an office building was built with class A space? Cathedral Place and 875 East Wi. but the majority of Cathedral Place is condos or retail and 875, even though I loved the design, is what? 9 floors. These two buildings represent all that has been built concerning office space since 1991.

I just see these news reports of law firms saying their looking to move and or need extra space and I see companies such as Manpower saying they want to move and are in the market. I don't know the numbers but it seems to me the demand is there so instead of talking about a possibility lets see some real proposals. Milwaukee needs someone like that guy from Madison who proposed that 500 plus ft. building in Madison. He didn't wait for studies but said this is what I got, what do you think?

Now we know that there has been some proposals already such as Ovation and that 24 floor office tower on Wisconsin but neither one of those building designs were anything that I would call makeing a signiture on the Milwaukee skyline. trust me, I don't care whether the building is 500 ft or 800 ft just as long as the design is inovative and new. Something that a law firm who wishes to expand can say to themselves, "I want my firm in that building".

After saying all that, please don't worry about me. I am not going through a falling out but just had to get my frustrations out. I'm still a big fan of Milwaukee and still believe she is heading in the right direction. perhaps just a little slower than what I would wish...

The Godfrey & Kahn law firm is considering a possible relocation into one of two proposed mixed-use towers in Downtown--Ovation Plaza and Lake Point Tower. The firm has also not ruled out the possibility of staying put in its current location in the M&I Bank building just south of City Hall.

Ovation Plaza is a proposal by Irgens Development Partners, and has been on the boards for a couple years now, in search of an anchor tenant. It would be built on N. Water Street between E. State Street and E. Highland Avenue, a site now occupied by the Marcu Center's parking structure. The proposed height ranges in the 20-story area (different figures have been given in previous articles), and would include office and retail space, condos, and a parking garage.

Lake Point Tower is the name of the most recent incarnation of a proposed "sister tower" to the US Bank Center. US Bancorp is working with develoeprs from JBK Properties to make the proposal become a reality. It would be built on E. Michigan Street, south of the US Bank Center. Developers would like the tower to include office and retail space, condos, and a hotel. Note the article reports Lake Point Tower is still being proposed as a 42-story high-rise.

Read all about it in the Business Journal article: Godfrey & Kahn considers two office building sites - Firm hasn't ruled out current location (http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2005/06/20/story5.html)


***


The owners of Midtown Center--the urban-oriented retail development built upon the ruins of the former Capitol Court Mall--have plans for expanded development. Plans include developing some of the outlots on the site that were set aside for future development when the first phases of Midtown Center were built between 2000 and 2004. The owners already have a few tenants lined up, but have so far declined to mention any specifics, aside from that they will be smaller retailers, no "big box" retailers. Midtown Center, which has been deemed a success within the inner city neighborhood, already includes a Pick N Save, Wal-Mart, and Lowes, plus several smaller retailers.

More in the Business Journal: Midtown will grow again (http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2005/06/20/story3.html)


***


The Business Journal reviews responses from a recent reader survey concerning the possibility of relocating the Potawatomi Casino to a Downtown site: Public support lacking for casino move (http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2005/06/20/newscolumn1.html)


***


An opinion piece from the Business Journal about the perception problem of the Garnville Station/Northridge area: Address Northridge 'perception problem' (http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2005/06/20/editorial1.html)


***


Another Business Journal opinion piece from Milwaukee-area business leaders supporting the proposed Metra commuter rail extension from Kenosha into Milwaukee: Business support growing for commuter rail (http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2005/06/20/editorial4.html)


***


And another opinion piece from the Business Journal regarding PabstCity: 'Do the math' on PabstCity TIF (http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2005/06/20/editorial5.html)


***

With PabstCity being such a hot topic of debate these days, the Jornal Sentienl ran some opinion pieces in the "Crossroads" section this past weekend...

A downtown boost — or threat? - Supporters say all will benefit from visitors and dollars PabstCity attracts, but some area business (http://www.jsonline.com/bym/news/jun05/334613.asp)

Public investments can be better spent (http://www.jsonline.com/news/editorials/jun05/334497.asp)

Is it a blue-ribbon idea? - Let's blow the foam off and drink to the future (http://www.jsonline.com/news/editorials/jun05/334503.asp)


***


Plans are underway to restore another house along Milwaukee's unofficial "Frank lloyd Wright Row." A series of six houses designed by the master architect were built on the 2700 block of W. Burnham Street during 1915-16. They are examples of the so-called American System-Built Homes--which Wright envisioned as well-designed, affordable housing for working-class families, and an early attempt at mass produced hosuing (an idea that did not take off at that time).

Last year the Frank Lloyd Wright Wisconsin group (a.k.a. the Frank Lloyd Wright Wisconsin Heritage Tourism Program) purchased one of the houses with plans to restore it with the aid of other FLW groups and the Historic Preservation Institute at the UWM School of Architecture and Urban Planning. Long-term plans for that house may include becoming a vacation rental property, an idea that has been used at other Wright-designed houses in Wisconsin.

FLW Wisconsin has also just recently purchased a duplex on the same block, and plans to restore the building to its original design based on Wright's old drawings. Restoration work will include replacing the aluminum siding (a later alteration to the duplex) with stucco, as it was originally built. Long-term plans for the duplex are still uncertain at this point, but the organization might use one unit as an office and another as a museum of sorts, available for pucllic tours. For now, the duplex will remain a rental property.

FLW Wisconsin is organizing fund raising efforts and plans to establish an endowment to maintian both properties.

A third Wright house on the block, privately owned, has already been restored by its owners. The remianing three Wright houses on the block range in condition from extensively remodeled to heavily neglected.

From the Journal Sentinel: Group to make Wright house right - Duplex will be stripped of aluminum siding and returned to its original stucco (http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jun05/334808.asp)

http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/news/img/jun05/wright061805.jpg
^ This duplex at 2724-26 W. Burnham Street is the second house designed by Frank Lloyd Wright on the block that will be restored by the FLW Wisconsin organization. Work will include stripping off the unoriginal aluminum siding which will be replaced with stucco as originally designed.

Urban development sometimes can't move fast enough. ;) Of course, if we had it the other way around, we'd probably find a way to complain about that, too. Lol.

As for Summerfest, I almost never go to the shows at the Amp, unless I'm dying to see someone who's playing there. I go for the afternoon and stay for the good shows at night...and I have to say, while I'm only thrilled about two acts this year (as opposed to six last year), there are still several bands that I'm excited to see. I'm really looking forward to Summerfest...it just feels the tiniest bit...flat(?) this year. I don't, however, see Lollapalooza cutting into Summerfest that much.

I hate to be the one to bring you all back to reality... but as I've said before, USbank does not plan on building another 42 story building. It will be smaller, they have said that point blank. Not that I wouldn't love another building that tall, I'm just not getting my hopes up that they will do a complete 180 from all their previous statements.
It doesn't matter to me whether the building is as tall or taller than the US Bank. I do hope it will be something that is so awesome that even if it's no higher than the 411 Building it will still make it a signiture building on the skyline. The Kilbourne Tower came close to this, now lets see an office building do the same thing!

Thanks for the info, Mark.

That "Address Northridge 'perception problem'" article was pretty interesting, too.

Summerfest headliners suck pretty hard this year. Im 19, not 40 years old....give some modern music. Bring in some major rap acts for christsake. People in this city get so worried about drawing in black people and then fights/riots breaking out. Thats the problem with Summerfest now..it markets towards middle aged white people. Some of the lesser musical acts are pretty decent--but they are all old bands! Morris Day and the Time, Issac Hayes...etc. The only headliner I want to see is Santana.

Summerfest headliners suck pretty hard this year. Im 19, not 40 years old....give some modern music. Bring in some major rap acts for christsake. People in this city get so worried about drawing in black people and then fights/riots breaking out. Thats the problem with Summerfest now..it markets towards middle aged white people. Some of the lesser musical acts are pretty decent--but they are all old bands! Morris Day and the Time, Issac Hayes...etc. The only headliner I want to see is Santana.

Middle-aged white people probably spend more money on Miller beer products and the food selections available at the grounds. At least that's my poorly-informed perception.

Your absolutely correct! :)


but cant they get someone like a Kanye West?

They had some major rap acts last year, and it was like fucking SWATfest.

Summerfest headliners suck pretty hard this year. Im 19, not 40 years old....give some modern music. Bring in some major rap acts for christsake. People in this city get so worried about drawing in black people and then fights/riots breaking out. Thats the problem with Summerfest now..it markets towards middle aged white people. Some of the lesser musical acts are pretty decent--but they are all old bands! Morris Day and the Time, Issac Hayes...etc. The only headliner I want to see is Santana.

I thought the same thing when I saw the lineup.

That said, the Marcus Amphitheatre sucks. To me, the Marcus is the abyss at one end of an otherwise great festival. Sound quality is terrible there and it isolates itself from the atmosphere so much. I would much prefer to see the 'B' bands at the Miller Oasis than to pay extra for the corporate rock at the Marcus (disclaimer: I am seeing the Pixies/Weezer this year).

The new director has even made some comments on the effort to improve the quality of the crowd at the expense of quantity. From a business perspective, I can see where he's coming from. However, part of the magic of that festival is the diversity of it's audience. If anything, I would look for ways to appeal to a wider audience, not just a richer one.

NeuBrew's ways to improve Summerfest.

1. Expand onto the peninsula. This area needs to be relatively open and park-like with an eclectic mix of real small stages and street performers. I would build an attractive footbridge on the north-end. Ideally, we could ask Calatrava to design this to accent the Art Museum. I really enjoy his work with bridges.

2. Find a way to attract families back to the park. At nighttime, the crowd turns into a drunken frenzy and the families have been scared away. The real problem is that everyone needs to head down two main paths. The first being the stage route, which is a large party and no place for a stroller. The second is the lake route, which is dimly lit and is a favorite for goth kids (nothing against goth kids, but they scare small children). By adding some open areas for families on the peninsula I think you can bring back some of the magic.

3. Light rail. Yeah, it's a popular answer for anything but I would still like to see it. The buses are fine (if not a bit raucous), but I think mass transit heading into the city and hotels from the grounds would be terrific. Pipe dream: will never happen.

all they really had last year was Big Boi with Ludacris and Twista. It should have been Twista and Ludacris with Big Boi. The only act they have this year is Talib Kweli. Next year, they should get Snoop Dogg.

Summerfest has long tried to be all things for all people, and the result is a festival that's way too big for its own good. I went to see one of my favorite acts there last summer and I could barely enjoy the show over the din of public intoxication and music leakage from the neighboring stage. Maybe I'm sounding like a curmedgeon here. Maybe I'm simply getting too old for Summerfest, yet still way too young for acts like Deep Purple. I will be going this year, and hopefully I'll have a better time.

Having said that, I do think in recent years Summerfest has been veering too far into the direction of being a fest for Baby Boomers and college kids from the suburbs.

1. Expand onto the peninsula. This area needs to be relatively open and park-like with an eclectic mix of real small stages and street performers. I would build an attractive footbridge on the north-end. Ideally, we could ask Calatrava to design this to accent the Art Museum. I really enjoy his work with bridges.

That'd be nice to see Calatrava do something with Harbor Island, but Lake Shore State Park and Municipal Pier are already planned out and ready for construction....

continue discussion on Milwaukee Development News III (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=4539378#post4539378)

this thread has surpassed its 500 post max.