continued from locked thread

Little old Green Bay now has a thread retired...and we still have a shitty Downtown.
Brief summary of last year:
Nicolet Bank opened
Washington Commons closed
and there is a hole lot of hope riding on Vetter.

We can only hope for what lies ahead. Peace out

:cheers:

Here's :cheers: to hoping that by the time THIS thread is retired:
Astor Place is built
The riverfront boardwalk is complete
Site 4 has a tower as tall or taller than Astor Place
The mall has been transformed into something useful
River Center is complete and vibrant
I can get a friggin cup of decent coffee on the east side of the river
There are more decent places to eat drink and be merry


Maybe something big will also be happening in the stadium area. What ever happened to those buildings they planned for Bart Starr Drive / Reggie White Way, etc?

Here's :cheers: to hoping that by the time THIS thread is retired:
Astor Place is built
The riverfront boardwalk is complete
Site 4 has a tower as tall or taller than Astor Place
The mall has been transformed into something useful
River Center is complete and vibrant
I can get a friggin cup of decent coffee on the east side of the river
There are more decent places to eat drink and be merry


I wouldn't hold my breath on the mall. The other six items seem achievable in the next two years.

I agree and hope that a majority of the 7 items listed at least get off the drawing board. I can't imagine that something won't happen to at least a portion of the mall property in the next 2 years, but I'm also not holding my breath.

The Stadium area is also a work in progress. The Cambria Hotel construction is under way with the foundation work getting started. I think I heard that there is also a brew pub/restaurant going in around there. As far as the twin tower condo development, I just don't see it happening in the next decade. I hope I'm wrong.
IMO If the Stadium View Bar could be rebuilt just to the south to allow for better sight lines of Lambeau that would be tight but that is as likely as a Brown Co. smoking ban.

You are correct GBSurveyor. At the last Planning Commission Meeting, a rezone and multiple conditional use permit requests were recommended for approval to the Common Council. The area was requested to be rezoned to a commercial district and the conditonal use permits were associated with allowing a restaurant w/ live entertainment and outdoor live music. The applicant indicated it would be about a 21,000 SF Brewpub/restaurant/banquet space and they were hoping to start construction soon. The proposed site of the brewpub would be the parcel directly east of the Cambria Suites hotel, but the area requested to be rezoned to commercial extends eastward to the parcel past Bart Starr Drive.

Spending 12 mil on that boardwalk is a terrible waste of money. If Schmidt’s golden boy needed it for his development he should be providing the financing, but we all know Jimmy will never do anything to upset his golden child.

I hear now that Vetter is saying he may need more room so there is talk of moving the road back, most likely into the Days Inn parking lot so Vetter can get his tower built. Its too bad that his da mayor dies not care about all of the businesses downtown as he does his future campaign cash cow.

gbmphillips, I'm curious WHY you think its a big waste of money. In my opinion, building great public spaces that benefit everyone in the city and the entire region, and that are open an accessable to all of those people is a great use of public money. One could argue that Grant Park in Chicago only benefits the buildings on Michigan Avenue, or that the Calatrava addition to the Milwaukee Art Museum only benefits properties on the Milwaukee lakefront. However, one needs not spend much time in either of these cities to realize that great public spaces are used by and benefit the entire community. The boardwalk will be Green Bay's main gathering space and as such is a perfectly valid use of TIF monay.

So, I appreaciate differeing views and an honest dialogue on this forum reagarding what's best for the downtown is welcome, but what I'd be curious to see are A) specific reasons WHY the boardwalk is a waste, B) an idea what you think would be better suited for the space, and C) please refrain from peosonal attacks on people. To say, "I disagree with the Mayor and Vetter and thier plans," is helpful in understanding your point of view, but your tone is less than respectful (the same goes for people who want to disagree with Guy Zima). Thanks and welcome to the thread.

If anyone coming to this thread wishes to refer back to the original Green Bay Dev. thread, it is here (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=182592).

While the boradwalk will be a nice addition lets be honest here Vetter is the one who benefits the most from it. He is usuing it as one of the selling points of all of his projects. If I remember correctly he said that he would not build without it. Well if that is such a necessity for the success of his projects then he should be picking up the majority of the tab, not the taxpayers. I could see $2mil or so from taxpayers but we should not be bearing all of the cost.

I don't disagree with the projects but just remember the local develeoper did meet all 12 and then all 15 of the obstecles that was put in front of him and yet after doing that da mayor still sent out and worked with Vetter. Ibelievehe reason for this was his ego, it was the previous mayor who actually got thinks moving but the current mayor would not have his legacy then if they had gone with the local guy.

I'll agree that in many way Juza got a raw deal, I've said that many times. However, I think the reason that Vetter is having more sucess is that he's more experienced in Urban Development (which is to say he has experience, whereas Juza had no experience in this type of development) and Vetter is better at putting together the right plan for a space and coming up with an acceptable financing package. Remember, Vetter's plans contribute more dollars to the boardwalk than did Juza's. In addition, Vetter's plans will bring down public ammenities such as the Flatley Market, the Children's Museum, and the Winter Garden, all of which contribute to the public space of the boardwalk. So in short, I agree with you about Juza but that isn't Vetter's fault, unless you want to fault him for being a more experienced urban developer.

I too have worried about the APPEARANCE of the realtionship between the Mayor and Vetter. However, I do think the only problem is with appearances, I don't think there is unethical dealing, just my opinion. I do think that if the Mayor was a bit more patient with those who disagree with him there wouldn't be these appearnace of problems, but overall I do like the Mayor.

Finally, to your main point of disagreement with the Boardwalk, I guess I have to disagree with your premise. You say you like the plans, but that essentially Vetter is benefiting toom much from them and therefore the city shouldn't pay so much. I don't see that as a very pragmatic way to develop a city. The fact is that if the city only contributes $2 million, the boardwalk won't happen and neither will the related riverfront developments. I believe the boarwalk is, apart from the developments adjecent to it and as a public ammenity alone, worth the city's cost in it. I also think that TIF is the right funding mechanism to get it built and protect the taxpayer. Will it greatly benefit Vetter and his projects, yes, but the city's job isn't to keep developers from benefiting too much.

We can do away with the boardwalk and with it Vetter's projects, but doing so would be like cutting off your hand to spite your face. The right thing in my view for the city is to take this opportunity to build a world-class public ammenity AND allow that to be a tool that makes private development along the river successful. I'd much rather have a winning public project that enables a developer to win than make a losing decision for the public just because I don't want the private developer to win.

But the boradwalk was not tied into the Juza plan and I am sure there are other developers who would feel the same way. I think $12 mil for one project that is being done mostly for one person is not a good way to use taxpayer dollars. Also once it is done who will responsible for the upkeep, Vetter or the city. Someone I know on Broadway said they only put $6 mil ino that WHOLE redevlopemnt, where can Schmidt justify spending 12mil for only a boardwalk. This is a poor use of taxpayer money, I am sure there are many areas of the city that could use a few mllion to improve the area. Why not put a mil into the NEW FISK park instead of forcing people to raise money something east side was not required to do.

I guess in the end the difference in our perspectives comes down to this: you feel the boardwalk is only for one person, while I feel it is a community resource. When it is built, I will go down there and feel a sense of ownership in it because it will be open to the public and people from throughout the community will gather there.

The cost to the city via the TIF funding is worth it, to me, regardless of what is built next door or who is building it. And it is a good use of taxpayer money becuase the funding, as stated when the council passed the project, will not come from the general levy but from increased taxes generated by development within the TIF district. Furthermore, the Fisk Pool (an excellent project) fundraising needed to raise $500,000 on a $3 million project, or just under 17%. The mayor has stated that all such public projects needed to raise at least 15% before the city would fund the rest. He also stated that this requirement does apply to the boardwalk. So both the Fisk pool and the Boarwalk should be held to the same standard, seems fair to me.

I'm not feeling progress. Like the past, downtown developments will fall flat, and part of me thinks a lot of people see it. I'll believe it when I see it. Invest in markets with good leaders.

Does anyone know anything more specific about the boardwalk? Like how they came up with 12 million? It seems like a high price considering the length, just between Main and Walnut. Also is this a sure thing? Is the financing in place? I am sure the city will have to bond for it. When someone says it is only TIF money, it still is tax dollars, which can be misleading to some.

One thing that is seriously lacking in this area is public space designed for pedestrian scale. I am totally all for the boardwalk and increased public space, I just wish that we weren't always in the dark with these projects. It seems like someone, weather it be the city or someone else maintain a connection with the public (website). This is how the shadow of doubt is cast.

As far as ripping on Vetter... At least he has completed a project. I really don't think he is getting any special treatment. There was an RFP sent out and other developers had the chance to step up, and there were no takers. Where are the local developers???? Who is going to pick to do a complex urban project when no one local has any experience. It is way easier to go carve up some new farm land to put some dwellings that requires everyone to drive everywhere. So the mass exodus of the "young professional" will continue to the larger urban centers and downtown will be left to further decay......

Avissers...or anyone in the know

Is there a central department in the city that keeps tabs on proposed developments???

I have been wondering about a few items, including:

Marcus Theatre Project- I43 Business Park. The sign has been up for like a year.
Baird Creek Trail
Bay Beach Expansion
University Height Business Park??

I really like how Milwaukee keeps the public informed and wish Green Bay would have something similar.

Milwaukee Department of City Development (http://www.mkedcd.org/)

I don't think Vetter's project reflects the area at all. It's purely investment, with little consideration of setting, and true understanding of the area, and the heritage of the region. All this project indicates, 20 years from now, is that Green Bay was part of the downtown development boom that happened nationwide.

I want to see cutting edge projects, like the Ponte Vecchio proposed, iconic, representative of Green Bay, and Green Bay only. A cutting edge project, so that when a nationally televised Packers game on one Sunday afternoon comes back from a station break, and pans over the town's local assets as corporate logos are superimposed, people nationwide will know this town is vastly different than any other, and not because of one sports franchise.

Can you give me more information about "the Ponte"? I don't think I'm too familiar with it.

Well the Green Bay version wasn't quite the "Ponte Vecchio" in Florence, Italy but the concept was the same. Bridges, get you from one side of the riverbank to the other,
and sometimes end up not looking half bad at the same time.

The proposed bridge for downtown Green Bay took the "Ponte Vecchio" idea of
common, commerce spaces, stores along the span and modernized it.
Here's a link to an image of the original Florence version.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ponte_Vecchio,_Florence,_Italy.jpg

Notice the series of built structures (buildings) piggy backing the span, the Green Bay version was a modernized version of this. I think the concept was floated by a Green Bay wouldbe developer, but never gained traction, possibly too outrageous (not mainstream enough.)

I thought the bridge was proposed for the Claude Allouez Bridge in downtown De Pere, not Green Bay.

Regarding the proposed boardwalk cost, I don't know exactly how they compare, but the RiverWalk in Milwaukee cost $23.8 million.

The idea behind the Green Bay boardwalk is pretty similiar: to open up the water to pedestrians & boats, provide a welcoming public space downtown, boost property values, and transform old empty run-down buildings into a vibrant mix use of small retail shops, restaurants, condominiums and apartments. There is a high level of connectivity between all developments and the public can enjoy all of them and the waterfront.

The Milwaukee RiverWalk waterfront has been a great success.

The alternative in Milwaukee was to let private investors develop the waterfront, which would have still brought the luxury condos but rather than connected public space, the waterfront would have been private and most likely it would have been gated off and rendered unaccessible to the general public.

Likewise in Green Bay, if Vetter was forced to pay for the waterfront amenities with private funds, it could be his right to put up fences and restrict access to the public, cutting off this area from the rest of downtown.

Any restrictions to access along this prime, central part of downtown waterfront would be just plain wrong. It would not only hurt the public who could no longer use the waterfront, but it would also hurt other downtown businesses because of the lack of connectivity at the pedestrian level.

As for Vetter's developments: If his proposals were "purely for investment" as one person indicated, why wouldn't he just slap up some cheap low-rise buildings and condo them off? Why would he take extrodinary measures to build a tower which costs so much more and has so many more complexities (especially considering the foundation on the deep-bedrock waterfront)? Why would he include such large public gathering spaces, such as what he is proposing with River Center?

I do not believe that all developers are "evil' in the sense that they are solely out to screw their fellow humans out of their money. I believe Vetter wants to make money, like anyone, but at the same time he has a track record of building good character and great urban spaces that benefit the whole community. Nobody's been able to dig up much dirt on Vetter, and it seems that some of the local developers have tried.

If you've watched these developments as they moved through the City Council closely, you will have seen many of the same arguments on that floor as we've had in this forum. Not that the Council is always right, but even the most conservative members, when given time to see all of the facts, came to the conclusion that these current development proposals are by far the best option for the downtown right now. There were a few council members who dug in their heels and voted against them, but their arguments did not hold water and their "no" votes appeared to be more out of spite than reason.

Another thing happened at these city council meetings: the downtown business owners and the general public showed up in droves, overwhelminly supporting these proposals. Other meetings such as Good Morning Green Bay nearly filled the Meyer Theater with interested people who also overwhelmingly supported these developments, including the boardwalk (a straw poll was even taken to prove it)

Based on what we have seen, the Green Bay taxpayers are largely in support of these developments, though not all of them are as "vocal" as some who oppose them.

Civic pride does come into play here. People who love this city see an ugly sore spot right in the core of the city. Frankly I am embarassed by the big, ugly, empty, run-down, bricked-in shitty buildings that still line parts of the waterfront, especially when they flash those images across network TV during packer games. It's pathetic right now, but we can fix it, and right now is the time.

The Vetter projects might not be perfect but they are only a beginning. These developments will bring new life to the downtown. They are already adding thousands of new office workers and downtown residents. Once "critical mass" is reached, the downtown can continue to develop with (hopefully) nicer buildings that "are" unique to Green Bay. But we need to start somewhere, first. Once the waterfront takes off, we are soon to have another huge empty palette in front of us, that being 8 acres of the mall space which can be carved up into functional spaces with good design leading to economic viability.

Long reply.

I thought the bridge was proposed for the Claude Allouez Bridge in downtown De Pere, not Green Bay.

Correct, to my recollection there was never such a plan for Green Bay, just the "living bridge" concept in De Pere. While the group that proposed it meant well, it doesn't seem that there was ever a very good plan for how they were going to pay for the project. I suppose its hard to try to get something unique like that done becuase there aren't any comperables. It could have been great or it could have been a total failure, I guess we'll never know.

I hear now that Vetter is saying he may need more room so there is talk of moving the road back, most likely into the Days Inn parking lot so Vetter can get his tower built. Its too bad that his da mayor dies not care about all of the businesses downtown as he does his future campaign cash cow.

where are you getting all of your "inside" information??? so you are okay with keeping a couple of parking spaces rather than having a 17 story condo building with retail?

as far as the boardwalk. I seem to remember that the taxpayers were not footing the bill for this but it would be funded through TIF and state funds and private donations as indicated by DTVital numerous times. that taxpayer funding was a point made by a couple indivduals on council who wanted to scare people from supporting this...

go back and read the council minutes for proof and you'll see that stated over and over again... better yet, read post #254 in the first thread and read the article on the vote and see it stated that no taxpayer money will be used.

is it just me or don't you think you have heard more and more news of businesses relocating downtown or interest in downtown picking up. every little bit helps, and I think the plans in place and the excitement that is generating are leading to these businesses to look downtown rather than the burbs.

This just takes time. But come this fall when things are underway - we can all breath a collective sigh of relief... Well most of us.

Sorry. I don't mean to lash out, but the process of getting the CORRECT information out there really bugs me. People form an opinion without really seeing all things related in order to make a complete and competent statement.

There are people that see the big picture and those that just would rather watch the movie... ??? Sure I'd like to see these things starting now, but I'm sure there are a number of things that need to take place in order for that to happen. There is a lot to clean up in downtown, but it will not change over night. Personally - now that the weather is getting better, you should see all the people walking on the Fox River Trail downtown... I can only imagine what the boardwalk will be like when you can sit down and eat your lunch, or sit at one of the cafe's and eat. That will be soooo cool and something that Green Bay residents aren't used to (yet)... I don't think Vetter is evil. Sure we would love to have a developer be infinitely rich and not ask any City support and develop a building before any pre-sales or committments from tenants are received. It's not that people aren't interested - it just takes time. Rome wasn't built in a day, and for sure dt Green Bay won't be redeveloped in one either.

The one positive thing is we have a guy that wants to do this, and there are people buying into it. For the longest time, we didn't even have that or weren't even close...

IMHO:

The five best things Green Bay has built in the last 50 years:

1) UWGB
2) Renovated Lambeau Field
3) Weidner Center
4) Resch Center
5) Botanical Gardens

The five biggest mistakes Green Bay has made in the last 50 years:

1) Port Plaza
2) Removed downtown street grid to accomodate Port Plaza
3) Built UWGB away from the center of the city
4) Built the Weidner Center on UWGB campus instead of downtown
5) Built Renards Island off the Bay Beach shore

Oh man, do not get me started about Reynard Island. I'll never get that, "Gee, lets dump our polluted dredgings in a big hump right in front of our beach park. That will be great!" Aaaaaaaaaarrrrgh!!! I'm sure it made sense at the time, but now were stuck with that when for years Green Bay had a nice beach people could use.

Green Bay 4 Life, to be fair, TIF funding does come from taxes, it just isn't a general levy tax. I have overstated this in the past too. However, the important point about TIF, as you know, is that it protects the "average" taxpayer and instead funds public improvement within the TIF district from increased tax revenues generated by new development in the district.

I've heard many people in the community say things along the lines of, "We need to find out why Ashwaubenon has so much development and bring that here [to Green Bay]." These people seem to want to find some magic pill, but it isn't magic at all. Aswaubenon's success is in large part the result of years (decades really) of progressive leadership and intelligent use of TIF. They have created an atmosphere that welcomes development and have seen much of it. For Downtown Green Bay to be successful be need to not scare people away from TIF, but rather use it as an important piece of the redevelopment puzzle.

Reynard Island, don't let the word get out too far about that one. Luckily, City Hall's dome and a candid farm shot are the only images that make the air during football season.

City Hall doesn't have a dome, the County Courthouse does. There used to be a city hall with a dome, but they tore it down long ago and now we have an ugly box for a city hall.

One time they showed sourkraut being made coming back from a commercial, don't leave that out!

At the time they started creating Renard Island, I think that they thought the soil would be clean enough to cap and then use it as a park or other public space, maybe even to expand Bay Beach onto.

Recently, they were still talking about doing that but the fear is that the soil is too contaminated even if capped with impervious clay to walk around on.

I am no where near old enough to remember the good o' days out at Bay Beach, (although I love going to the Neville to check out the old time photos of the city's past). I don't even remember the terribal time that followed. When I was in high school it was fairly common for people to swim down at communiversity park, I am not sure if people still do that. Anyways it will probably take an act of God to make the Lower Fox and the Bay an attractive place to be, however IMO the bayfront has always been under utilized. The City has been buying and stock piling all the land adjacet to and west of Bay Beach park, I haven't heard of a plan of action out there yet but would be interested to know what is up.
I dont want to take any momentum away from Downtown, but it would be nice to see someone with a vision come and make a plan to upgarde the Webster Street exit area of I-43, both north and south, the city has all that public space just sitting there and it is totally underutilized. Am I crazy???

I have a whole bunch of out-of-town family members coming to visit Green Bay for a few days--I was thinking of things to do and it hit me: There isn't nearly enough to do...Or is there?
Here's what my wife & I came up with:

Railroad museum
Packer stuff (they've seen most of this before)
Shopping on Oneida Street
Foxy Lady cruise (might not be open soon enough)
Neville Museum
NEW Zoo (kind of out-of-the-way though)
Bay Beach (mostly for younger kids though--I need more adult stuff)
Heritage Hill (also might not be open soon enough)

What else can you suggest that we can do?

This short list made me think about how this area really really needs more regional attractions--

The ideas kicked around in the first forum, such as the Aquarium, would be great to have. So would a nice art museum, or ....What else might work???

What else can you suggest that we can do?


When I return to Green Bay for a visit I always hit Krolls... I prefer the Preble Krolls to the one on the west side.

I don't know if anyone came across this yet, I noticed the cranes on a recent bike ride. Here is a link (http://www.uwgb.edu/campaign/KEC.htm) to some info on the project. Also is a link to the web cam.Kress Event Center WebCam (http://www.uwgb.edu/webcam/kress/index.htm)

I have a whole bunch of out-of-town family members coming to visit Green Bay for a few days--I was thinking of things to do and it hit me: There isn't nearly enough to do...Or is there?
Here's what my wife & I came up with....


I too prefer Kroll's East...
Not sure what type of activity you are looking for, but to add a few things:

go downtown-not too impressive, but we have hope:

make sure to point out Port Plaza...take a look around.
stroll down the Fox River trail, hopefully catch a freighter.
Check out the Meyer theatre
catch breakfast or lunch at Al's Hamburger (Washington St.)
go to Glory Years-very Packer related, check out Vince Lombardi's office
Stroll down the trail a bit further to Hazlewood house (great GB area history)
go to Titletown Brewing
cool little shops on Broadway, not to mention a boat load of bars and grit...Green Bay at its best!

Also I think that DePere has Comedy City/Venture theatre, which can be a good time.
If you think the new zoo is out of the way you probabaly think algoma is a bit far, but Von Stiel winery is pretty cool.

I like the suggestions. These are some things that didn't come to mind right away. Thanks and keep 'em coming

Is this anything?:

I was just thinking about future attractions that might work for this area. The aquarium idea was mentioned but I'm thinking that we give that a little twist and, instead of exotic fish, wouldn't some sort of fishing museum be cool?

We're right on the great lakes and Fox River where there are some awesome native fish (eg Sturgeon)..Then you factor in how important fishing was to native americans in this area, and how the fishing industry was pretty big back in the 1800's..(until invasive species and pollution ruined it).

Sport fishing is still huge, especially walleye...there are thousands of fishermen who come to this area every year and it's considered one of the best walley fishing in the Nation...Yet we don't have anything that I can think of to commemorate or recognize it.

A combination of mounted trophies, live fish, historic stuff (nets, boats, lures, spears, etc), pictures, displays on invasive species and pollution..Winter too--put up a model of a typical ice shanty (not everyone has seen the inside of these) and a display on sturgeon spearing...the possibilities are many!...

All of this would not only celebrate the fishing heritage of this area but also call to attention and make people think about the water issues we have right now...

Put this place somewhere on the waterfront, maybe where fishing boats can dock on a rainy day or where people can cast a line. How about that unused area next to Mason Street across from C. Reiss?

I think it would be successful. Maybe more successful than a typical exotic fish aquarium.

What do you think?

I think if you're going to have a museum, something like that (reflecting the regional culture) would be better than a more common approach. If it's going to be a fishing museum, it would need a niche apart from the Fresh Water Fishing Museum in Hayward. Not that Hayward is that close, but who would want to compete with this gem?

http://www.freshwater-fishing.org/images/membership_main_musky.jpg

http://www.freshwater-fishing.org/museum.html

Could someone in the know tell me whether the recent city council elections gave us a net gain or loss in terms of downtown redevelopment supporters? I'm just curious if it's possible that any roadblocks could be thrown down by the new council. Thanks in advance.

Geez that Muskie is taller than Nicolet Bank! Maybe the mayor would like that on 'site 4'.
You're right you can't compete with teh hayward museum, but maybe something more of a Great Lakes/Fox River Educational Center would be more of a niche.

As far as the elections:
Of the 4 who voted "No" consistently, 3 still remain on the council. The fourth constant "No" was replaced by a guy who I think will be reasonable in making decisions about downtown developments.

There are some other new Council members but I can't predict whether they support downtown or not. I think Celestine Jefferys appears to be fairly progressive. That's about all I know.

Could someone in the know tell me whether the recent city council elections gave us a net gain or loss in terms of downtown redevelopment supporters? I'm just curious if it's possible that any roadblocks could be thrown down by the new council. Thanks in advance.

You should know the answer to that question next week. The following article headlined "RDA Makes Deal to Straighten Out Downtown Green Bay" is posted on the WBAY website. http://wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=4758027
It looks like the new council will be voting on a plan sent to them from the RDA. It calls for a payment of just under $165,000 to Days Inn, in exchange for land to straighten out the Main Street curve coming off the bridge.

Lombardi condo project OK'd

Developer's retail plans put on hold

By Andy Behrendt
abehrend@greenbaypressgazette.com


Developer Paul Kaczrowski is once again looking to amend his first-phase plans to redevelop an industrial area east of Lambeau Field, but he's also pushing ahead with the second-phase plan for two 12-story condominium towers south of Lombardi Avenue.


The city's Redevelopment Authority gave a preliminary nod Tuesday to the Prestige Towers, the latest project from Kaczrowski and his Prestige Realty, so Kaczrowski can begin to market the anticipated 84 condos. But unsure about Kaczrowski's latest push to adjust the initial plans for retail south of Tony Canadeo Run, the authority referred that request back to city planners.


"I have more reasons to try to complete this project than the city can possibly push upon me," Kaczrowski told the authority while arguing he has invested $3.5 million in land purchases in the project area. "I put more pressure on myself than you do."


Kaczrowski, an investor in the nearby Tundra Lodge Resort & Waterpark, hasn't come through on some projects in the past, and the RDA two months ago approved his previous request to amend timelines.


Along with another change to timelines, the key would be replacing his planned 25,000-square-foot natural-foods grocery with a brew-pub restaurant and banquet facility just east of the 127-room Cambria Suites on Tony Canadeo Run that is the only piece of Kaczrowski's Prestige Park to get under way. A 35,000-square-foot retail center is now off the table indefinitely, Kaczrowski said.


The change of plans, he said, comes because of the possible extension of Master Fleet's lease on the land where the retail buildings were planned. Master Fleet president and co-owner Jerry Jurek died in February, and his fellow co-owners approached Kaczrowski about possibly extending their lease past Jan. 1 in case Master Fleet's plans to move to Ashwaubenon fall behind. Master Fleet co-owner Craig Dickman, reached after Tuesday's meeting, said the fleet-maintenance company anticipates remaining on its original schedule.


Kaczrowski said the 21,000-square-foot restaurant, planned by an unnamed entrepreneur referred to Kaczrowski by the city, is estimated for completion by fall and would bring $3.5 million to $4 million in value. If that proves true, it would be more than the $2.5 million grocery store and with the hotel still provide the $1.7 million in property value required in the city's tax-increment financing equation.


The Prestige Towers — proposed in the block bordered by Lombardi Avenue, Reggie White Way, Tony Canadeo Run and Bart Starr Drive — would be a $45 million project. The development, which still hinges on some land acquisition, would include about 10,000 square feet of commercial space and a reflecting pond on the third story between the towers.


The authority's approval, which heads to the City Council next week, doesn't tie in any dollar figures but allows Kaczrowski to secure tenants for one year while reporting quarterly to the RDA, after which a development agreement might result.

Of the 4 who voted "No" consistently, 3 still remain on the council. Which is needed, you just cannot have a rubber stamp council with a mayor like this. I think Celestine Jefferys appears to be fairly progressive. The buzzword progressive means one thing free spender. Not good for taxpayers.

I think this mayor is doing a fine job and this city needs to be more progressive....Progress. Advancement. Improvement...

How can anyone stand to look at that downtown riverfront and not be disgusted, dismayed, embarrassed? Ugly run-down vacant buildings that generate no tax revenue are NOT saving the taxpayer any money.

There is huge opportunity to rectify this...the city can INVEST in the future by getting it developed. A lot of people want to live, work and have fun downtown but they can't because currently there's nothing but shit.

Once finished, will generate millions in tax revenue for the city and it will no longer be a hideous embarassment to this city.

Why is being progressive a bad thing to you? Give us progress. Improve our city.

Which is needed, you just cannot have a rubber stamp council with a mayor like this.

The buzzword progressive means one thing free spender. Not good for taxpayers.

This is like saying that the buzzword conservative means one thing, living in the past and being against any and all progress.

Both are overstatements. You can be progressive and conservative. You can believe that taxes should be kept as low as possible and yet believe that for the long term progress of the city development needs to be encouraged and the appropraite tools need to be used to encourage that development.

Smart conservatives know that you need to make capital investments to ensure future success, and smart progressives know that over-taxation will ruin spending, drive out business, and kill the economy.

The beauty is, you can work to build for the future, make Green Bay a world-class mid-sized city, and protect the taxpayer.

To your first point, it would absolutly be bad if nobody on the council questioned spending. There are a lot of people in the city who agree with council members like Zima, and while I disagree with those people, they deserve to have thier voices heard as well.

A story about Guy Zima. My wife's uncle (uncle-in-law???) was at one time going through some very hard times in his life, and one person who helped him out, even though he didn't stand anything to gain by it, was Guy Zima. I don't always (or often) agree with his politics, and sometimes he (like the mayor for that matter) needs to be more respectful, but he isn't all bad. Would I vote for him? No, but there can be utility in a Zima or two.

gbmphillips,

Why don't you give some REASONS for being against the developments? If you did, who knows? I might agree with them. I am the kind of guy who will weigh facts, pros and cons, and then make a decision. Maybe I just need to see your point of view. So what is it?? Help me understand.

All I can guess is that your anti-development comments stem from a personal vendetta you have against the Mayor. Is this the case? That's fine but then it's between you & the mayor, not the rest of us. Don't try to bring the whole city down just because of your personal problem.

I thought conservative meant liberal with money. Look at the Thompson and McCallum administrations in Wisconsin , hardly conservative with the people's hard earned currency (to the tune of $3billion in debt).

I thought conservative meant liberal with money. Look at the Thompson and McCallum administrations in Wisconsin , hardly conservative with the people's hard earned currency (to the tune of $3billion in debt).

:lol: Very true it seems. Look at the fed. gov't even where our current "conservative" leadership has increased spending and debt. But actually, in Green Bay conservative usually really means conservative, i.e. low taxes, controlled spending, and low debt. Not that all those things are actually accomplished, but the conservatives usually try (sometimes to a fault IMO).

...I don't always (or often) agree with his politics, and sometimes he (like the mayor for that matter) needs to be more respectful, but he isn't all bad. Would I vote for him? No, but there can be utility in a Zima or two.

I could not have phrased this better myself. Well said Dan.

There is nothing more than I have wanted for a long time is an improved downtown. When I host out of town guest and they pass through what we have as a downtown they are surprise by what it really is and I am embrassed to say thats all there is.

However I do not trust the rubber stamp that the Mayor has for one developer and disrespect he has shown to local developers. I know he is popular with many in the business segment in this town but with the common people there are many who finds his actions very questionable.

As for Guy Zima, I spoke to someone on the east side who has a apt complex behind her home she had numerous problems with people who live there, there have been a number of police calls to this site. She had complained to her alderman about the problems and never got any type of action so she went to Guy who actually looked into and since then actions have been taken to correct the problems over there.

Say what you will about Guy, I have had a few go arounds with him but have found he really has the best interest of the people of this city at the top of his list and has done much more for this city then this mayor ever will.

We've discussed Juza's development downtown on this website before and I'll say it again: I liked Juza's plan and I was pulling for him as a local developer. I'm not sure exactly what happened but it did initially appear to me that he got a raw deal.

However as was previously mentioned, we don't know exactly what happened "behind closed doors" between the City and Juza. My understanding is that the city had concerns about Juza's finances or experience, and the city chose to keep those concerns hidden to the public out of respect for Juza (they didn't want to expose things that could hurt his business). The site he was going to develop is too important...the city felt that it had to make sure that whoever developed it had the experience, finances, etc. Let's face it: Juza has a lot of experience building homes but not large urban center projects.

At least that's my understanding. I personally don't believe the mayor had anything against the local developer, he just had concerns and was looking out for the city while also trying to protect Juza's reputation by not exposing whatever weakness to the public. Seems to me the mayor took the high road.. The mayor took more of a hit to his reputation than Juza did through this whole deal...and never complained about it, just took it on the chin... and that to me shows class.

Then, despite all of this, Juza recently came back with another development near downtown on Main St and the city (including the Mayor) has been wholeheartedly supporting him. It would appear that Juza has also taken the high road by continuing to work with the city. That also shows class and I am very glad to see that they worked this out.

As for Vetter..I don't feel all that great that he is pretty much the only one developing the waterfront....but then again, he's the only one with the total package (experience, reputation, finances) that's stepped forward so far. And his plans are pretty good, as good or better than anything we've seen.

I am hoping that once Vetter's projects (Astor Place, River Center) get started, it will be a catalyst for the rest of the downtown to shape up. I believe it will. The boardwalk, though expensive, will aslso pay off in the long run, in my opinion.

Thanks gbmphillips for responding. I really do like to see others' point of view, it helps me understand the whole issue

So did everyone have a great Easter weekend???

It will be interesting to see the direction the revamped council helps guide the city, I am not sure that there will be much coming up for this weeks meeting, a couple interesting items that may pop up:
Days Inn land deal/improvement agreement-per the RDA minutes, seems like a straight forward deal (hopefully everything will stay on target for a July/August ground breaking on Astor Place).
Former Adams St. Station development (remember that?), sounds like someone has stepped up with some money and has a plan for a pub/bar, however there are 2 roadblocks, 1.Washington St. moratorium on expanding bars and as I read it there is only 1 liquor license available and 3 people vying for it. I guess we will see how that pans out.

Anyone remember the date Vetter was supposed to report back to the RDA on the Rivercenter project? If I recall he had a 4 month option, he must be in month 3 by now.

Also still waiting on any "news" pertaining to the boardwalk, timeline, cost breakdown, etc.

Puant en la Baye- a couple posts back you made a reference to the Milwaukee boardwalk and a $ amount, where did you get those numbers? It seems really low considering the length... or was that only the portion of the city financed amount?

Affordable housing is.

Gov. Jim Doyle is going to join Mayor Jim Schmitt today to announce that the Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority is awarding Affordable Housing Tax Credits that will help to finance the River Center planned on the site of the former Younkers department store.

Rental lofts, a hotel, splash park, movie theater and new Children’s Museum of Green Bay, plus condominiums are part of the project.

It will ne interetsing to see what Schmitt and Vetter believe is "affordable" When you look at the pricing of their condo projects you just know its not going to be all that affordable. Once again a private contractor is building on the backs of taxpayers. I am all for the projects but Vetter and Schmidt need to a little more responsible for the funding of their projects, not taxpayers.

^^ Ya know, the Mayor and Vetter aren't out to get everyone, they just aren't. The Mayor really believes that these developments are the best thing for the city and the people of Green Bay, and Vetter is an enthusiastic developer who likes smart urban development and yes, runs a for-profit business and wants to make money. Furthermore, WHEDA decides what affordable is, the Mayor and Vetter don't get to just make up definitions of affordable and then receive tax credits. So while I understand that you seem to dislike Schmitt and Vetter, in this case you need to worry about the state if anyone. This announcement is VERY GOOD news for the downtown.

Former Adams St. Station development (remember that?), sounds like someone has stepped up with some money and has a plan for a pub/bar

Besides the waterfront development, this Adams Street thing is the other thing I'm looking forward to seeing soon.
A while back I thought about trying to start up a restaurant at 109 S. Adams (the building wiht the enclosed alley) myself... I've been inside...with a little work, this could be a really cool place. There's nice woodwork, a fireplace...it's just a great layout for a restaurant with a kitchen area in the back. Plus there is good pedestrian access with nearby parking, and thousands of bank/government & other employees surronding it who have very few places to eat. There is good vehicular traffic nearby too, on Walnut. Adams Street is a little bit of a quieter street people can turn off onto and park. But I think the most customers will be pedestrian from the nearby offices. One potential problem might be night and weekend business--could be slow at these times? Having a pub in the adjacent corner building would help, but I believe it would be busiest morning till early afternoon on weekdays.
I had some renderings of the layout but it's been so long I lost them. Oh well I don't have the financing or the time for that kind of venture anyway. But I still believe it will work, whoever can make this happen, good for them.

Puant en la Baye- a couple posts back you made a reference to the Milwaukee boardwalk and a $ amount, where did you get those numbers? It seems really low considering the length... or was that only the portion of the city financed amount?
I read this in a book called "New Urbanism: Comprehensive Report & Best Practices Guide" by Stueteville, Langon and others. I'll see if I can verify this $ number.

The book says: "...cities are applying new urban ideas to many..kinds of developments. Under John Norquist, the mayor of Milwaukee...that city incorporated new urban prncipals into every aspect of it's planning and development system. The first great success achieved through this change in philosophy was the $23.8 million RiverWalk, completed for a mile and a half on both sides of the Milwaukee River. This project was designed to open up the water to pedestrians, privide a welcoming public space downtown, and boost property values. The RiverWalk has had a transformative effect on dowtown, where old warehouses and commercial bulidings have been turned into upscale apartments and luxury condominiums."

For those who have been on RiverWalk in Milwaukee and have seen the plans for Green Bay's boardwalk: Can you compare the two? Is the RiverWalk narrower? I think Green Bay's boardwalk would be about 1/4 of a mile long. But it might be wider or have more amenities such as public boating docks? I know that StoSS proposed using a wood called Ipe for GreeN Bay's boardwalk, because it is much stronger, more resistant to rot than just about any other kind of wood...but it is more expensive too. I'm wondering what kind of construction materials they used in Milwaukee.
Having been on the boardwalk in Sheboygan--it's very nice but they used regular treated wood, I think. Maybe it's cedar...but anyway, it is about 15 years old now and it's still in pretty good condition..though I wonder how long until they have to replace major parts of it? If GB uses a better wood (Ipe) I would hope it would last a very long time.

For those who have been on RiverWalk in Milwaukee and have seen the plans for Green Bay's boardwalk: Can you compare the two? Is the RiverWalk narrower? I think Green Bay's boardwalk would be about 1/4 of a mile long. But it might be wider or have more amenities such as public boating docks? I know that StoSS proposed using a wood called Ipe for GreeN Bay's boardwalk, because it is much stronger, more resistant to rot than just about any other kind of wood...but it is more expensive too. I'm wondering what kind of construction materials they used in Milwaukee.

It has been a while since I was last down on the riverwalk, but I don't really see that much of a comparison, the Milwaukee riverwalk is much, MUCH more urban and intimate then the boardwalk proposed in Green Bay. From what I recall the bulk of the riverwalk is concrete and fairly narrow, however it transitions very well with the surrounding buildings, when completed it will be amazing.
I still have a hard time trying to fully visualize what Green Bay will look like with all or any of the proposed improvements.

Here is a link (http://www.mkedcd.org/downtownplan/catalytic7.pdf) I found to the Milwaukee Riverwalk, I am not really sure how far along they are.

So while I understand that you seem to dislike Schmitt and Vetter, in this case you need to worry about the state if anyone. This announcement is VERY GOOD news for the downtown.No I don't dislike Vetter at all I am thrilled that something is finally happening in downtown. Its been a long time coming. I just think that maybe too much public money are going into private projects. But that is just the way it works these days.

RiverWalk looks nice. Wish I had time & a reason to visit downtown Milwaukee.


I still have a hard time trying to fully visualize what Green Bay will look like with all or any of the proposed improvements.


Me too. I'm confused about whether the old Younkers building will be torn down or whether they'll re-use all or most of it. I've heard conflicting reports. I'm still hoping that the buildings look similiar to how they look in Dan's website. (http://www.downtownvital.org/html/designplanflash.htm)

I'm not sure if anyone noticed/posted this already, but the Astor Place website has added a really cool interactive diagram of the Boardwalk. You can use your mouse to shift the diagram left/right and see it along part of it's length (the parts in front of Astor Place and River Center).

You can't see all the way to Walnut, but even so-- It's cool!!

Check it out here (http://www.astorplacecondos.com/boardwalk.htm)

gbmphillips, my apologies for mis-characterizing your feelings about Vetter.

I'm confused about whether the old Younkers building will be torn down or whether they'll re-use all or most of it. I've heard conflicting reports.

If I'm not mistaken, all or virtually all of the Younkers building is coming down. I don't believe the foundations are of any use to Vetter's plans either. It's a shame they can't keep the historic part facing Washington St. I once heard Vetter say that they looked into saving that portion but it wasn't feasable. Juza wasn't going to re-use that portion either in his plan and he was trying to reuse as much as possible. It must be in pretty bad shape... too bad as that portion has so much history and so many memories tied to it.

About the Milwaukee River Walk, GBSurveyor is right, the two really aren't comperable, nor are the rivers they are set in. Foot for foot, the Milwaukee River Walk is (obvoiusly) much less expensive. It's great though and works perfectly in it's setting.

[B]For those who have been on RiverWalk in Milwaukee and have seen the plans for Green Bay's boardwalk... I'm wondering what kind of construction materials they used in Milwaukee...

I don't know if this helps you, but the Milwaukee riverwalk uses many different materials (depending on the neighborhood it passed through). The wood you were describing sounds familar to the type used in the newest Third Ward segment, my Dad was visiting once and commented on the quality and price of the material.

The Milwaukee riverwalk is evolving (new projects on the river add new segments), so I'm guessing this is something Green Bay will experience as well. Please post pictures when yours begins construction, they're an awesome public asset.

I'm not sure if anyone noticed/posted this already, but the Astor Place website has added a really cool interactive diagram of the Boardwalk. You can use your mouse to shift the diagram left/right and see it along part of it's length (the parts in front of Astor Place and River Center).

You can't see all the way to Walnut, but even so-- It's cool!!

Check it out here (http://www.astorplacecondos.com/boardwalk.htm)

From the happy superimposed people photos, the boardwalk looks very
monolithic, aircraft carrier deck-ish. I am glad there is something being done along the river, oh well, I can't say anything since I wasn't at any of the planning meetings. At least something is happening, hope it is a catalyst
for more contiguous, thought out urban design spaces.

I like the many "levels" of the boardwalk--they will provide interest and give people different perspectives from which to view the waterfront. Check out image 2 for example: this one shows the various levels quite well.

I don't think it will look too much like an aircraft carrier deck, but even if it does, maybe that's OK considering it memorializes and honors Admiral Flatley.

As a guy who renders stuff in his spare time, I know how hard it is to make these planned projects look and feel "real".. THe finished product still always looks better than the plans. THese images convey a concept and help plan the thing, that's all.

It's very true. I would think in this case the renderings don't do the boardwalk justice.

Skyscrapers on the other hand are often rendered to the point of monoliths impervious to imperfection, the perfect sheen in the setting sun, the perfect budget (unlimited, no cost over runs, no delays with subcontractors.) The cold reality, the rendering, usually better than the finished product.

My only worry with the Boardwalk, these types of edifices usually exist in milder climates, with historic orientation to the adjacent body of water (easements, building footprints abut, open to boardwalk.) And population density is a concern, Boardwalks like the one in Atlantic City, or Ocean City, NJ have strong foot traffic.

This project should provide the drive and direction to define Green Bay.

Was just heading through downtown and got stopped when the Walnut St. bridge was raised. Normally not too fun, but when it's a beautiful day, you're not in a big hurry, and it's a nicely kept ship passing through, a welcome diversion.

http://www.uwgb.edu/moored/001RCBoat.jpg

The mall's for sale. Development Assocaites is asking $8 million. Hopefully this wil beging to be redeveloped in the not too distant future.

Washington Commons for sale for $8M (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060420/GPG0101/604200437/1207)

did you guys see that the washington st straightening is scheduled to be started the first week of july and be complete by the end of august? check it out.
http://www.ci.green-bay.wi.us/geninfo/public_works/publicworks_cip_washington_o.html

Green Bay "Cinema" Live... today must have been a busy shipping day.

http://www.geocities.com/stdebak/pics/apr2006.JPG

It will be interesting when the boardwalk gets built, those ships already get pretty close to the bulkhead.

did you guys see that the washington st straightening is scheduled to be started the first week of july and be complete by the end of august? check it out.
http://www.ci.green-bay.wi.us/geninfo/public_works/publicworks_cip_washington_o.html
That means that construction on Astor place can't possibly start until late August. I was hoping to see at least a steel skeleton rise by the end of the year. Glad to see that there are at least solid plans regarding the schedule and timing though.

The mall's for sale. Development Assocaites is asking $8 million. Hopefully this wil beging to be redeveloped in the not too distant future.

Washington Commons for sale for $8M (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060420/GPG0101/604200437/1207)]

Hopefully someone in town will buy the mall. Schneider National, Knoll International, Shopko, Associated Bank? Northwestern Mutual Life owned the Grand Avenue Mall in Milwaukee, and still have a hand in its fate
at least through the Chamber of Commerce.


An out of town investment group never invests the real time needed to leverage the success of a local mall.


Washington Commons should connect with a redesigned, pedestrian corridor to the Fox River, tie in nicely with the riverfront development. I don't know if an out of town developer (Gorman Co, Vetter-Denk) sees this. Where are the Onieda in all this? Or is that taboo to bring up?

One of my favorite things about the downtown is that the river is a working river. Having the ships come through brings a sort of authenticity to the area that can be recreated. That's why I like having the warehouses along the river downtown, they are well kept and bring an element to the area that new condos or entertainment venues can't. We need to make sure we keep a mix of old buildings, new developments, and industry. Seeing the ships go by is just so cool!


Hopefully someone in town will buy the mall. Schneider National, Knoll International, Shopko, Associated Bank? Northwestern Mutual Life owned the Grand Avenue Mall in Milwaukee, and still have a hand in its fate
at least through the Chamber of Commerce.

An out of town investment group never invests the real time needed to leverage the success of a local mall.

Washington Commons should connect with a redesigned, pedestrian corridor to the Fox River, tie in nicely with the riverfront development. I don't know if an out of town developer (Gorman Co, Vetter-Denk) sees this. Where are the Onieda in all this? Or is that taboo to bring up?

The Oneida aren't taboo at all. There has been discussion of a Casino downtown (not serious discussion, I don't think), I'm not sure the Oneidas or the community have interest in that (maybe they do, I just don't know). Not that the Oneidas just do Casinos. They are always trying to diversity their economy, so maybe they would have interest, I don't know that they've been approached.

By and large the Oneidas are very good neighbors (some folks in Hobart would beg to differ), but there clearly is a fair bit of tension in the community relating to them. Even the best intentioned, non-casino development by them would unfortunatly encounter a fair bit of opposition just because the Oneidas were doing it. Anyway, I don't know if they would have any interest or if anyone has ever even approached them about it.

I think the odds are that much or all of the mall will be torn down. As for who does it, well, we have local ownership right now and we've seen how that has gone. Local ownership isn't a panacea, nor is an out-of-town development group necessarily bad. It's really up the the city planning office, and ultimalty our elected officials to make sure that whoever develops the space does so in a way that flows well into the riverfront and the rest of downtown.

One of my favorite things about the downtown is that the river is a working river. Having the ships come through brings a sort of authenticity to the area that can be recreated. That's why I like having the warehouses along the river downtown, they are well kept and bring an element to the area that new condos or entertainment venues can't. We need to make sure we keep a mix of old buildings, new developments, and industry. Seeing the ships go by is just so cool!

I agree! The shipping helps the local economy greatly. Shipping is still the most fuel-efficient means of transportation, and of course this is becoming more & more of an issue. It's cheap transportation that saves us all money, indirectly at least. It equals jobs for the local economy too. Given that GreenBay connects to the St. Lawrence seaway, there is a great connection to the world w/o the need to change modes of transportation. It would be crazy to try drive the industries who use the waterfront out of business. I know that there has been recent opposition to C. Reiss because the coal piles are ugly and dirty. There was a plan to move and expand C. Reiss coal from their current location to a more industrial part of the river closer to the mouth of the river--though I'm not sure if they got the funding to do that. Anyone know where that plan is right now?

I was not opposed to K&K warehousing's recent enhancement to the Port. A lot of people wanted them to move that warehouse somewhere else but it is now used to bring in wood products. That building does not bother me. What does bother me is that emptly underutilized lot between K&K warehouse and Mason St...I know it's a brownfield but that should be developed and used somehow. A marina or something.

We need to find ways to keep and even expand the "working river" with other uses (recreational), while cleaning up where necessary. Other ports have done this sucessfully.

The greenbaypressgazette.com currently has an online poll asking "What should happen to Washington Commons, Green Bay’s vacant downtown mall?"

The choices are...

1) sell for reoccupation;
2) demolish for new construction;
3) not sure/other.

In the first GB forum I tried to tie a bunch of ideas and plans by others, as well as some of my own, together and rendered up some 3D images on my website (http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/downtown_GB.html). I have added some new images.

I'm not usually in favor of tearing down buildings particularly when they're still structurally sound, but this mall building is so large and dysfunctional that at least parts of it will have to come down.

I'd love to see the renderings from one of the local architects, Dan Dallbach. His ideas involve using much of the existing structure but it appeared to make good sense.

I'm afraid that someone will try once again to "fit a square peg into a round hole" with this mall, and be too conservative. Something radical has got to be done with this thing.

I strongly believe in the conceptual themes that I tried to convey in my website (http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/downtown_GB.html), which include:

1) put the street grid back through whereever possible
2) use of organic architecture and green space, together
3) create 1st class office space combined with other uses, including public gathering places
4) make it all pedestiran friendly
5) add a tall building on Washington St.

I'd like to tie more plans and ideas together on my website soon. For example I've been hoping to draw in the Boardwalk, and add a better model of Astor Place.

Posted April 24, 2006 in Green Bay Press-Gazette

Downtown's looking up, Green Bay leaders say

But majority of residents doubtful of area's progress

By Paul Srubas
psrubas@greenbaypressgazette.com

Rumors of downtown's death, to paraphrase Mark Twain, are greatly exaggerated.

Viewpoints are overwhelmingly pessimistic about progress on Green Bay's downtown revitalization, according to the 2006 Brown County Quality of Life Survey. Of the roughly 400 people surveyed, 71 percent rated the progress as "not so good" or "poor." Only 22 percent said it was good, and 2 percent rated it as excellent.

But Mayor Jim Schmitt takes strong exception to the pessimism. "Downtown's future is very optimistic," he said. "We've had more development in the last two years than we've had in the last five, and it's just a small portion of what's coming."

As positives, he pointed to such recent developments as Nicolet Bank and the parking ramp at East Walnut and North Washington streets, and to upcoming projects like the $48.5 million River Center, planned by Milwaukee's Vetter Denk Architecture on the Fox River's east bank. The complex will include condominiums, a proposed hotel, splash park, movie theater and new Children's Museum of Green Bay.

"We have APAC coming," Schmitt said. "And to have the state, which is under budget constraints like everybody else, commit to $7.5 million to assist with housing tax credit to put in loft apartments, to have the City Council step up and support festival grounds and Bayfest saying it wants to be part of it — it's all significant, and not just talk. There are good, tangible signs, significant steps toward what downtown is going to be."

But dragging down the public's outlook is ongoing difficulty with Washington Commons.

"There's an awful lot of positive things happening with our downtown," said Paul Jadin, president of the Green Bay Area Chamber of Commerce and former Green Bay mayor. "If there's some negative to offset it, it almost always points back to negative publicity surrounding that mall. The longer we allow that to be an issue, the more people will think the renaissance is still a ways off."

Schmitt said he couldn't deny that the mall has been a struggle. "It's been a struggle the last 10 years," he said. "It's not just because of the city; it's a nationwide trend. A few things that were tried didn't work, and now it's in foreclosure. But people shouldn't see that as a negative but as a reality."

The fact that the mall owners have put the structure up for sale, listing it at $8 million, is an important positive step, he said. "I don't know if they'll get that for it, but seven acres downtown in a city with potential is sought after," Schmitt said. "People are calling."

Times have changed

A possible reason for the pessimism evident in the Quality of Life Survey is that downtown Green Bay likely will never be the retail center of the county that it once was, said Michael Kraft, professor of political science and public policy at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay.

People often find that a hard message to accept. "It should go back to the way it was with the mall and the unique stores that were there," said Julie Schmitz, 41, of Green Bay.

But a downtown that isn't a community's retail center "isn't necessarily a bad thing," Kraft said. "Some people think the downtown should be the heart of the community, but it's not the pattern that's developing here or in most other places. You'll have a downtown … I don't think downtown Green Bay is ever going to be a real rival to Bay Park Square. It can't compete. Things have gone too far in that direction. For one thing, downtown doesn't have the space to ease the traffic flow."

As small retail stores leave, people start losing reasons to get downtown, and that's what the city needs to reverse in order to survive, he said.

Downtowns often do that by encouraging the development of banks, clinics and other services, as well as by establishing downtown housing, and that's what Green Bay is trying to do, he said.

That can help preserve a bustling retail trade, through restaurants and boutique shops, though probably not to the level that Green Bay once had, he said.

That's the approach Green Bay is taking, through mixed-use development, Schmitt said.

But people need to change their mindset about what a successful downtown is, Jadin said.

"I think there'll be other reasons people will want to be downtown over the holidays, for example — particularly during the summer months, with the Fourth of July and other festivals," he said. "Retail won't drive the downtown, but it doesn't have to, either.

"In the 1960s and into the '70s, it had to. Now, I think, most people are comfortable shopping in asphalt-paved suburban malls because of their mobility. But going back to the 1950s? That's not going to happen. Those people who think they want to shop someday in a 1 million-square-foot shopping center downtown need to give that up."

Some people are beginning to understand and appreciate what Green Bay is trying to do.

"I think it's good to build housing downtown, such as the condos, because then it creates a need for services," said Roger McGrath, 55, of De Pere. "Maybe if there was a small market downtown where the malls aren't threatened, it would work, too. But if we get people downtown, it will create a demand and so it will grow."

Posted April 24, 2006

Tall Ship festival site is approved

Final site plans for the Baylake Bank Tall Ship Festival from July 27 to 31 in downtown Green Bay have been given the green light by the American Sail Training Association, the organization behind the Tall Ships Challenge where the ships race from port to port.

Race director Jonathan Harley was in Green Bay last week and told Green Bay Mayor Jim Schmitt the site plans are good to go for the festival.

The Baylake Bank Tall Ship Festival will bring 14 tall ships to the Port of Green Bay and it's possible more ships will choose to visit.

The festival, complete with ship tours, entertainment and food, is expected to draw 50,000 people from a five-state region. It's estimated 700 volunteers will be needed.

Go to www.tallshipgreenbay.com (http://www.tallshipgreenbay.com) for more information

Posted April 24, 2006 in Green Bay Press-Gazette

Downtown's looking up, Green Bay leaders say

But majority of residents doubtful of area's progress

By Paul Srubas
psrubas@greenbaypressgazette.com

Rumors of downtown's death, to paraphrase Mark Twain, are greatly exaggerated.

Viewpoints are overwhelmingly pessimistic about progress on Green Bay's downtown revitalization, according to the 2006 Brown County Quality of Life Survey. Of the roughly 400 people surveyed, 71 percent rated the progress as "not so good" or "poor." Only 22 percent said it was good, and 2 percent rated it as excellent. "

I think peoples perception will change when they see a 17 floor building rising along the river downtown come the end of summer.

Too bad the "Tall Ship Festival" couldn't happen the weekend of a nationally televised pre-season Packers game.

I think some perceptions will be changed when the riverfront projects begin. There have been so many proposals that have died that I can't blame people who are suspect of any new proposals. Heck, I'm not going to feel totally confident about Astor Place until I see construction start. Also, I've heard enough opinions about downtown to know that some people won't accept the downtown unless it becomes the retail center that it once was... so those people are in for a dissapointment. There's a lot of negative history to overcome so I'm not surprised by the findings of that survey.

Too bad the "Tall Ship Festival" couldn't happen the weekend of a nationally televised pre-season Packers game.

I'm normally not one to care about the whole "what people see on TV during Packer's games" angle, but I do have to say that it would look pretty cool if people could see all of those ships!

As an aside, the next stop for that tall ships series after Green Bay is Chicago. For a pretty good chunk of change you can ride on one of the ships from Green Bay to Chicago... how cool would that be to sail into Chicago's lakefront on one of those!!!!!

Truth-Perception will never change for a large amount of people, just as many of the people I talk to haven't been downtown for years, and unless you work down there or have some strange urban desire to see downtown as more then just Port Plaza mall, what would be a reason to go down there? I constantly hear people say that there isn't enough PARKING LOTS, which totally drives me nuts. I was floored when I asked around at work about the Neville Muesum-most have never been there and some people didn't know what it was. So I am not convinced that a couple of new buildings are really going to change anyone's perception. What I think would have a huge impact would be: Children's Museum, IMAX, Aquarium, or something to lure the typical "sub-urban" dweller, more to re-introduce them to what urbanism is all about, Not the typical... "Lets go to Texas Roadhouse... then drive across the parking lot to the mall to do some shopping... then lets hop in the car and drive a block to Barns and Noble...and finally we will drive over to Crispy Cream to get a yummy snack..." (not that this is bad, I actully do this, because of lack of options)

I guess after all, being raised in Green Bay, I have seen many of my high school friends leave after college to more interesting areas, those same areas that I envy.

Truth-Perception will never change for a large amount of people, just as many of the people I talk to haven't been downtown for years, and unless you work down there or have some strange urban desire to see downtown as more then just Port Plaza mall, what would be a reason to go down there?

Hmmm, strange urban desire, prognosis accepted. I have a strange urban desire. But on a serious note;

I think the focus to "re-introduce" people who dwell in bedroom communities like Allouez might be misguided. Mr. Guy Zima's statement last December that he doesn't think the people of Green Bay will come downtown for the Boardwalk has some truth to it. If they don't patronize places like The Nevile Public Museum on a regular basis now, chances are that the effort to put an IMAX or Aquarium downtown would not compell them to change their lifestyle. The focus should instead be as it is, on providing mixed-use space for corporate headquaters of mid- to large-size companies and the housing for young urban professionals that work at them. Less emphasis on drawing in outside population and more on attracting a permanent inside one.

On another issue, Last week I saw an old friend walking downtown on Washington St. and we stopped an chatted about the announcement that the State was going to kick in a few million bucks for development of River Center. He conveyed his thoughts about the "low income" residents that would be moving in. I hate that the the term "low income" is being used. It conjures up images of scruffy-looking grease-monkees hanging around frightening women as they walk to their cars parked in the Main Street Ramp. Or Hillbillies moving in and tossing garbage out the window to the street below.

But to me, what it really means is that some of the workers being hired by APAC can live downtown close to work. The term is deceptive I think, because I assume a single mother working at APAC wages is close to qualifying as "low income". If "low income" means having wages 55% of "median income". Does anybody know the median income of Brown County?

What do you all think? It would be nice if someone from APAC were to read this post and respond.

Best wishes,

Navarino Rezdnt

It conjures up images of scruffy-looking grease-monkees hanging around frightening women as they walk to their cars parked in the Main Street Ramp.

Hey! I take offense to that!! I was born to be a "scruffy-looking grease monkey who frightens women"!! Geez, buddy! Show some tolerance for those who aren't as charming as you! :)

According to Wikipedia:
"The median income for a household in the city is $38,820, and the median income for a family is $48,678. Males have a median income of $33,246 versus $23,825 for females. The per capita income for the city is $19,269. 10.5% of the population and 7.4% of families are below the poverty line. Out of the total population, 12.7% of those under the age of 18 and 9.2% of those 65 and older are living below the poverty line."

On another note, just when I thought the ideas on my website were dead, the Press-Gazette called me and asked a bunch of questions. I credited all of you on this web site for coming up with ideas. Hopefully that gets conveyed into the article. Regardless I think this Skyscraper web forum is going to get more "Pub" in the paper.
Thought I should disclose that to you, my skyscrapercity family, that Puant is coming out of the closet. No I'm not gay ("not that there's anything wrong with that") but I mean that I gave my identity. You can still call me Puant though.

P.S. I think they might also include a picture of me-- the scruffy looking grease monkey. So WARNING! keep tomorrow's Business Section of the newspaper away from your women, or they'll be frightened!!

I think the focus to "re-introduce" people who dwell in bedroom communities like Allouez might be misguided. Mr. Guy Zima's statement last December that he doesn't think the people of Green Bay will come downtown for the Boardwalk has some truth to it. If they don't patronize places like The Nevile Public Museum on a regular basis now, chances are that the effort to put an IMAX or Aquarium downtown would not compell them to change their lifestyle.

I totally agree with you.

However those are the things I think would work to change the perception of many of the doubters. These are the same people who perceive there to be a parking shortage downtown, so I am not holding my breath

I see Brett Favre's return as an Omen of another year of the same-old, same-old in Green Bay, on the field and in downtown. Joking aside, has anyone on the city council ever stepped foot outside WI, or lived anywhere else besides Green Bay? I don't live there now, but when I did 8 years ago I witnessed the same kind of jargon among city leaders, Guy Zima especially. Let's find a new quarterback and new leaders with new ideas who actually act instead of sitting around thinking about how great life would be "if only." Ideas are worthless without action. Sorry, I don't like hearing the same crapola over and over again. ;)

has anyone on the city council ever stepped foot outside WI, or lived anywhere else besides Green Bay?

That is funny... I wonder if Guy has ever left the city, oh wait I think I saw him in Ashwaubenon :)

Hey! I take offense to that!! I was born to be a "scruffy-looking grease monkey who frightens women"!! Geez, buddy! Show some tolerance for those who aren't as charming as you! :)

Puant,

I apologize for offending you, I'm also a hypocrite because I'm guilty of scruffiness on my part at times. Today I was at my parent's house cutting their grass and I think I scared the lady across the street because I was wearing a flannel shirt with the sleeves cut off and greasy jeans. :)

That's great news about the PG article. Informing the general public about the issues concerning downtown development is always good. And getting a development idea like yours out there may help to change the perception problems downtown has.

:cheers:

Has anyone heard who might be interested in the mall property???

From the most recent article it sounded like there was a great deal of activity. I have to imagine that the KI is at least looking to expand into the JC Penny building.
If I recall I think they are asking 8 mil - which divided by the sq. footage = like $25 a sq foot. Which doesn't seem all that unreasonable if the building was reusable. But at a price of about 1.1 mil an acre seems pretty steep for someone to buy it and tear it down and build something else. How in the world did Development Associated fall so far in debt??? If I recall they purchased it for like 2.5 mil and if they need to get 8 mil to break even, I don't think that they put anywhere near that much into it.

I just don't see a fast fix for a large part of the downtown.

Congratulatons Puant en la Baye on the great read in the GBPG. For those of you who missed it here is the link http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060427/GPG03/604270427/1247/GPGbusiness As to your picture, unfortunately the online article doesn't show your mug so we may never know what the "scruffy looking grease monkey" looks like. :)

From the April 25th Improvement and Service Committee Minutes. Link (http://www.ci.green-bay.wi.us/mins_agd/minutes/20060425MN1087.html)

Ald. Zima explained the history of the construction and funding of the parking ramps in the mid-70’s. He indicated that there was discussion on whether the funding should be by general obligation bonds or revenue bonds. In the end, it was decided that the funding would be by general obligations bonds meaning that repayment would be by the taxpayer, not revenues. He thought that the cost/bonding of the parking ramps was in the area of $20 million and that the Parking Utility only paid approximately $2 million after paying their operating costs from the revenues. Thus, the difference was paid for by the taxpayer, not the user. Furthermore, he feels that the parking rates should not be lowered. He is tired of subsidizing the businesses in order to get them to come into, or stay in, the downtown area.

A lengthy discussion took place regarding this issue.

A motion was made by Ald. Wiezbiskie and seconded by Ald. Fradette that the Parking lease structure for multiple use customers be approved with implementation on July 1, 2006. Alds. Kriescher and Zima voted no. Motion carried.

I do understand his point, rates should be driven by the market and not so heavily subsidized, however Guy's comments just keeps dragging down the the downtown.

I do understand his point, rates should be driven by the market and not so heavily subsidized, however Guy's comments just keeps dragging down the the downtown.

The rates are being driven by the market because it's free parking everywhere in Northeast Wisconsin. The city is held to compete with that and so the rates are low. Now if this was another downtown in a large metro area where there's private parking garages, the rates would be adjusted accordingly. The first hour in the ramps wouldn't be free, they'd be more like $10 and drop a dollar or two every 1/4 mile the farther away you got from city center.

Two dissenting votes will not stop progress. Feeling confident that their costituants will bring them back the future, Misters Zima and Kriescher may change their obstructionist behavior of bringing up issue financing to stacked committees, to speeding up meetings by calling for votes before much debate and discussion. The meetings end early , everyone goes home, or to the bar, feeling victorious. Then, at election time, city budget cuts and debt increases become the issue. Yes and no votes may play a part to re-elect or oust officials.

In the end, it could play out a few different ways. I'm confident that progress will continue and everybody will be happy at some time during the process.

I totally understand the parking debate, (BTW-I really like free stuff!!) however I just wanted to bring out Guy's POV. The City basically is subsidizing many non-city residents buy not charging enough for long term parking, you can hardly argue that, at least as I see it. I am not sure what the debt payments are for the ramps, but revenue can hardly cover a small portion of that amount, and it seems like maintance is ongoing. Unless there is a magical 'grant from the feds' every city resident is paying for it if they use it or not. I know in Appleton you pay $1 to get in the ramp and that is it. No staff sitting there on the clock for such measly turnover.

As far as the fate of the city-I really don't think that progress will stop either, I just find it humorus that Misters Zima and Kriescher are the anti-"rubber stamp" to the mayor and basically create all the "uneventfull discussion".

I was just looking at the different renderings of the atrium and had some thoughts. What if the market sways back to a return of retail businesses downtown. The former mall site has ben converted to the tower and atrium and there isn't enough retail space available. What if the atrium were on the second floor and there was essentially an enclosed mall on the street level? What if the current vision is too conservative, and we should consider and discuss a more extreme one?

Imagine that due to phenominal promotion of the virtues of Northeast Wisconsin by commerce promotion entities, 5-15 years into the future there's another 15-25k permanent workers and residents downtown. Would that be enough to support retail again downtown and more space than in the current idea?

In 20-25 years, how many more mid-rise skyscrapers could there be in Downtown Green Bay beyond River Tower at the end of this building expansion?

Maybe a 25+ story building where Chase Bank is in the 200 South block? One on the 300 South block where the GBPD is? Another one yet still in the 200 North block between Madison and Monroe streets? On the block directly to the South of that, 500 East Walnut? And a Skyway similar to the one in Minneapolis connecting downtown buildings?

What if?

Maybe a 25+ story building where Chase Bank is in the 200 South block? One on the 300 South block where the GBPD is? Another one yet still in the 200 North block between Madison and Monroe streets? On the block directly to the South of that, 500 East Walnut? And a Skyway similar to the one in Minneapolis connecting downtown buildings?

What if?

Personally, I hate skyways. My reason for this is that they break the sight line of the streetscape. If they must have interconnecting buildings; IMHO, a much better way to go is with tunnels.

Many cities that have the skywalk networks are wondering if they'd be better off without them. One the one hand they are great in winter, but people get in a habit and still use them in summer. They can be a real killer of street life, and without street life a downtown can be pretty crappy.

I work at the UWGB. All of the academic buildings on campus are connected by a network of tunnels. Even in the summer most people seem to still use those and there isn't as much life outside in our beautiful campus as there should be. I would hate to replicate the same thing downtown.

That said, isn't it fun to dream about all of the potential we have downtown? Wouldn't be amazing to have 5 or 6 15 to 20 story buildings!

^^
I myself attended UWGB back in the 70's and was guilty of using the tunnels. You're right, no skywalks and no tunnels!

You are right about UWGB. I graduated from there 7 years ago, and even in the middle of May when it's 75 outside people are still using the tunnels. But's let's not focus on UWGB since we all know that if the campus were downtown, Green Bay would be a much different place. I don't think it would come close to Madison, very few cities do, but atleast there would be some sense of collegiate freedom and artistic expression. Just like today, city leaders back then wanted to be frugal by going the cheap route. "Lets build out there because we can get the land cheaply, because we ourselves are cheap." (Insert sarcasm) You don't have to spend money to make money, the city will develop itself (End Sarcasm). I cringe when I think of what GB would be like if the Weidner center, the Resch Center, and dare I say, Lambeau Field were downtown. On another point, I think Port Plaza mall was an excellent idea; it was a lack of leadership that drove it to where it is today. :runaway:

I cringe when I think of what GB would be like if the Weidner center, the Resch Center, and dare I say, Lambeau Field were downtown. On another point, I think Port Plaza mall was an excellent idea; it was a lack of leadership that drove it to where it is today. :runaway:

I agree with everything you have stated except for Port Plaza being an excellent idea. Having grown up in Green Bay, I remember what downtown was like before the mall and it was quite nice. Washington St. didn't die off until after the mall was built and the same stores that were on Washington Street moved in there. Perhaps, if they had built the mall vertically about 5 or 6 floors and not had taken streets out to accomodate it, it wouldn't have been so bad.

On another point, I think Port Plaza mall was an excellent idea; it was a lack of leadership that drove it to where it is today. :runaway:

I think in a way you are both right and wrong. The mall wasn't a bad idea. Cities all across the country did the same thing, and for a good twenty years it worked. However, as you alluded to, there wasn't a lot else done to help sustain the mall. It was more like, "well, we have a mall, we don't need to develop anything else downtown." The really doomed the mall.

At the same time it is hard to compete with suburban malls. Across the country those same cities that built downtown malls are finding them to be failing. So maybe nothing could have saved the mall.

That said, if downtown had remianed a priority throughout the last 30 years since the malls construction, downtown wouldn't have become so dependent on one property and one use and may have survived the malls failure better. We've also learned that it's probably not a good idea to let one property take up too much real estate downtown. These lessons are why I think that whatever replaces the mall must embrase a mix of uses, a mix of ownership, and be followed up by continuing support and development on nearby properties.

Finally, I'm not too sad that UWGB is where it is. I brings a nice alternative to the UW system. I think it's good to have a mix of urban and more rural campuses, and UWGB is certainly unlike any other in the state. Having campus downtown would sure bring life to the area, but I like things how they turned out too. Once nice idea would be for UWGB to put some upper-classmen student housing and a smallish classroom facility downtown. This would give students the option to live in an urban or rural setting, and help increase the university's presence in the community.

a lot of university's have 2 campuses. what they need to go is but like the business college and another college in that same realm sowntown. that would not only benefit the donwtown but give the students a lot more opportunity when getting up in the juunior senior year. but GB would keep their main campus as their main campus but it would have a subsidy called UWGB downtown campus. it is done in A LOT of other campuses. i really think GB should do this

Port Plaza mall: Classic example of all your eggs in one basket.
I must apologize for my recent comment. I was dwelling on the past instead of focusing on the future. Sure, a lot would be different "if only," but that doesn't help us now.

From the Milwaukee Business Journal:

QPS Companies Inc. has opened its first office in northern Wisconsin in Green Bay, the staffing firm's 16th location.

The opening of the office May 1 marks a continued growth of the Brookfield-based firm.

Full text. (http://milwaukee.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2006/05/01/daily16.html?jst=b_ln_hl)

a lot of university's have 2 campuses. what they need to go is but like the business college and another college in that same realm sowntown.

What is also unique and interesting about the Green Bay area, is for its size, there are 3 well known schools in the immediate area (St. Norbert College, UWGB, and NWTC). It would be very beneficial if all three could work on some consortium plan to have a partnership business program in the downtown area. I believe that UWO has already put forth effort on it's own, and UWGB had a good start until the mall had closed. However, if all the institutions would collaborate, and bring all of their strengths together we could have a very strong business extention in the downtown business community which could offer not only classes, but licensing, and seminars as well.

Mr. Guy Zima's statement last December that he doesn't think the people of Green Bay will come downtown for the Boardwalk has some truth to it. IThe fact that Guy is right quite often is what really upsets the spend spend spend crowd. I can't say I have heard one person say"gee can't wait for that boradwalk to be built, I am going to just RUSH downtown again." I am sure the boardwalk will be nice for Vetters projects and the few people who will live down there but its not a major reason for people to go downtown, for that matter its not even a reason to go there that river stinks in the summer heat. Maybe now that da Mayor is done giving vetter everything he wanted he will try to developemnt other areas of downtown and possible bring something besides condos down there.

Maybe now that da Mayor is done giving vetter everything he wanted he will try to developemnt other areas of downtown and possible bring something besides condos down there.


What do you have in mind?

Posted May 3, 2006
Cost to lease Green Bay ramp space will see change.
Goal is to entice more businesses

Full Story (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060503/GPG0101/605030605/1207)

By Andy Behrendt
abehrend@greenbaypressgazette.com

Rates for major users of Green Bay's parking ramps will be dropping after a narrow decision by city officials aimed at securing business downtown.

The City Council in a 6-5 vote Tuesday approved a new system of monthly parking rates, most notably with greater discounts for entities leasing more than 400 stalls in the city's Cherry Street, Main Street or Pine Street ramps.

The fact that Guy is right quite often is what really upsets the spend spend spend crowd. I can't say I have heard one person say"gee can't wait for that boradwalk to be built, I am going to just RUSH downtown again." I am sure the boardwalk will be nice for Vetters projects and the few people who will live down there but its not a major reason for people to go downtown, for that matter its not even a reason to go there that river stinks in the summer heat. Maybe now that da Mayor is done giving vetter everything he wanted he will try to developemnt other areas of downtown and possible bring something besides condos down there.

You and Guy Zima may be right. I trust your thoughts much more than Mr Zima's. I just don't trust that man for reasons that are posted all over newspapers from years past.

What is happening with the Federal Courthouse? A few years ago, it was such a big deal that Green had persuaded the Federal Government to commit ~30million $ to a new federal courthouse in downtown Green Bay? Is this ever going to happen?

A reply to Navarino Rezdent's observation about the potentail for needing more retail in the future:
I think the Atrium would be a great "hub" for the revitalized retail space. It won't offer as much contiguous retail space as the Port Plaza mall once did, but I think that with the restored street grid and the boardwalk, there will be ample places for retail space, in a more traditional sense (sidewalk window shopping-style). Sort of the way it used to be in downtown Green Bay in the 1950's--Street parking, sidewalk shopping, smaller shops. Wouldn't that be refreshing?

However, I don't think the mall is really going to be torn apart. If the street grid were really going to be put back in place, why wouldn't the city be using some means right now to reclaim parts of the mall for public street corridors? I think that there is something brewing and it involves using the existing structure pretty much "as is". Have you heard anything?

I wish we actually had more development info to talk about, but until that day happens we must mull over the same items...Boardwalk, Mall, Etc.

I was browsing for more info on the federal courthouse, the most recent post I could find was a list of federal building projects that were put on hold, Green Bay was like #24 on the list, so it doesn't sound like anything is going to happen anytime soon, for all I know they could put it in the vacant mall. I wonder how much activity actually takes place in Green Bay Federal Courthouse????

However, I don't think the mall is really going to be torn apart. If the street grid were really going to be put back in place, why wouldn't the city be using some means right now to reclaim parts of the mall for public street corridors? I think that there is something brewing and it involves using the existing structure pretty much "as is". Have you heard anything?

Is this pretty much just a hunch??? It seems like several months ago there were numerous developments in the works and here we all are still waiting to hear what those are. The city is in no position to condemn the mall and lose out on any money owed. I am sure if the $ was there it would be a priority to put the grid back and rebuild the downtown to the way it was before the mall.

I feel that Downtown Green Bay is headed in the right direction. The quickest and best way to get there is to build up the amount of housing. That is if all of the price points are covered and not just the upper end. I don't know about anyone else here but I cannot justify spending quite a bit more money to get much less of a home. But if there are enough people out there willing, then more power to them. Any development- condo or office is much better then a vacant lot. I too wish for more entertainment opportunities and I am sure with time something will happen, maybe :)

This is a little off subject; but, has anyone seen any pictures (drawings) of the new De Pere bridge they are going to start building this summer. If so, could you post them. The only one (drawing) I've seen is the one on the Wisconsin Department of Transportation web site and not only is that one pretty old; but, I don't think it is the final design.

I wish we actually had more development info to talk about, but until that day happens we must mull over the same items...Boardwalk, Mall, Etc.


At least you guys have all that and plenty more to talk about. Down here in the Fox Cities, there is nothing going on, whatsoever. Not even a single project to be even remotely excited about outside the usual exurban 1-2 storey office buildings going up.

I was on the FRT and didn't notice any construction yet.

I did not see the DOT one but I have seen the one's on DePere's website. I am assuming there are from the same source.

Here is the link (http://www.de-pere.org/bridgeRepl.htm)

^^^^^^
Thanks for the link!

I wish we actually had more development info to talk about, but until that day happens we must mull over the same items...Boardwalk, Mall, Etc.

Is this pretty much just a hunch??? It seems like several months ago there were numerous developments in the works and here we all are still waiting to hear what those are. The city is in no position to condemn the mall and lose out on any money owed. I am sure if the $ was there it would be a priority to put the grid back and rebuild the downtown to the way it was before the mall.

I feel that Downtown Green Bay is headed in the right direction. The quickest and best way to get there is to build up the amount of housing. That is if all of the price points are covered and not just the upper end. I don't know about anyone else here but I cannot justify spending quite a bit more money to get much less of a home. But if there are enough people out there willing, then more power to them. Any development- condo or office is much better then a vacant lot. I too wish for more entertainment opportunities and I am sure with time something will happen, maybe :)

Yeah I hate to keep harping about the mall, but I feel that until that huge part of central downtown site gets "fixed", we have a major problem. I won't be satisfied until something starts to happen here. Even if (when?) the riverfront sites are redeveloped, it's true that many people won't exactly rush downtown unless there are other developments following suit, especially on the mall site.

As for other developments, I've been keeping an eye on the twin towers that are planned near the stadium. Those could be cool, though I wonder if they'll be marketable enough to become reality (especially 2 of them). How many people in GB want to live in condo towers? I don't really know...What kind of people exactly are interested in these? Local empty nesters? Older people who want to live w/in walking distance of various places? Recent arrivals to Green Bay who are accustomed to 'big city' living?

A few thoughts...

The Mall: I don't think there's any indication that the building will or won't be kept intact. I don't think the city is going to make difinitive plans to put the streets through, because they want to keep options open for developers who will (hopefully) be intereseted in the site. I can't imagine a developer no tearing down a large portion of that, but who knows?

Federal Courthouse: I think that is in limbo right now. The plan was to have it built on Site 4, but when Mayor Schmitt took office he wanted (rightly so I believe) to keep that open for private development so it would be a taxable development if/when it happens. I beleve the primary candidate for it now is the corner of Walnut and Monroe where the Press-Gazette garage is. Not sure that's my favorite spot for it, but I don't have any better ideas either. I think that Rep. Green was the one pushing for it in Washington, but when the probable location changed his enthusiasm waned, and so now it is in limbo. I'd love to have it, but one coould argue that it would be federal tax dollars poorly spent as the federal court seems to be getting along just fine now.

There was a nice recap of recent and upcoming developments in the paper today. I was sad to see that the retail in the Pine Ramp wasn't going anywhere. New downtown retail is just a loser right now until more people are around.

To that end, I think the boardwalk will help greatly, but won't be a panacea. It will need to be a piece of a larger puzzle, including the condos and APAC, plus new ideas and developments. But what makes people want to visit a downtown is a very subtle thing. I think the success of the boardwalk will hinge in no small part on how the boat docks are used and how many people come down the fox river trail to the boardwalk.

The trail is, at least it was a few years ago, the most heavily used trail in the state. If the right mix of elements can make the boardwalk a popular trail-head, that will be huge. Plus, if on nice evenings there are always a few people coming and going of the river, that creates great atmosphere. A ton of people won't drive down just for the boardwalk, but they may stop there as part of a bike ride or boat trip. So those alternate modes of transport are key. Develop the surrounding area such that drivers have destinations to come to, and so that downtown residents want and need to walk outside, and there can be success. They key will be to tend to all of these users, and that will be no easy task. Lets hope for the best!

While the opening, and move-in to the new Condos gives some people a view of downtown development, I think the majority of people need to "see" more progress to endorse it and keep the momentum going forward. Seeing is truly believing for most. Even those with high hopes are starting to wane with the several revisions to the development schedules. APAC was late April, then May, now July. We heard at the Development meeting in Feb. that work of some type would be started on Astor Place in June, then August, now early Fall. I think many people are getting frustrated over not "seeing" anything done, only what is being said, and changed over and over again.

I am entirely for downtown development, but am disheartened by the lack of monthly progress that is in the open, or in the news, or being witnessed. I am sure the delays are all for good purpose, but delays are what loose the general population's support.

^^Right on. I just wish there was something I could do to help keep things moving, even a small part.

How do you guys feel about the proposed housing credits on the River Center project as well as the Broadway Terrace project?
I have heard a few of my neighbors gripe about how the low income will get to live it up on the wallet of the rest of us tax payers while bringing down the value of the rest of the property. I don't really see it this way at all, but there must be some partial truth the "rent assistance". I believe that there need to be a good mix of income ranges, however I don't like to see the property values reduced substantially.

Posted May 8, 2006 full Press Gazette article (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060508/GPG0101/605080498/1206/GPGnews)

Development shapes up along waterfront
By Andy Behrendt
abehrend@greenbaypressgazette.com

Downtown Green Bay's east-side waterfront already looks mighty different than it did a couple years ago. And the transformation along the Fox River isn't stopping anytime soon.

Plans are progressing for the towering Astor Place Condominiums, due to begin construction early in the fall on the site of Admiral Flatley Park, and the multifaceted River Center that will replace the old Younkers, albeit somewhat behind the original schedule as Vetter Denk gauges interest in the center's various components. The city's adjoining $12 million system of boardwalks is likely to start taking shape in 2007.

Meanwhile, more people are flowing back into the downtown thanks to other developments near completion: The first residents of Milwaukee-based Vetter Denk Architecture's Riverfront Lofts will move in this week, and more than 800 employees from APAC Customer Services in Allouez will be moving into the Baylake City Center early this summer. But the future of Washington Commons remains uncertain.

Astor Place Condominiums

What: 17-story, 95-unit condominium building, including three-story public marketplace

Who: Vetter Denk Architecture

Timeline: With terms approved by the City Council and with 41 units reserved, reservations will start becoming offers to purchase in the next two months. Construction is due to begin in early fall and complete in early 2008.

Financial impact: $33 million in property value

River Center

What: Complex of 110-room hotel with possible splash park, new Children's Museum of Green Bay, condominiums and rental lofts, riverfront retail and 60,000-plus square feet of commercial offices

Who: Vetter Denk Architecture

Timeline: The City Council approved terms in December. Construction start is undetermined, with completion eyed for sometime in 2008.

Financial impact: Undetermined, last figured at $48.5 million in property value. (The project will receive $7.5 million in federal affordable-housing tax credits.)

Riverfront Lofts

What: 26-unit condominium complex

Who: Vetter Denk Architecture

Timeline: Construction began in April2005. Of the 26 units, 25 are sold. Closings and move-ins will begin this week and be complete by early June.

Financial impact: $9.5 million in property value

Nicolet Center

What: Four-story, 81,000-square-foot office building; home to Nicolet National Bank and Aon Corp.

Who: Nicolet National Bank and Commercial Horizons, co-owners

Timeline: Construction began in May 2004 and was completed in September. Commercial Horizons will move in around June, Smith Barney at year's end.

Financial impact: $16 million in property value

RiverTower

What: Commercial tower with mostly offices and likely with condos and ground-level retail — the riverfront's most conceptual project, eyed as the city's tallest building

Who: Vetter Denk Architecture

Timeline: The city in March OK'd a one-year planning option for Vetter Denk to seek tenants for the "signature building," which at minimum must be 100 feet tall and $12 million in market value. Plans and timelines aren't defined.

Financial impact: Undetermined

Days Inn City Centre

What: Renovations to the 40-year-old hotel, including new exterior materials, remodeling in all 98 rooms and upgrades to the entrances, lobby, banquet rooms and pool area.

Who: Rashid Enterprises

Timeline: Originally the Beaumont Inn, the hotel began its first complete renovation about nine months ago. A second phase, fueled by $250,000 in a deal with the city, will include a new elevator, boiler and windows. The inn's restaurant may also open for daily lunches and dinners.

Financial impact: $1 million in total renovations

Washington Commons

What: Vacant, 450,000-square-foot mall

Who: Development Associates, owners

Timeline: The commons closed Feb. 27. With the owners seeking to sell the mall and adjoining J.C. Penney building, many consider the former downtown centerpiece to be the biggest redevelopment opportunity yet.

Financial impact: Property assessed at more than $4 million; Development Associates seek $8 million.

Baylake City Center/APAC Customer Services

What: Office-commercial redevelopment of the former Boston Store building

Who: Baylake Bank; APAC Customer Services and Smet Construction Corp.

Timeline: The City Center opened in June 2005. APAC will move in late June or early July due to fiber-optic delays. Leasing the 70,000-square-foot second floor, APAC will bring more than 800 jobs — eventually 1,000 — and bring the building to 80 percent occupancy.

Financial impact: With APAC, around $9 million in property value

Cherry Street ramp

What: 795-space parking ramp with 12,000 square feet of ground-level retail space at the corner

Who: City of Green Bay, Nicolet National Bank

Timeline: The ramp opened in August. The bank recently built a drive-through fronting North Washington Street. The city in February had arranged a $390,000 sale of the retail space to Commercial Horizons, whose interest has waned. Another buyer to lease out the space is possible.

Financial impact: Ramp was a $10 million project; retail space selling for $390,000

^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
Personally, I'm tired of subsidizing CEO's of large companies who make big salaries. Every time I make a purchase of a product their company produces I have to pay higher prices so they can get their fat paychecks.

In all seriousness though, I don't have a problem with lower income people having subsidized housing. It's my feeling that these are people that are trying to get ahead like everyone else. They may not have as well of a paying job because of educational limitations or hardship circumstances that many of us haven't experienced. All though the housing is subsidized are they not still required to purchase these housing units?

They also will probably get the least desirable units in the development. Low floors, no view, etc.

By Jeff Alexander From WBAY.com Story (http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=4881595)

People got their first look Tuesday afternoon at what would be Ashwaubenon's tallest building.

Development company SCM wants to build an eleven-story building at 821 Morris Avenue, between Oneida Street and Holmgren Way.

The complex would be a combination of retail space and condominiums and, as village president Nubs DeCleene sees it, the catalyst to start redeveloping the whole area around it.

"This area is 50s and 60s vintage buildings. You have Butler buildings... wrinkled tin or steel buildings, and they do have a lifetime of 20, 30 years, so that's all coming to an end, and now we have to be smart enough to move around and make sure we do it properly for the next 40, 50 years," DeCleene said.

A sketch shows what the village envisions for the area east of Lambeau Field and running from the Resch Center to Bay Park Square Mall. The concept of a walkway, called the Ashwaubenon Boulevard, is already approved and would link everything together.

DeCleene says there are a few zoning issues to iron out but he expects little opposition to this initial development. He calls it an incredible boost to the village's tax base.

A public hearing on the proposed development was scheduled for Tuesday night but the village says it didn't mail notices in time. A hearing on the eleven-story building will be held on Tuesday, May 23, at 7 p.m. instead.

DeCleene says if all goes well, construction will start next month.

I haven't seen the detailed plans of the Ashwaubenon boulevard walkway, but I like the concept, and I like what Ashwaubenon is doing. It's going to be great for the whole metro area.

Why is it though, when Ashwaubenon comes out of nowhere with proposals like this, they find ways to get started w/in a few months, while the city of GB talks and talks for years w/o much happening at all?

And what's the deal with that tower in Ashwaubenon right next to Hwy 172 and the Fox River? It was finished at least a year ago, but from what I can tell there's only one tenant so far (Merril Lynch I believe) occupying only a small part of the building? It's been mostly vacant for a long time now...brand new nice looking building...Was this building put up purely on speculation and if so by whom? And I recently learned there are plans for another similair taller bulding next door.

^^
Ashwaubenon seems to have can-do village leaders without the obstructionists that GB has.

While watching the Brewers get a 4-1 lead on the Padres tonight, I thought I'd take a few minutes away from the TV to relay some interesting reading I found in a book by Jonathan Barnett called "Redesigning Cities: Principles, Practice, Implmementation" (2003). This book seems to me to be pretty much dead-on accurate with a lot of things.

Chapter 11 is called "Keeping Downtowns Competitive".
It starts off with some real estate market analysis that concludes that: "...about a third of all U.S. households would like to live in a small town or rural area, if they could have what they wished. Another third prefers conventional suburban living. The remaining third would like to live in an urban community where it would be possible to walk to shops, restaurants, and entertainment. It is this third preference that is driving...the remarkable new interest in living in traditional downtowns"

The book goes on to describe what has happened to downtowns all across the U.S. (and the descriptions match Green Bay's problems almost 'to a T') in terms of the problems encountered over the years.

The book then discusses things that are being done to revive downtown areas (housing, tourist destination type things)....It sets the stage for a lot that I won't try to put on this thread,

The last part of this chapter was well-done and I thought I would post this here because it's what I think we see happening even here in little ol' Green Bay. This gives some hope, I think. Some of it is obvious but bear with this and read it to the end:

"Downtown's Competitive Advantage: It's a Real Place

" From the 1960s through the early 1980s..downtowns tried to compete with the suburban office parks and retail by being as much like the suburbs as possible. Urban streets were turned into pedestrian malls in imitation of early suburban shpping centers. As noted on page 190, in most cases, these towntown malls have been failures. Later, cities build indoor shopping malls in imitation of the big suburban retional shopping centers. This strategy has been somewhat more successful, but often created dead spots along the downtown streets, so that there was life inside the mall but not much urban activity around it. Old buildings were cleared to make parking lots, so that once you went off the main downtown streets, buildings became separate objects surrounded by parking. Smaller towns and cities gave up on their main streets...

Then in the 1980s the process began to turn around...Some of the change was created by cities merchandising their cultural and tourist destinations, and building convention and exhibition centers. Some of the success came from the great inventory of historic buildings in urban areas, which were finally recognised to be an asset and not an encumbrance preventing the highest and best use of the land. Cities becan to improve their quality as places: restoring old buildings, landscaping streets, fostering the arts and culture.

This revival of the traditional attractions of cities, originally motivated to bring in tourists and meeting participants, has lead to a change in the regional marketplace. The flats and warehouse districts in Cleveland prospered with some help from the city, but most of their success came from local entrepeneurs working with cheap real estate to create a restaurant and entertainment location that was more interesting and more fun, than going to to a place on the highway. Some of their business comes from downtown workers, visitors and convention goers, but suburbanites actually came into town after work to go there. In many other cities, entertainment and restaruant destinations have created a nightlife scene that draws people from the region to the downtown after work and on weekends.

Some of the people who come downtown for entertainment become interested in living there. A few urban pioneeers began living in converted warehouse...Soon loft-living downtown became a trend; now it is recognized in the real-estate category. When the developers run out of old buildings to convert they start building new ones (downtown).

With more bright, highly educated younger workers interesting in living dowtnown, some of the businesses that compete for them began to take another look at downtown office locations. The trend is well-established...

When there is strong business in the evening from downtown residents and people who come downtown after work, the food can be better than at the restarant near the mall or at the office park..Being able to walk from place to place is also an advantage usually found only downtown. If one restaurant has an hour-long wait, then what about the one next door?

The phenominon can be self-reinforcing: the more people come downtown for entertainment, culture , or food, the better these offerings can become. The more inviting the downtown scene, the more attracitve it is for offices and housing.

The salvation of downtown, it turns out, is not in being the dominant office market or in imitating malls. Much of the change in the last four decades is permanent. Competing office and retail centers in formerly suburban locations will only become more important. Building on downtown's unique advantages is their best chance for future prosperity: their central location, their compactness, their inventory of historic buildings, their variety and incident. Every cheap, older building can be an asset because it gives scope to entrepeneurs who can't afford to occupy a new structure.

Most of all, people are attracted to main streets and downtowns because they are real. They are the products of hundreds of decisions made over long periods of time, which create an ambiance almost impossible to duplicate even by the most imaginative themed developments. Downtowns are already real palces, and most of their competitors have a long way to go."


whew. This is my 100th post and it was a long one, huh? Now I'm going to go see how the Brewers are doing.

Great Post Puant!! That sounds like and excellent book.

Man was that a Sweet win by the Brewers tonight. El Cabello rocks.

That Ashwaubenon tower really blew me out of my seat when I heard about it. Ground Breaking in like a month!!!! They must have been working on this behind the scenes for some time. These project don't just pop up overnight. That whole Ashwaubenon concept is pretty cool, I kind of just never imagined that it would take off. I still think that 11 stories is going to be out of place in that area, but who knows maybe next week we will hear about another project in that area. Green Bay really needs to get off their ass and get something built. I don't have any stats, but I think GB is far behind the TIF % of Ashwaubenon. Stop nickel and diming everything :gaah: :goodnight

I’m convinced that Norbert DeCleene has no fear. Every couple months it seems like there’s another development proposal in Ashwaubenon. I’m sure a supportive board has a lot to do with it as well. My assumption is that since Ashwaubenon is land locked, they can’t grow their tax base by expanding outward so increasing the value of the current properties is the only option and all of the village leaders seem to understand that. There seems to be an overwhelming goal to get things done. They obviously have no problem with thinking big. The pedestrian walkway plan is just awesome. Hopefully the finished product is as cool as the idea. It’s funny, in comparing Ashwaubenon’s plan to the excerpt from Puant’s book regarding downtowns, you get the feeling that the Village is beating Green Bay at what should be its own game. Hopefully Green Bay will see this as a challenge and really think big in the downtown area east of Washington Street.

Is anyone concerned that the high rise condos and pedestrian-oriented development will lure potential residents and entertainment seekers away from the future downtown development? Right now Ashaubenon is more sports bar and chain restaurant oriented but this plan could possibly change that. Personally, I’d love to see two separate pedestrian friendly entertainment districts but I’m curious if anyone else has concerns about the area being able to support both.

BTW, (sorry, off topic) I went to the Brewers-Dodgers game on Sunday. There must be some rule that Milwaukee teams can’t perform when they play in LA. There’s nothing worse than getting decked out in your Wisconsin gear and watching the Brewers or Bucks get worked over in the visiting team’s stadium. Plus, on Sunday two of our boys (Sheets and Fielder) got hurt. Hopefully I get a different result when the Pack plays in SD and SF.

A while back someone posted things they would like to see built in downtown Green Bay. It ran the gambit from aquariums to water parks. Something I think would be interesting and enhance the downtown entertainment scene is if they could get Sundance Theaters to build downtown. http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=368302. They build theaters that feature indy and foreign films. Do you think Green Bay and Northeastern Wisconsin would support seeing these types of movies?

A while back someone posted things they would like to see built in downtown Green Bay.

They build theaters that feature indy and foreign films. Do you think Green Bay and Northeastern Wisconsin would support seeing these types of movies?

The Historic West Picture Show tried to have indy film showings but I never saw any promotion for it and don't know if they ever did. Personally, I'd love to have an indy theater in town but the market isn't here. Plus, you can now get the Independent Film Channel 24/7 on digital cable and satellite. If cable programming ever goes ala carte I'll pick it up.

I'm looking forward to the performance areas that the boardwalk will supposedly have. Hopefully theater and performing arts students from UWGB and St. Norbert might put together small plays, concerts and alternative theater works. Or maybe historical actors from Heritage Hill could make an occasional showing.

post deleted

Construction Update. :cheers1:

There is finally some earth moving equipment on site. This project was really hyped when they announced it.

Mayor Schmitt welcomes multi-million dollar corporation to the I-43 Business Center
August 3, 2004: City website (http://www.ci.green-bay.wi.us/geninfo/mayors_office/mayor_press_080304_o.html)

Green Bay… Last Wednesday, Marcus Theatres came before the City’s Economic Development Authority with a request to purchase some of that land and pursue the construction of this Office Village. Marcus Theatres is here today to share with us their vision for making their proposal a centerpiece in the I-43 Business Center. Marcus Theatres is a reputable firm with an impeccable track record, and more importantly the financial strength to make this plan a reality.

“We are thrilled that a brand new Marcus Theatre will become part of the I-43 Business Center. We believe this project epitomizes the city’s commitment to business and also our commitment to the economic vitality that new and expanding businesses bring to our community. The I-43 Business Center features an Office Village concept that includes a mix of retail, business, restaurants and entertainment. Until now, this concept has been only a proposal in our 20-year plan. I am proud to announce that the concept of an Office Village is here today,” Mayor Schmitt said.

“We are very pleased to become a part of the tremendous growth on the east side of Green Bay. The convenient location and combination of business, retail and entertainment in the Office Village will make it a very attractive destination for people from Green Bay and its surrounding communities,” said Bruce Olson, President of Marcus Theatres. “We look forward to expanding our presence in the Green Bay community and to serving area moviegoers with an exciting new theatre offering the latest amenities.”

“We believe that this project epitomizes the City’s commitment to business and also our commitment to the economic vitality that new and expanding businesses bring to our community,” Schmitt said.

...another fast track project in the City!! :hahaha:
Wonder if there are any additional componants planed for the "village"

Posted May 10, 2006 Link (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060510/GPG03/605100476/1247)
Richard Ryman/Press-Gazette

Groundbreaking set for new Marcus theater

Marcus Theatres Corp. has scheduled a groundbreaking for a new 12-screen theater in the I-43 Business Center for 10:30 a.m. May 25.

The theater will be all high-backed stadium seating. It will have digital sound, large curved screens, lobby entertainment on flat-screen monitors and self-service drinks. The theater will be on Kepler Drive, east of STS Consultants and south of Country Inn and Suites. A fall opening is planned.

Marcus owns and operates Marc Cinema, 1815 Main St., Green Bay, and Bay Park Cinema at Bay Park Square in Ashwaubenon.

Anyone have a pic of the tower in Ashwaubenon?

Anyone have a pic of the tower in Ashwaubenon?

I saw some renders on WBAY at the time the news was released, but they've taken the video off of their web site; only the story remains. So, I googled "SCM developer" and found what I think is the developer's web site...The company is based in Florida, I think...However I found no pics or any proposals for developments anywhere in Wisconsin. I also checked the Ashwaubenon web site, nothing there either.

I seem to remember from the TV newscast that the tower was rather large around (lots of 'girth'), stubby, almost squatty-looking--hardly a tower at 11 stories but still tall by the area's standards.

Anyone have a pic of the tower in Ashwaubenon?

I also saw the piece on WBAY but have not been able to locate a pic.

As far as the developer goes, it seem like a local operation and not the Flordia based SCM Development.

Here is a link (http://www.scmcompany.com/index.htm) to there web site. It mentions the project in Ashwaubenon but has very little details.

Oh yeah, it is a local developer. Cool. THis building will look nice along the pedestrian boulevard.

Here's today's P/G article about Ashwaubenon setting the height limits on buildings:

Growing up is a growing concern in Ashwaubenon

By Patti Zarling
pzarling@greenbaypressgazette.com

ASHWAUBENON — The sky might be the limit, but building heights still should be capped, village leaders say.

"We need to have something on the books," Ashwaubenon Village President Norbert DeCleene said.

Proposed restrictions call for a mix of two- or three-story buildings near residential homes, with heights of up to 20 stories in some business districts, including areas south of the Resch Center.

But while officials argue development has to go up since it can't spread out in that popular commercial district, some residents feel sky-high buildings will ruin the look and feel of the village.

"I think they did need a building heights committee," said Tom Urquhart, who lives several blocks from Lambeau Field on DuChateau Lane. "But for the life of me, I don't understand why they want to build 10 stories or more. My feeling for the village is that buildings should stay about the height of the Resch Center or the (Pioneer Credit Union) bank on Morris Avenue. They're all about five stories, and that seems to fit.

"You've got heavy residential not too far from that, and 10 or 11 stories would have a negative effect."

A year and a half ago, Urquhart helped organize a petition against a proposed five- to six-story sports-themed condo project on Ridge Road near Lambeau Field. The developer reduced the height to three stories, then backed out altogether.

In response to neighbors' complaints, village officials formed a Building Heights Committee to recommend parameters for maximum building heights throughout the village. The initial map now is making the rounds to various village committees and commissions for review. A final map, which would need the approval of the Village Board, should be complete sometime this summer.

Patricia Neumann, who has lived on True Lane since 1964, agrees 10 or 20 stories is too much for the village.

"I think six stories is enough," she said. "What if only one comes in? It wouldn't flow with the rest of the village and would stick out like a sore thumb."

She also raised concern about fire safety.

Public safety director Gary Wieczorek said fire trucks in general are built to accommodate a maximum of five to six stories. After that, a different type of firefighting is used, he said. In addition, taller buildings must be built with stairwells on each end, special sprinkler systems, and other fire safety measures.

"Green Bay does it all the time," Wieczorek said. Village public safety officials already have gone through some of the training and will do more, he said. Training is estimated to cost less than $10,000.

DeCleene said village leaders will keep residents' concerns in mind as they put together the new map. He also cautioned the rendering is just a proposal.

"We don't want to panic people," he said.

At the same time, the village should have guidelines for building heights, he said, and he also expects buildings in the area south of the Resch Center and north of Bay Park Square mall, the home of a proposed Ashwaubenon Boulevard, will be allowed to go higher.

In fact, a proposed 11-story condo/retail complex on Morris Avenue currently is winding its way through the village approval process.

"I think it's an important area," DeCleene said. "With property values high, in order to get the bang for the buck people are going to build up. They can't go down."

The map would serve as a guideline, DeCleene said, and developers would be allowed to ask the Village Board for variations. The proposed 11-story Morris Avenue project, for example, exceeds the 10-story recommendation made in the original building heights recommendation.

One businessman in the proposed Ashwaubenon Boulevard district applauds setting building heights requirements.

"With the potential development that's going to be happening, it needs to be done," said Mark Williams, who owns Williams Auto Body Inc., 825 Potts Ave., and is also a village trustee.

A member of the village's Economic Development Committee, Williams said that panel agreed with most of the map, but would like to see stricter building height limits near Ashwaubenon High School.

"I don't think you want 10-story buildings there and to turn it into an urbanized area," he said.

Overall, though, he supports the concept.

"In talking to different developers, the cost per square foot is going up and we have to make it more dense," Williams said of the area surrounding his business. "That's what I've been hearing.

"As for Ashwaubenon, we're trying to be proactive rather than reactive to potential development coming down the road."

It makes sense, he said, to create greater density at the heart of the commercial district, with shorter buildings buffering residential areas.

Why is it though, when Ashwaubenon comes out of nowhere with proposals like this, they find ways to get started w/in a few months, while the city of GB talks and talks for years w/o much happening at all?

As far as the Ashwaubenon building, I heard this being kicked around last year - so it has been in the works for some time. As far as starting construction next month. I will believe it when I see it. Am I to believe that the rules don't apply in the Village of Ashwaubenon? Has anyone seen this being marketed yet? I'm assuming since it has a number of condos that they would have to pre-sell a certain percentage to secure financing. Plus, there is the site plan process and all of the other ordinances such as stormwater and what not that this will need to meet. Have they done this yet? Maybe. But before zoning approval??? Plus, think of the views. I'm sure the Lambeau views will sell out first, but what about the east views. Wow, I get to look at GP and two giant smokestacks with a bunch of metal buildings and truck trailers parked on the ground. I know there are changes in store for the area, but who in their right mind will drop $500k on that view. Again, it goes back to marketing. If we can't even find a rendering on the project (except for the one shown on the news), let alone prices, number of units, square footage, retail tenant spaces, etc, etc we are supposed to believe that this developer can finance this entire building before any of that happens? If that is true, then after this project goes - the Green Bay City Leaders will need to talk to this group. I think the one month time table is a little unrealistic. Do I see this happening? Yes, but maybe closer to the end of the year. And by that time Astor Place will just be getting started.

No one in their right mind would drop 500K for a Lambeau view, but you know how some of those old jocks are! "Hey honey, check it out. Weez got ourselves a view of da frozen tundra. Weez cool...ain't we?" I will believe it when I see it too. A tower that size breaking ground before Astor Place would be a slap in the face to Green Bay. And you are right, I have not heard anything about condos for sale in that area. They had better be reasonably priced, or they will never sell. Astor Place proves that!

Just remember what happened bewteen the United States and the Soviet Union in the late 50's through the 60's, a little thing called the Space Race. Maybe we can have the "Condo Tower Race" happening between Green Bay and Ashwaubenon. Then maybe we'll actually get to "see" some progress, instead of paper trails.

Has anyone happened to check out the prices of Astor Place lately? It sure seems to me like they keep going up. And what ever happened to the June construction start? I realize that Washington St. needs to be straightened before anything happens, but come on, can it take any longer.

As far as Ashwaubenon goes, the GB metro is sooooooo small, it is hardly a race. It is a joke that some people even would think it is like competing. That is the underlying problem in this area, people always conceive it to be Howard vs Green Bay or Ashwaubenon vs Green Bay, when in actuality Howard, Ashwaubenon, etc.. is Green Bay with more levels of government, I cannot believe that one single person that is not from the area is going to give a rats ass about it. People need to stop thinking locally and move on.

Also it seems to me that instead of one large 10+ story building, the area would be better suited to have several 3-5 story pedestrian scale buildings. The Ashwaubenon concept is a great idea on paper but until I see people buying into the idea we will probably get more of the same, auto friendly developments.

i'm kind of glad that Green Bay takes there time a little bit with big development projects. i wait the waiting but in the long run it works out better. we could be like ashwaubenon and rush to put up a 6 story office building on the riverfront and only hat one tenant for the first 3 years. and their doing it again, building class A office space without trying to find more then one tenant. look at Nicole National Bank. been completed for what, 9 months and already have commitments to tenants to be at 95% capacity by the years end. i know it sucks ass to be waiting and waiting and waiting but just wait until they do get those building downtown and how much of a hit they are upon completion. i do agree with you though i am longing the day that i hear of a demo team at the old younkers building tearing away at the biggest eyesore since green carpet.

Also, has anyone seen anysites for rivercenter. i can't believe that it isn't being marketeed yet, but i suppose it's a 2 year project. and also did u hear that the boardwalk isn't going to be done all at once. the last i heard it's going to be done in phases to be only completed as the riverfront building are completed. anyway please share anything new if you have anything.

It is a joke that some people even would think it is like competing. That is the underlying problem in this area, people always conceive it to be Howard vs Green Bay or Ashwaubenon vs Green Bay, when in actuality Howard, Ashwaubenon, etc.. is Green Bay with more levels of government, I cannot believe that one single person that is not from the area is going to give a rats ass about it. People need to stop thinking locally and move on.

Excellent point. People should be thinking regionally and working together to advance the region. And not just Green Bay and Howard, Ashwaubenon, De Pere, etc.; but, also the Fox Cities. Just think of the flights you would have out of the Valley if Green Bay and Appleton had built an airport midway between the two cities instead of each having a small airport. You would most likely have non-stop flights to New York, Denver and other cities you currently don't. All for an extra ten minutes drive to somewhere around the Wrightstown area you could have eliminated those 2, 3 hour layovers.

I'd like to weigh in on a couple of recent topics:

As for the tall buildings proposed in Ashwaubenon:
First, a tall building amongst shorter buildings doesn't necessarily "stick out like a sore thumb" as some have suggested...I know it's almost cliche to bring this guy up, but he is a master visionary: Frank Lloyd Wright's ideas for skyscrapers were that they should be in open green space. He felt that skyscrapers grouped together were nothing less than evil--though inspiring, economical, and desireable, they could end up being menacing to people on the streets--engulfing them in dark sunless caverns. FLW felt that towers should be built in open spaces where it would not increase congestion but rather stand free. Buildings like the Johnson Laboratory in Racine and H.C. Price Company tower in Oklahoma were designed by FLW and stood out in open space. He called these towers "trees that escaped the crowded forest". Yeah yeah, I know..what else did I learn from Architecture 101? What's new? Read on...

Second, regarding why people might like to live in a condo tower in Ashwaubenon or anywere else for that matter:
It's not all about the view, necessarily. Few people would shell out that kind of jack just for a view of the almightly Lambeau Field!!! The desireability of a condo tower has more to do with the efficiency of living than view alone. The ability to walk from place to place: restaurants, things to do w/in walking distance. The pedestrian walkway in Ashwaubenon where the tower(s) are being proposed are designed to provide that walkable, liveable, densly urban community amenities are offered close-by. Same goes for the condo towers in downton Green Bay or any other city for that matter; the views may be nice but it's about a lot mroe than that: SOme people simply like to live in a place where they can walk to the YMCA, then to the library, to work, to restaurants, etc. I assume many of the people who have already reserved half of the Astor Place condo are those types of people: bankers, lawyers, etc who work downtown and can walk to work and all sorts of other places; yes, they also have the beneift of the views of the water but that's not necessarily the biggest attraction; if it were, why aren't there condo towers lined all up and down the Bay of Green Bay in Suamico and Scott? The views of the water would be much more spectacular there. And look at condo towers in other cities: Many of these have views only of another tower next door, yet they sell because a significant segment of the population likes the urban living experience.

As for the metro area competing:
I have to believe that there is some competition between the munis in the metro area. I've heard the leaders from Ashwaubenon, DePere, and Howard comment on how they've been the benefactors of Green Bay choking on and eventually caughing up businesses to them. The metro areas have been able to take tens of millions of dollars of tax money from the core city by being competitive. Look at the Oneida St. area, all of the businesses that located there rather than dysfunctional GB. Same goes for AMS who wanted to put their 40 million dollar building downtown GB but political wranglign chased them off to the 'burbs. The suburbs have not necessarily actively competed but they've gotten a lot simply by default. But you're right we should be working more as a community rather than separate entities, ideally.

To wrap up another long post , I would like to say that I'd like to see the core development (tall towers) built on the waterfront in dowtntown Green Bay rather than any of the suburbs, GBsurveyor and others are right--let the suburban buildings be more pedestrian friendly and less obnoxious. I don't think downtown GB is going to have many 'urban canyons' with too many skyscrapers anytime soon so I don't think that's going to be a problem here. I'm not sure I agree with FLW in building towers in the middle of nowhere...I'd rather see at least a few choice landmark towers built where they make sense; that is, in an urban core area like downtown GB where going up makes economic sense.

Excellent point. People should be thinking regionally and working together to advance the region. And not just Green Bay and Howard, Ashwaubenon, De Pere, etc.; but, also the Fox Cities. Just think of the flights you would have out of the Valley if Green Bay and Appleton had built an airport midway between the two cities instead of each having a small airport. You would most likely have non-stop flights to New York, Denver and other cities you currently don't. All for an extra ten minutes drive to somewhere around the Wrightstown area you could have eliminated those 2, 3 hour layovers.

The whole airport thing really touches a nerve. It is totally absurd that there are 2 airports within 30 mile that basically duplicate each other. Both airports within the last few years have expanded. If even one would of closed that would probably put the other one #2 in wisconsin, behind mke. I wonder if over time you will eventually see one overtake the other and eventually merge??? One time on a connecting flight from Detroit the GRB and ATW flights got combined and the plane flew into ATW unloaded and then flew like 5 minutes to GRB...frustrating. At least GRB is becoming more convenient and modern, on NWA they have replaced many of the DC9's with A319, along with an additional direct flight to Dallas, Atlanta and Vegas...Wooooohoooooo and we are International you know. :hahaha:

...Wooooohoooooo and we are International you know. :hahaha:

I've always wondered about the "international" status of Austin Straubel airport--What, is there a puddle jumper flight to Canada or something to get that status? How do they get that designation? "Austin Straubel, International Airport of Mystery"

i'm kind of glad that Green Bay takes there time a little bit with big development projects. i wait the waiting but in the long run it works out better. we could be like ashwaubenon and rush to put up a 6 story office building on the riverfront and only hat one tenant for the first 3 years. and their doing it again, building class A office space without trying to find more then one tenant. look at Nicole National Bank. been completed for what, 9 months and already have commitments to tenants to be at 95% capacity by the years end. i know it sucks ass to be waiting and waiting and waiting but just wait until they do get those building downtown and how much of a hit they are upon completion. i do agree with you though i am longing the day that i hear of a demo team at the old younkers building tearing away at the biggest eyesore since green carpet.

Also, has anyone seen anysites for rivercenter. i can't believe that it isn't being marketeed yet, but i suppose it's a 2 year project. and also did u hear that the boardwalk isn't going to be done all at once. the last i heard it's going to be done in phases to be only completed as the riverfront building are completed. anyway please share anything new if you have anything.

I agree totally, that development just north of 172 just really cracks me up, they put up that office 'tower' and then build like a suburban style 6-plex or whatever they call it. I don't know where they get the financing for these projects.

I have been looking for any info regarding the Rivercenter and havn't been able to find much. I did run into a wheda website ( link (http://www.wheda.com/cat_tca/2006_lihtc_approved_applicants.pdf)- Appl #5162) where they were awarded $750,000 of credits.

That same web site also list the Broadway Terrace Enterprise Lofts (Appl #5113) as 'on-hold'

Something else in the news:
Green Bay Looks to Expand Bay Beach
May 18, 2006 05:38 PM CDT

A popular summer destination is looking to expand. Green Bay city officials tell Action 2 News they're hiring a consultant to develop a plan that could double the size of Bay Beach.

We're also told the city has been buying land to the west of the park in hopes of developing it.

The expansion would be paid for with both private and public funds.

Bay Beach Amusement Park is now open on weekends. Its summer season begins Memorial Day weekend, when the park will be open every day through the summer.

***********************
By the way, I found an old plan (1987/88) for Renard Island--Remember we discussed this before on the first thread? IN this plan, they considered Renard Island to be polluted, yes, but not to the extent where it would be too toxic for use as a park and wildlife area. The thing was to be capped with clean soil at least 2 feet thick. It also discussed capping with impermeable clay or something that would prevent exposure to the polluted soil beneath. The plan called for a causeway to connect the island to Bay Beach, and the island to be used for public use as either a marina and/or park.

I'm not sure how exactly this island changed from a place where, " yeah, it had some pollution but was still use-able" to, 20 years later, "oh my god, a glowing, green toxic place worse than Chernobyl where anyone who so much as set foot on it would immediately grow a new brain tumor!! aaahhh!!"

That the whole thing even exists is sad, backwards, ridiculous but are we being overly cautious here? I mean, the whole river and bay are just as polluted as this island, and there's no capping or protection on the water as there is on this island. Yet we all fish, swim, and live near the water and don't think much about it (maybe our tumors cloud our judgement?)

Regarding "international" airport. It has nothing to do with international commercial flights. It just means that there are US Customs agents located at the airport.

Also, has anyone seen anysites for rivercenter. i can't believe that it isn't being marketeed yet, but i suppose it's a 2 year project. and also did u hear that the boardwalk isn't going to be done all at once. the last i heard it's going to be done in phases to be only completed as the riverfront building are completed. anyway please share anything new if you have anything.

It seems a bit odd to me as well that they haven't marketed River Center (at least not publicly) yet. I wouldn't count on any action there until early 2008 at the earliest.

And roots, your understanding of the boardwalk is, as far as I know, correct. It will be built in phases as the TIF funding from the buildings along the river comes online.

I've always wondered about the "international" status of Austin Straubel airport--What, is there a puddle jumper flight to Canada or something to get that status? How do they get that designation? "Austin Straubel, International Airport of Mystery"
Actually, an airport, regardless of the city size around it, can be deemed "international" if the runway exceeds a certain length; in order to accomodate larger birds.

I totally agree with having one regional airport. I just came back from Florida where I decided to drive down to Milwaukee and fly to Ft. Lauderdale on AirTran. That was very cheap, $169 RT. I really wish the Green Bay Metro would act like the year 2006 and not be so dang conservative on building up! I can't believe how many skyscrapers I saw being built between West Palm Beach and Miami. Just hundreds of high rises going up. Pic below pretty much sums up Miami is booming. If it wasn't for the 2 airports in the metro they would be challenging Chicago for height. Some of the new proposals are over 1,000 ft now and I believe the FAA is shooting it down for airspace to the runways. Ashwaubenon is way to conservative. I remember when they shot down the idea of a parking ramp at Bay Park Square. It is is way too dangerous. What are they going to do in the future with no place to park? I am glad to hear about Bay Beach. As for Astor Place....I will believe it when I see it we ever get a new tallest.

http://www.miami.com/images/miami/miamiherald/14434/208343819160.jpg

I totally agree with having one regional airport. I just came back from Florida where I decided to drive down to Milwaukee and fly to Ft. Lauderdale on AirTran. That was very cheap, $169 RT. I really wish the Green Bay Metro would act like the year 2006 and not be so dang conservative on building up! I can't believe how many skyscrapers I saw being built between West Palm Beach and Miami. Just hundreds of high rises going up. Pic below pretty much sums up Miami is booming. If it wasn't for the 2 airports in the metro they would be challenging Chicago for height. Some of the new proposals are over 1,000 ft now and I believe the FAA is shooting it down for airspace to the runways. Ashwaubenon is way to conservative. I remember when they shot down the idea of a parking ramp at Bay Park Square. It is is way too dangerous. What are they going to do in the future with no place to park? I am glad to hear about Bay Beach. As for Astor Place....I will believe it when I see it we ever get a new tallest.



airtran is a great service. i know people in the airtran business. Green bay really needs to start winning over the citizens appreciation for a downtown. I think for GB, once the tower is built the people in your metro will begin to see what a downtown represents, and not just a deserted urban core of buildings. I can not say a whole lot for your city....I have not been updated on the development news as of late, but i will say GB needs to start attracting people to its downtown (as in large events, parks, riverwalks, boat rides, ect). I almost wish that green bay could have boomed faster then appleton in the 1900s to establish a greater population, but it continues to increase for you guys which is a positive. I must not look at the what-ifs and should start looking at the "what could be" in the future for this city. GB is not going to flip itself over in a nights rest, but eventually wisconsin will have its 3rd strong cored downtown. give 'er time!!

With all these new articles and rankings coming out showing how capable the city is, one would imagine some type of boom will take place.
("best place to do business in" type of articles)

AH Yes Titletown... You see what happens when you run out of land. Instead of sprawl you get very dense developments. The Atlantic and the Everglades create a nice narrow strip from south Miami all the way past West Palm Beach. I guess that the weather doesn't hurt them much either. South Florida Rocks...and from what I remember they have at least 3 major airports, I have flown into Palm Beach (PBI) and Fort Laurdale (FLL) and I know that Miami also has one.

Is that smog in Miami? Miami doesn't have smog, with all those sandy beaches, palm trees, fake body parts does it? Density alone does not equal a livable city.
Be happy Green Bay is moving slowly.

A rehabbed mall, and extensive riverwalk, marketed as an outdoor destination - gateway to the Bay- few publicity photos with out-of-town NFL players catching large trophy fish, Green Bay will come around.

AH Yes Titletown... You see what happens when you run out of land. Instead of sprawl you get very dense developments. The Atlantic and the Everglades create a nice narrow strip from south Miami all the way past West Palm Beach. I guess that the weather doesn't hurt them much either. South Florida Rocks...and from what I remember they have at least 3 major airports, I have flown into Palm Beach (PBI) and Fort Laurdale (FLL) and I know that Miami also has one.

The flight into Miami is incredible, amazing views of the city.

airtran is a great service. i know people in the airtran business. Green bay really needs to start winning over the citizens appreciation for a downtown. I think for GB, once the tower is built the people in your metro will begin to see what a downtown represents, and not just a deserted urban core of buildings. I can not say a whole lot for your city....I have not been updated on the development news as of late, but i will say GB needs to start attracting people to its downtown (as in large events, parks, riverwalks, boat rides, ect). I almost wish that green bay could have boomed faster then appleton in the 1900s to establish a greater population, but it continues to increase for you guys which is a positive. I must not look at the what-ifs and should start looking at the "what could be" in the future for this city. GB is not going to flip itself over in a nights rest, but eventually wisconsin will have its 3rd strong cored downtown. give 'er time!!

With all these new articles and rankings coming out showing how capable the city is, one would imagine some type of boom will take place.
("best place to do business in" type of articles)

Currently, IMHO I think Wisonsin's third most impressive downtown is Racine. If you go out on whatever pier that is and look at Racin'e skyline, it looks really impressive. I didn't have my camera with me at the time, but plan on taking a few pictues and posting them sometime this Summer. Now once these GreenBay riverfront projects are complete, then there will be no question that Green Bay will have Wisconsin's #3 downtown.

Step 1 in this good web site uses a famous Racine building as an illustration:

http://www.cr.nps.gov/hps/tps/walkthrough/step1_intro.htm

Currently, IMHO I think Wisonsin's third most impressive downtown is Racine. If you go out on whatever pier that is and look at Racin'e skyline, it looks really impressive. I didn't have my camera with me at the time, but plan on taking a few pictues and posting them sometime this Summer. Now once these GreenBay riverfront projects are complete, then there will be no question that Green Bay will have Wisconsin's #3 downtown.


yeah, racine is overlooked quite a bit, its gritty, dense, and has its own lakefront thing going on now.

Step 1 in this good web site uses a famous Racine building as an illustration:

http://www.cr.nps.gov/hps/tps/walkthrough/step1_intro.htm

I get a security violation page showing up with that link. (I'm at home and don't have any unusual security policies set on my computer.)

I get a security violation page showing up with that link. (I'm at home and don't have any unusual security policies set on my computer.)

Try this link, then "Start":
http://www.cr.nps.gov/hps/tps/walkthrough/index.htm

The new, big-ass parking structure on Washington has been finished for a while now, but I'm a little disappointed that they have not sold/finished more of the street-level retail spaces. Something's gotta go in there, right now it looks pretty bad at the street level.

I was hoping a subway, starbucks (or better yet Joe to Go) would locate there...

What do you think would work here?

I always thought that Subway would have opened there after the demise of the mall. A while back I seem to recall there was 2 prospectant tenants lined up, but that must have fell apart. There just doesn't seem to be enough traffic to support anything other then the few bars and restaurants there already. From what I observe it seems fairly busy from like 7:30-9, then again like 11:30 to 1 and 3:30-5, but after those hours it is like a ghost town.

I will safely say that the majority of people in this metro would prefer to drive over to Oneida St. and choose from the many restaurants and shopping opportunities available and until there is something more unique err 'chic' in downtown I think it will stay that way for awhile.

I saw a brief piece on WBAY at 6 about the Meyer and their plans for the Daily Planet building, possibly an announcement within the next 2 months. This has been brought up before and still no announcement.

Anyway to answer you question:

I totally agree that it really need to get filled in. I would prefer to have tenants lined up, but I say built it and they will come.
I think that any fast food type joint would work (bar crowd included), maybe a qdoba's
Starbucks would be huge, but I don't see that happening...yet
It would be nice if the sidewalks were quite a bit wider there to allow for more outdoor seating, alway a big hit in most metros.
I always thought that having the food vendor carts were great, then the City chased them all out....... just my :2cents:

Just for fun, these are Qdoba's guidelines for obtaing a franchise, they seem to be fairly standard industry wide. Woud downtown support some or any of these guides?

Site Guidelines

High visibility end-cap and freestanding locations between 2200 and 2400 square feet. Smaller spaces can be considered on an exception basis and will be evaluated based on business day part analysis and ability to augment interior seating with patio or food court style seating.
In-line locations only considered with distinguishing architectural features, exceptionally strong co-tenancy or urban, high density demographics.
Maximum of 100 feet from main traffic road or primary entrance into the shopping center.
Minimum frontage of 30 feet at a maximum depth of 80 feet.
High concentration of daytime population with a target of 10, 000 or greater within a one mile radius.
Residential population target of 15,000 or greater within a one mile radius.
Median household income in the top 30% for the MSA
Per capita income 20% greater than MSA average.
Prefer power retail generators as co-tenants including large or high end grocery and general merchandise, multi-plex movie theaters, “Lifestyle” centers and select Malls.
Minimum 30,000 daily vehicle counts on primary traffic leg.
Maximum signage and trade dress as allowed by local code with ability to secure tenant panel on common pylon/monument sign.
Must have exclusivity in the Mexican, fast casual category, for the shopping center or mall
Must have the ability to obtain beer and wine license within the development.

Was it commercial horizons that was going to buy that space to lease? Whoever it was, the deal feel through and as far as I know the city needs to find someone to buy the space who will then turn around and lease it, as the city isn't in the business of leasing retail space. I'm guessing that the retail market isn't super strong downtown right now, so potential buyers for the space are hard to find. Hopefully when there is more residential in the area those ramp spaces will become more attractive.

To your questions, I'd LOVE to see the Attic Coffee and Books move in from just off Main St. Not that they aren't fine where they are, but I love that place and would enjoy being able to go there and people watch with my drink. I'd bet the used books would be a hit with the folks moving into the condos too. Subway would be okay, but I'm not sure we need two sub shops on Washington St. Is there any Mexican right downtown? That might be nice. I'll bet people living down there would enjoy a small convenience store to walk to. Maybe some sort of grab 'n go food that people visiting the boardwalk would use. How cool would it be to have a window out to the sidewalk from where you could get ice cream or pastries, crepes in the fall/winter...or donuts! Mmmm...donuts....

So here we are, still waiting for the waterfront developments to be the catalyst to help pull some of these other things such as this ramp retail and Adams Street together. We wait some more...until that happens a lot of other things are in limbo.

GOOD NEWS, I think:
They vacated the street where part of the boardwalk will go, and there are excavators and other equipment there, digging. I don't know exactly what this means, but it looks like something. And, the final CSM went through to straighten out Washington Street where it connects to Main, making way for Astor Place. Looks like the city pretty much stopped taking care of Flately Park, they must figure it's about to start happening. There are utility markers all over the lawn...

Sentiments to the old tree: I gave that big old tree in Flatley Park a little pat today, and said sorry to see it go, but all in the name of progress. It made me think some more about how and why we need to create new park space somewhere else nearby to replace this...I still believe that part of the mall site is perfect. Sorry to say I have not won the lottery and thus cannot buy the mall and build my dream.

Any word on the status of the Ray & Joan Kroc Community Center? Last I heard GB raised the money to qualify for this Salvation Army donation. They mentioned they were going to break ground as early as this summer and open Early 2008.

I think the downtown needs a uniqueness that is outside of the norm of Oneida St., Appleton, etc. I notice that everything Green Bay gets, Appleton seems to mirror, and vice versa. One VERY UNIQUE chain that would be great in the downtown parking ramp right on the corner would be a Rainforest Cafe. http://www.rainforestcafe.com/ I don't think it would move in as a trailblazer, but would wait for more development. However, I think it would be a hit not only for its unique dining experience, decor, and facade, but also would be a great tie-in with the new and improved Children's Museum that is slated to go into River Center. I can hear all the kids now "Mom and dad let's go to the rainforest cafe, please please please...." :)

I really like this idea. But I think we should put necessity before luxury. There is a grocery chain called "Trader Joes" that is quite unique and has a maritime theme. TJ's are all over D.C., where I reside, and will soon be in Madison. They are not low price, but they are very comparable to other stores and shopping there if acutally fun; no warehouse feel. A store like this would serve as an anchor for other unique stores, or lesser know companies, like Caribou coffee. For a Rainforest cafe GB would need massive mobs of people; but thinking big is good :) Check them out at TraderJoes.com
I do not work for Trader Joes, nor am I affiliated with them in any way, shape or form.

There's something about Trader Joes that, even though it's just a grocery store, people seem to rave about that place. It's a little funkier than your average grocery so it seems like it would fit in in the downtown area but if I remember correctly there's a market going in at Astor Place. I think TJs would work well in the Broadway area. Qdoba is awesome. The queso burrito rocks. That would be a big draw. I've never been to a Qdoba that wasn't continually packed. I also really like the Attic idea. When downtown comes around and the popluation down there spikes, that place would do really well. I think a dry cleaner would do good business there. It's definitely not as cool as having a book store or coffee shop but it would be useful for the residents and those who work in the area and would promote some foot traffic. Is anyone familiar with boba? It's a tea-based drink with tapioca balls in it. Sounds strange but I'm hooked. Some boba places out here do very well although something like that would have some trouble competing with a coffee shop. A coffee/boba place would have my repeat business.

In regards to the Astor place market, I am not sure that it is set in stone. The only tenant committed is A' bravo cafe. I have never been to a Trader Joes, but I have checked out the website quite extensively. I think that TJ would fit in great in either Astor place or River Center.

As far as Rainforest Cafe goes, There are enough people around here, the hard part is getting them to patronize downtown.

What I love about the DC area is the housing density and the variety of housing options, obviously no comparison to GB what so ever but If some one could develop some 'nice' and not extraordinary housing downtown, people would 'buy-in'. I will not drop $200k for 1100sf pad.

There are some very decent housing options in DC, if you have the money. The new trend out here is "starter castles." People who have seen great market appreciation over the past 3 or 4 years are taking their small ranches and sometimes tripling them in size to raise the price even higher in order to sell. It got so bad in Bethesda that the city passed a law prohibiting existing houses from being expanded past a certain amount of square feet. Since the market is so flooded here, these houses sell. And I hate to sound negative, but it looks like Vetter might be doing the same thing with Astor Place. I have a unit reserved there, but I don't think the project will ever break ground. Astor Place is a "starter castle" for Green Bay and I believe people will not spend that much money on uncertainty. The downtown lofts are a good start, and we should have more buildings that size to fatten up downtown, then it will be time for a 17 story building. Right now the "metro" area is way too small and it will take a very long time to develop. Yet I linger on to the impossible dream of seeing downtown GB succeed. Interest rates aren't helping and prices at AP will have to come down to make this project a go. Hell yes, Trader Joes would bring people downtown and would be a perfect catalyst for downtown growth.

I saw a brief piece on WBAY at 6 about the Meyer and their plans for the Daily Planet , possibly an announcement within the next 2 months. This has been brought up before and still no announcement.


What did the news say about this? I heard there are big plans for the daily planet site, as in big and even TALL (rivaling the Bellin Building in height).

We've kicked around a lot of the not-so-good things in the past few days, but lets also remember there are still good things happening too. Take the Meyer Theater for example, from what I can tell that place is doing great and it's starting to book some very solid shows.

Also take for example the Nicolet Bank building: The thing is pretty much full now. This seems to prove that IF someone is willing to build a good, first-class, high-architecture type building, the tenants will come. All too often someone tries something stupid like putting offices in that crappy downtown mall, and when that fails all of the naysayers say "See, I told you, downtown is dead!". But this Nicolet building should be a counterpoint to say, no, "if you build it properly they will come!".

What other good news is there? The weather is nice...lots of people out and about, at least at lunchtime.

I was dreaming about my restaurant at 109 N. Adams again today...I peeked in the windows at lunchtime, man that would be a cool place if done up right....Then after work I saw a bunch of guys scoping out the place, seemed like they were seriously considering or planning something. I hope so, so I can stop thinking about it...

The old building might not be a gleaming new beauty, but it's location is good, the historical aspects are cool, the layout of the interior would work very very well for both "quick pick-up" type breakfast/lunch/coffee, or for sit-down...the fireplace, windows add ambiance (sun shines in in AM) and the overall layout would be perfect for a restaurant downstairs, with perhaps an office up and/or apartment lofts (just like what was proposed for Adams St. Station).

These pictures don't do it justice, but here are some pics I took of this old building a while back:
http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/images/109_N_Adams_Entrance-Stairway_interior.jpg
http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/images/109_N_Adams_windows_looking_Out.jpg http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/images/109_N_Adams_Fireplace.jpg http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/images/109_N_Adams_Street_Exterior.jpg

What did the news say about this? I heard there are big plans for the daily planet site, as in big and even TALL (rivaling the Bellin Building in height).
They offered no details about what is planned other then something is planned. It also mentioned that this coming season was going to have less theatre and more music/comedy.


Tonight at 6 again on WBAY they mentioned that the demolition of the Younkers building has been delayed, but this time for a good reason...sounds hopefull here is the piece (link (http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=4951826) to wbay.com)

Younkers Store Demolition Delayed

May 25, 2006 05:59 PM CDT

By Jason Allen

The long-awaited facelift of Green Bay's downtown waterfront is going to have to wait a little longer.

The empty Younkers building was scheduled, under the original terms, to see its last days by next week.

The city still has to buy some land from the neighboring Days Inn hotel, take the curve out of the adjacent Washington Street, and have the power company move a bunch of major utility boxes. The work is at least a month off.

The larger delay, though, is because of plans for the building itself -- a multi-purpose River Center -- is receiving enough interest from potential tenants that the city and developers want more time at the drawing board.

"You only have one chance to do these types of projects," Allison Swanson of Green Bay Economic Development said, "and we're talking about very significant projects that alter Green Bay's skyline for the rest of our time here."

The developer of the riverfront sites says he's looking at them comprehensively now, trying to figure out which tenants would be best off in which buildings, including the tower planned to be built on a parking lot.

When all of this riverfront development is finally finished, it isn't just a new face for the city, it's a new very public position for any business that decide to set up here. City leaders say with that considered, any sort of a slow down to get things right is in no way a setback.

The Meyer is great. With Frank's coming down there, and some of the other events they are booking, that place is going to be brining in people all the time (to the tune of 250 nights and 150,000 people a year). Almost by chance, I think the Mayer is better positioned than the Weidner (obviously) or the PAC. It's smaller size and more affordable entertainment seems to fill an entertainment niche with less competition than the larger Theaters. I know it struggled at first, but with the new management and a LOT more dates hopefully it will be a big success... seems to be on the right track.

Great pics from the Schauer and Schumacher building. I've been in there once too and it is really nice. Just beautiful woodwork and nice big windows, a real jem. The upper floors would make for great lofts with wood floors and the old brick walls. It's a very cool atmosphere and I hope someone will put it to good use.

Interesting about Younkers. I always thought it was odd that they never started marketing the River Center space, and this could be one explanation as to why. I guess one advantage of having one person develop all those properties is that you can plan for appropriate and complimentary use at all of them more easily. I still hope the Site 4 building can bring a bit of architectural diversity to the riverfront, but we'll see.

I know I need to be patient and that development takes time, but man I want to see action along the river. Even straightening Washington St and moving the utilities will be good to see.

Finally, I couldn't agree more about the Nicolet Bank and other signs of progress. When you look at all the development in the downtown, its hard to make a case that things aren't getting a lot better. Problem is, of course, the mall and past riverfront proposals that fell through have created a lot of skeptics. I think Astor Place is the key. When that starts rising it will be impossible to ignore.

One idea as far as green space is concerned would be to turn the street level parking lot in fornt of the Baylake Bank Building into a town square type park. It could have a wide walkway connecting the building to the Cherry St. Parking Ramp, and include several bushes/trees, benches, a central fountain, etc. It seems to be a central location surrounded by both new construction, and turn of the century buildings. I could envision people eating lunches out there, enjoying break-times, etc. It would be a compliment to the boardwalk area, but have a town square feeling.

As far as the news about postponing the destruction of the Yonkers building, this makes no sense to me. Regardless of what River Center becomes, Yonkers has to come down. Why postpone the inevitable? Prices for fuel, etc. are just going to rise as time goes on, just do it now and get that phase out of the way.

Many on this forum seem quite thrilled with the pending destruction of the Younkers building. I have fond memories of that building from when it was H.C. Pranges. Although I agree that the plans Vetter Denk has for the site is outstanding and that much of the building is of no great historical significance, I wish he could have incorporated the old façade of the Washington/Pine Streets corner of the building and blended it with his new modern building. It seems Green Bay has lost so much of its historic downtown architecture that it would be nice to preserve what little it has left.

The Town Square Park is a great idea, I agree. The City of Green Bay's downtown plan called for a multipurpose plaza with pavilion shelters, grees, public art, etc. ONe of the goals was to create the parking ramp to offset the loss in parking spaces due to the Town Center park.
Now that the ramp is done, it's time to get started on this Town Square Park. And soften up the Baylake facade with some vegetation while we're at it. I thought some people were working on some designs for this (Dan? Jeff? Andrew?..can anyone else speak to this?)

As for the historic part of the Younkers buiding on the corner of Pine and Washington...Yes that exterior would still be grand if they'd remove the bricks from the windows and clean up the rest of the facade. I'm not very excited or thrilled to see that part of the building get torn down, but I am excited for the rest of the structure (the windowless building to the north) to crumble. I heard that Juza had wanted to save the historic nicer part, and I believe Vetter did at first too...but aren't there some major structural problems with it? Or is it that younkers gutted the interior so badly that there was not anything to really save?

Now, remember the veterans, enjoy the weekend. Start at the former Stan & Ollies, I peeked inside it looks great. Have a few :cheers: and work your way down washington and have more :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

The thing about the older building of the old younkers is that it was built in 1890's and the foundation is made of cedar. the cedar foundation is not strong enough to allow for digging underneath and making an underground parking lot. that was the thing with vetter was that he wants an underground parking structure for the tenats. juza wanted that at first to but when everyone made a fus about it, he took it out so that would make everyone happy. vetter didn't care becasue he knew that inorder to effectly sell the apartments and condos is that he needs to provide close parking.

Puant, your pictures made me want to go get a closer look, so I took some time yesterday to do a little exploring/snooping, . That is a really interesting area, I was amazed that I have never been back there. From the patio at Angelina's to the alley between the Cherry St. ramp, and finally the 'secret' passage way from the alley to the back entrance of "Adams St Station" - Schauer and Schumacher building. That was really funky. It sure seems like there is quite a bit of construction activity inside the building at Adams and Walnut.
I find it strange that the building where Bosses is located is really out of place and what is the deal with the narrow parking next to the Stick, a couple other interesting rehabs could include The CA Gross building and Risers Diamonds, maybe some loft conversions???
I was also snapping a few more pic of the Younkers building today and noticed that Washington Way is all torn up with a sign that says "Dock wall improvements". I wonder if this is also has a part in delaying the pending demo of the building.
As far as salvaging the historic part of the complex, I would be all for it if it could be worked into the development, however it doesn't sound feasible. I wish that Vetter would release a rough footprint (if known) to get a better feel of how much land this place is going to take up, if I recall there were several stories of parking included...
and as far as the latest delay, would you prefer that the River Center Office component be minimized to make site 4 a reality OR just make River Center as large as demand now exists and hold of on the River Tower for a while. I think I prefer the latter.

One idea as far as green space is concerned would be to turn the street level parking lot in fornt of the Baylake Bank Building into a town square type park. It could have a wide walkway connecting the building to the Cherry St. Parking Ramp, and include several bushes/trees, benches, a central fountain, etc. It seems to be a central location surrounded by both new construction, and turn of the century buildings. I could envision people eating lunches out there, enjoying break-times, etc. It would be a compliment to the boardwalk area, but have a town square feeling.
I agree that the Town Center park idea IS needed, even if only like the west 1/3 of the surface parking is converted, that would be a great start and it would only impact like 100 parking spaces.

May 26, 2006 07:16 AM CDT

"St. Vince" Behind Lambeau Condo Project

By Chris Duffy (WBAY link (http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=4953454))

A Wisconsin developer is taking a shot at filling some abandoned property in Ashwaubenon, right across the street from Lambeau Field. The idea stems from a famous Packers fan who hopes to call Titletown his home.

For ten years now, Madison native John O'Neill has been known to Packers fans as "Saint Vince." He says, "I've made the trip from Madison to Green Bay hundreds of times."

But the retired man is tired of making the 140-mile trek to Titletown several times a year. What he'd really like to do is live here.

"Being as close to Lambeau Field as you possibly can," says O'Neill, "and I think there would be a lot of interest in Packer fans to be able to do something like that."

The Packers diehard is a member of Wisconsin Legacy, based in Madison. On Tuesday the group presented the "Home Field condominium project" to the Ashwaubenon Village Board.

If approved, the condominiums would be built at the intersection of Ridge Road and Brookwood Drive, just west of the stadium. The four-story, 44-unit design is different from a proposal made last year by Capstone Development and tackles many of the concerns brought up by the community during that process.

This plan would take up less space than the previous proposal. The majority of the parking would be underground. Out of the three vacant buildings that currently stand on the property, only two would have to be torn down.

"They've done their homework," village administrator Steve Kubacki said. "This probably addresses more of the concerns than Capstone did, so that will probably grab some market success."

In two weeks the proposal goes to the Ashwaubenon plan board. Public meetings will follow.

As for Saint Vince, he hopes to get Ashwaubenon's blessing so he and other Packers fans can live out the green-and-gold dream in Lambeau's neighborhood.

I know this is supposed to be a 'new development' web forum, but since some of you seem to be interested in the old historic buildings of Green Bay I thought I'd post some images I've been collecting. Rather than make this thread too long with a lot of images, I'll just put a couple here and then you can go to my web site link at the bottom of you want more.

Interesting note: At the time the Bellin Building was built, it was as tall as the tallest buildings in New York or Chicago.

http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/images/Historic-Other/0412000577-l.jpg
http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/images/Historic-Other/bellin.jpg
http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/images/Historic-Other/laud-gb-h-08-29-03-sb.jpg
http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/images/Historic-Other/Hotel_NOrthland_GreenBayWI.JPG

The rest are here (http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/Historic_Images.htm):

Sounds like Qdobas is opening in the newly completed strip mall next to Barnes and Noble on Oneida.

Regarding the potential funding cuts at Austin Straubel. Sounds like ~1/3 of the money required to realize specific improvements at the airport may be in jeopardy due to proposed federal spending cuts. That would be a bummer. Does anyone have any statistics about surcharges at airports around the country which help to fund airport improvement projects? With ~400,000 boardings a year, we would need ~$10 per passenger to make up for what would be ~$4,000,000 lost in federal funding annually. I remember traveling through Montreal several years ago and having to go through yet another line prior to departure in order to pay ~$25 for airport improvements. Just wondering if an automatic surcharge is a viable solution to this potential shortfall.

Great pictures, Puant. The shot on your website of the ship running up the river at night is awesome. I love the trolley cars in the Washington Street drawing. It's a downer that those tracks were taken out. Any city with a train or especially a trolley system is by (my personal) definition 50x more charming. I had been told once that there used to be a trolley that ran along the Fox River almost as far as Wrightstown to a popular club that was on the west shore of the river. Not sure if that's true but if it is that was quite an extensive train system. The City by the Bay in Northern California is known for its trolley cars. It would be great if the City by the Bay in Northeastern Wisconsin still had the same connection. How cool would it be to have a system of trolley cars running through Olde Main and downtown and across to the Broadway District and continuing through to the stadium/commercial district in Ashwaubenon. Not economically feasible but a fun thought nonetheless.

Interesting plan that may happen in Bellevue. I really hope they don't skimp on the aesthetics.


Posted May 27, 2006

Bellevue thinking big with planned complex

Businesses, homes, trails pegged for 500-acre area

By Terry Anderson
tanderso@greenbaypressgazette.com


BELLEVUE — Village officials are considering a plan for a commercial and residential complex comparable in scale to the Fox River Mall area in Grand Chute, but with the feel of an old-fashioned downtown main street.


The location would be the roughly rectangular 500-acre area between Allouez Avenue and Wisconsin 172 on the north and south and Lime Kiln Road and Bellevue Street on the east and west.


The property is being studied by village planners, developers and the dozen or so property owners who have a strong interest in the long-term plan.


"Do we have some concerns? Do we have questions? Yes. But, hopefully, those can be resolved. There's more than one plan that could meet the goals that the village is looking at," said Barbara Lautenslager, a spokeswoman for the Alton and Agnes Van Rite family.


With more than 300 acres of farmland, the Van Rites are the largest property owners within the commercial zone.


The development plan is being called informally the Bellevue business/commercial park, and it's almost soon to be part of the village's 20-year comprehensive plan.


Officials envision an area that would integrate big box retail stores with large office buildings and residences with green space, park benches, bike stalls, parking ramps and interconnecting pedestrian walkways, including a link to the East River Trail.


It would take into account some of relatively new development in the area — such as the Target/Copps Food Center complex — while creating a blueprint for several hundred acres of undeveloped farmland. And it would be created around state-mandated Smart Growth principles.


Former village president Bob Schlag, who owns 120 acres within the proposed commercial zone, says that when the retail complex near Allouez Avenue and Brown County GV was being developed a few years ago, some of the most desirable property fetched about $200,000 per acre.


"So far I've just listened to what's being said, but I haven't taken a position," Schlag said. "When they come and put something on the table, that's when I'll have something to say."


Village Administrator Randy Friday said the Van Rites have turned down several offers to purchase their land.


Lautenslager said her family is looking into the possibilities.


The village hired Madison-based Vierbicher Associates, an engineering and planning firm, for $65,000 to develop a comprehensive plan for the commercial parcel, Friday said.


"We are looking at a place to live, work and play," Vierbicher official Gary Becker said. "An important part of the plan would be restaurants, night clubs and movie theaters. We're talking about a total environment with high design standards."


While the plan would be specific to this commercial zone, it would dovetail into the 20-year comprehensive plan that will be developed for the village, Friday said.


The plan commission has seen a preliminary draft of the proposal. Commission members plan a trip June 5 to Middleton, where Vierbicher has worked with large-scale developer T. Wall Properties, the third-largest commercial developer in the state, to create a development that is serving as the model for this one, Friday said.


"This will be a gateway to the village of Bellevue," Becker said. "It will be unique to the Green Bay area, mixing retail and commercial and residential. Rather than a development strip along (Brown County) GV, we're talking about a Main Street concept that will be pedestrian friendly."


The nearest thing like it, besides Middleton, is in the Twin Cities, Friday said.


Rather than stand-alone big box retail stores surrounded by acres of parking, the plan calls for stores and offices linked to parking ramps. A number of storefronts would overlook a pedestrian-friendly green space, Becker said.


"Anything to get pedestrians walking would be wonderful," said Julie Phillips, owner of Jitter Bean Coffee and Ice Cream Café, 2670 Monroe Road/Brown County GV. She said her business has increased since a Kwik Trip opened up next door.


"Any time you get people to see (your business), that is a bonus; that is awesome," Phillips said.


The proposal also calls for multifamily and single-family residential properties on the east and west edges of the development area, Friday said.


With Vierbicher's development in Middleton, the result is "a very livable space," Friday said.


"There are buildings that are multiple stories, with the first being retail — sales or shopping — and the floors above being either office or residential living space. People who work in the offices during the daytime will be visiting and shopping and eating at these retail shops and restaurants during the day."


To make the area accessible to the entire village and surrounding areas, the plan would feature connections to area pedestrian trails.


Becker said the center is planned to have a long life.


"Sometimes when you have a big box surrounded by a big parking lot, after 20 years it becomes outdated, the retail store closes and the big boxes sit empty," Becker said. "Eventually when there is reuse, it is inevitably at a lower standard."


Craig Jones, out-of-print specialist with Reader's Loft, 2069 Central Court, Suite 44, one of the area's few independent book stores, said he thinks the development would be great for business at the book store.


"I can't think of how it would be a bad thing out here. The more people traffic, the better off everyone is," Jones said.

Reporter Lee Reinsch also contributed to this report.

Sounds like Qdobas is opening in the newly completed strip mall next to Barnes and Noble on Oneida.

Bummer... Like Oneida St needs more dining, does anyone even work over there?

Regarding the potential funding cuts at Austin Straubel. Sounds like ~1/3 of the money required to realize specific improvements at the airport may be in jeopardy due to proposed federal spending cuts. That would be a bummer. Does anyone have any statistics about surcharges at airports around the country which help to fund airport improvement projects? With ~400,000 boarding's a year, we would need ~$10 per passenger to make up for what would be ~$4,000,000 lost in federal funding annually. I remember traveling through Montreal several years ago and having to go through yet another line prior to departure in order to pay ~$25 for airport improvements. Just wondering if an automatic surcharge is a viable solution to this potential shortfall.

I think this is fairly common in Canada, I have paid this 'Airport improvement fee' in Vancouver and Calgary as well, It's not like you have much of a choice because you pay this fee when you board to leave the airport.

Was the airport funding tied to the runway extension or general operations? Green Bay already has an additional fee tacked on to fund the current expansion which puts us higher then Appleton on many fares...which all leads back to duplication of services, but because of convenience I will still fly out of Green Bay anyway.

Interesting plan that may happen in Bellevue. I really hope they don't skimp on the aesthetics.


Posted May 27, 2006

Bellevue thinking big with planned complex

Businesses, homes, trails pegged for 500-acre area...

I question weather or not this can happen at all in the near future. How much competition can this small metro absorb??? I don't think suburbia really likes parking ramps or compact development, this is why downtown retail died, isn't it??

On the positive side - it is at least a great idea to let people know that this sort of development has happened somewhere else and can work and we do not need to replicate the pedestrian death trap (Oneida St.)

Does anyone else have a problem logging into the astorplacecondos.com website? It seems to have been disbanded? :eek2:

I had no problem at all.

:okay:

Thanks, it seems to be working now. Earlier in the morning I tried to check the site, and it took me to a register/buy this domain page. I even tried to go through Vetterdenk.com to get to it, and it took me to the same site. Kind of strange, but seems to be working now. Thanks again! :)

I question weather or not this can happen at all in the near future. How much competition can this small metro absorb??? I don't think suburbia really likes parking ramps or compact development, this is why downtown retail died, isn't it??

On the positive side - it is at least a great idea to let people know that this sort of development has happened somewhere else and can work and we do not need to replicate the pedestrian death trap (Oneida St.)

I do have some questions/concerns about this Bellevue thing as well, I had posted a new thread here (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=355079) to see if I could get some outsiders perspectives on this sort of thing.

This area is the only farm left inside the beltline highway system; I've wondered for years why this part had not developed yet.

I am happy that it's not simply more of the typical strip mall/big box type crap you usually see in suburban/highway development areas like this....I do like that this is something different...It reinforces the idea that maybe people are starting to get fed up with the suburban strip mall junk.

As for parking-I'm sure they'll do surface parking, but intead of ramps, they'll keep the parking along the streets and behind the buildings so that the storefronts can line the sidewalks with zero setback. Expensive parking ramps just would not make much sense when you have a whole farm field to start with.

A few thoughts, apologies in advance for how long this is going to be...

The Bellvue Plan

In principle, this is a great idea. Hopefully it will result in a more dense land use plan, and create a walkable community, it seems that's the goal. I was very frustrated with De Pere in the last few years when they turned down a request for a subdivision with smaller lot sizes. By contrast, this plan on the surface ssems like it would embrace that.

I am right now reading a book (Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, by Jared Diamond) and though I am only at the beginning, the part I'm on talks about Montana and the struggles to create a sustainable economy there. The main theme is that land uses in Montana are not in line with what the state is environmentaly suited for, i.e., it isn't great farm land and thus the practices necessary to farm the land ultimately results in environmental change that damages the environment and the economy of the area. One could argue that farming most of Montana is so out of line with the sustainabllity of that land, and so economically difficult that it should be phased out (an admittedly unrealistic goal).

The point is, by contrast, we in Wisconsin live in an area ideally suited for farming. Though we still need to be careful to have sustainable practices, land in the area has been used for agriculture since time immemorial, and the highest and best use for much of the land is indeed to produce food. This is why sprawl is an extra shame in a region like this. Increasinly the world will NEED as much land in climates like ours to produce food for our growing population, and once that land is developed it's gone as far as farming is concerned.

I guess that's a very long way of saying that I think the Bellvue plan is, if done right, an great use of land and I'm happy to see communities looking towards such ways of planning.

Baylake Bank Lot/Town Square

You're preaching to the choir with me as far as turning that lot into a town square is concerned. Sadly, my understandng is that the folks at Baylake have been assured a certain number of spaces, and that reducing the number of spaces there is not going to happen. That siad, it is possible to recofigure the layout of spaces there and use as space the size of the last two rows nearest Wash. St. for a plaza without losing any parking. This idea is being thought about, but of course as with all things it will need to be paid for.

Younkers

Yes, it's a shame to see the old part of the Younkers/Pranges building go. If memory serves me right, that is the waekest part of the whole building. I believe Juza wasn't even going to save that portion, as that is where he was going to put his parking structure. Sad to see it go though (assuming River Center happens, of course)...

Daily Planet

I did hear something a while ago to the effect that someone was looking into a 6-story development on the Daily Planet site. That would be awesome, though it's just rumor and I have no idea how feasable it really is.

[I]

Baylake Bank Lot/Town Square

You're preaching to the choir with me as far as turning that lot into a town square is concerned. Sadly, my understandng is that the folks at Baylake have been assured a certain number of spaces, and that reducing the number of spaces there is not going to happen. That siad, it is possible to recofigure the layout of spaces there and use as space the size of the last two rows nearest Wash. St. for a plaza without losing any parking. This idea is being thought about, but of course as with all things it will need to be paid for.
.

BayLake could cut off that dead appendage known as the mall and put a street behind it on the north side (Navarino Way (http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/streets.htm)). That way, they could create new parking immediately adjacent to their building (I figure with parallel parking, up to 60 parking spaces) allowing the Town Square Park to be built on that surface parking lot. This would help soften up the whole area and make it so much more functional.

Gosh this would solve a lot of problems. I could go on & on but I think you know how this could help in many ways.....

BayLake could cut off that dead appendage known as the mall and put a street behind it on the north side.

That would potentially be a good solution that would allow Baylake to maintain it's parking while making the current lot available for a plaza. Two potential probelms: 1) The Baylake building is designed so that the main entrances face the current lot, so moving the parking to the "back" of their building may be undesireable, and 2) whoever develops the mall site is unlikely to want to use a bunch of their land for another building's parking, and Baylake is unlikely to want to buy more land for parking at the "back" of their building when they already have parking in front.

That said, given the location of the Cherry St. Ramp, I'd love to see a plaza on that (whole) site, and think that ultimatly it would be good for Baylank too, as it would increase the prominence of their building. At the same time I can understand why they want that lot to combat the parking perception problem that downtowns face.

Just FYI, in the May 31st edition of the Wall Street Journal there was an article on the front page about "fake downtowns" similar to what is being envisioned in Bellevue. The article described the rise in popularity of these developments throughout the country and also briefly went into whether they could spell the demise of actual downtowns which have benefited from a resurgence in popularity over the last decade. I read this in the hard copy of the newspaper and I'm not a member of WSJ.com so I'm unable to post the article here. Just a heads up if anyone here has access. It's an interesting read.

I know in the past the idea of a waterfornt (riverboat) casino had emerged as a dowtown attraction. However, building on the idea of using the waterfront for attactions, I think it would be interesting if the museum could place a ship of some type near their location that could serve as an extention of the museum itself. Whether it be a naval surface ship of some type (Manitowoc already has a sub), or a cargo ship to tie in with the history of GB shipping (Duluth has a nice display), or tugs, etc. I think we should utilize the space (river) that we have available around the museum to expand the attractions around the downtown area, which already has a great local history presence.

That would potentially be a good solution that would allow Baylake to maintain it's parking while making the current lot available for a plaza. Two potential probelms: 1) The Baylake building is designed so that the main entrances face the current lot, so moving the parking to the "back" of their building may be undesireable, and 2) whoever develops the mall site is unlikely to want to use a bunch of their land for another building's parking, and Baylake is unlikely to want to buy more land for parking at the "back" of their building when they already have parking in front.

That said, given the location of the Cherry St. Ramp, I'd love to see a plaza on that (whole) site, and think that ultimatly it would be good for Baylank too, as it would increase the prominence of their building. At the same time I can understand why they want that lot to combat the parking perception problem that downtowns face.

Dan,
Good points.

I looked at the city's "Downtown Design Plan" (1997) again (I think it's still a good plan). The Town Center Park in this plan is a combination of parking and multi-purpose plaza. I tried to take a picture of the graphic (below).

As I think about it, the parking lot portion does work well for Art Street and other events.

I still hope the city can somehow work with whoever buys the rest of the mall to work the street in behind Baylake as well as to extend Adams to the north, though.

Anyway here's that graphic from the city's plan regarding the Town Center park: http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/images/TownSquarePark-DowntownGB_Design_Plan.jpg

or click here and scroll down to the bottom image (http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/miscimages.htm)

I know in the past the idea of a waterfornt (riverboat) casino had emerged as a dowtown attraction. However, building on the idea of using the waterfront for attactions, I think it would be interesting if the museum could place a ship of some type near their location that could serve as an extention of the museum itself. Whether it be a naval surface ship of some type (Manitowoc already has a sub), or a cargo ship to tie in with the history of GB shipping (Duluth has a nice display), or tugs, etc. I think we should utilize the space (river) that we have available around the museum to expand the attractions around the downtown area, which already has a great local history presence.

Yes, a museum tug would be cool...Not too big, yet interesting. A while back, wasn't there a push to bring the "USS Green Bay" to town as a floating museum of some sort? And wasn't there another guy who proposed putting an aquarium inside of one of the unused ships that used to be tied up on the river to serve as double-duty ship museum/aquarium? I wonder what happened to those ideas?

i was looking at gould evens and goodman's website today and i found something kind of interesting. if you remember, gould evans goodman and associates where the architects that proposed the lombardi upgrade a while ago. anyway go to this website, www.gouldevans.com then click on planning/landscape architecture, then portfolio and then on downtown green bay plan. i never heard anything about this but i guess it's in the comprehesive plan. has any one heard anything about this? also, have you seen on loftsontheriver.com that all the condos are sold now. does anyone know if the owners have moved in yet? i can't wait to get back intown in a couple weeks and walk around downtown. anyway, just thought i would share.

Great find. Those are some cool concepts. I can't even envision where those developments would be. Like you I've never heard anything of this. Maybe it's just something that was proposed to the city in the past but never made it through the planning committees. Who knows but I love the bold ideas. If only Avissers was still on the board. He might have some insight.

Roots,
That was a great find! I had never seen those renders before. I do have a copy of the 1997 "Downtown GB Design Plan" done by Gould-Evans Goodman (the one I referred to above & got the image from) but it did not have the renders shown on their web site. Based on that web site, I think maybe there was a follow-up to this 1997 plan which covers more implementation? If so I'd like to see it.

THe City web site does have a copy of the map contained in the 1997 plan. On this map you will see some of the things shown on the Gould-Evans render, such as the "Landmark Tower" and the mixed-use building next to the Bellin Building. What actually got built isn't quite as nice as the G-E render. Anyway here's the map: (http://www.ci.green-bay.wi.us/geninfo/planning_development/planning/planning.html) (click and scroll down to City of Green Bay Downtown Plan link, you can "hover" over the numbers).

And yes, some of the owners have begun moving into the Lofts on the River condos. I think the building is looking quite nice, now that the detailing is getting finished.

I'm also anxious to see how many show up for the new "International Bayfest" which is this weekend, downtown at the new festival grounds on the river. It's free! Hopefully there's a good turnout so that this grows.

http://www.artseventsinc.com/bayfest/events/

Puant, maybe you can help me out as I'm not familiar with how this city planning process works. On the map that you included on your post there are numerous projects that I'd never heard of. Now is this plan based on ideas that were just dreamt up by people in the city planning department or are they based on projects that were proposed to the city by developers? For example I see two new marinas along the river and a sizable mixed use development on the southeast corner of Main and Monroe but after 9 years I've never heard of anything along these lines until now. I'm just curious from where these ideas originate. I'm not sure if you have the answers either but you seem like a good source.

I'm pretty sure I've seen those renderings before, as part of the '97 plan. They look pretty cool.

As I understand it, when the city wanted to revise their comp plan, as they have to do from time to time, they hired Gould-Evans on as a consultant to help with the downtown portion of the plan. Obviously, the city planning department has a large hand in working with the consultant on the plan. Developments that are proposed aren't a driving force (although I suppose if a project is on the table from a developer, of course they'll plan for that).

The plan is sort of just a vision for land use in the area. Residential here, commercial here, mixed use there... that sort of thing. Any renderings on there are pure speculation, a way to help visualise what a mixed use development could look like next to the Bellin Building, for instance, but as we can see by what was built there, in no way realted to any actual design. In a sense, the renderings are functionally the least important part of the the plan, becuase in most cases the city has limited control over how development will actually look. At the same time, they are politically very important because they help people visualize what could be and therefore help sell the plan. The really important thing is to plan for the right mix of uses in a sensible pattern in the downtown.

Well, I'm not a planner but I'll give it a shot...

For various reasons, the City may choose to create or update the plan. Prior to the '97 plan, there had been multiple planning efforts that looked at just one or two aspects of the downtown...Parking might have been one, Broadway was another, Transit another and so on...The 1997 plan was one of the first to bring everything together and address new things as well...and a Gould-Evans was used as the consultant to help with that.

A Steering Committee was also formed, consisting of members from the Chamber of Commerce, business leaders, developers, and others who represented a variety of community interest.

The Public also had input through a series of workshops. The "design charrette process" was used to help sort and rank issues.

Plan implementation
As I page through this plan, I can see that much of it has actually been implemented already,with mixed success. I won't list them all but here are some samples:

1) The Town Center Park we've been discussing for the Baylake parking lot is actually the first thing listed in the downtown design plan. Just do it!

2) Second was the mall...A lot of what was done to try to save the mall was discussed in the plan, such as changing the food court, enhancing the facade. Remember that in '97 the mall was still functioning. We can scrap this section of the plan...

3) Mixed use parking ramp. This is the big monolith that was just recently completed on Wash. If only the real ramp would have been designed to look as nice as the rendering in the plan......if only......

4) The mixed-use development (completed in 2000--the offices/condos on the water just south of Walnut St).

6) Fox Theater Renovation (done, successfully, properly).

13) Fox River/Great Lakes Park (recently done--it's what the new Bayfest is being held on this weekend)

Thank you guys for the response.

In a sense, the renderings are functionally the least important part of the the plan, becuase in most cases the city has limited control over how development will actually look. At the same time, they are politically very important because they help people visualize what could be and therefore help sell the plan.

Makes perfect sense. So it's really just a zoning plan with idealistic drawings of what could be. It seems to me that the city is doing its part in implementing what it can from the plan. Leicht Park and the parking ramp are really the only things it can directly control. Private developers seem to be a little more tentative but things are rolling in the right direction.

I really like the thought of adding the marinas along the river near downtown if demand allows for it. It really adds a lot when you see a lot of boating activity in that area.

3) Mixed use parking ramp. This is the big monolith that was just recently completed on Wash. If only the real ramp would have been designed to look as nice as the rendering in the plan......if only......

Out of curiosity, where can I find these drawings? Are they on the same City of Green Bay website? The plan that I saw only showed the map and did not show in detail the drawings of the individual developments.

Also, it's been nearly 10 years since the last plan. Is this something that's done every 10 years or so? Would either of you guess that we could expect to see an updated rendering in the next couple years?

6) Fox Theater Renovation (done, successfully, properly).

I found a cool picture of the Meyer Theatre online. Not sure if I understand how to post it but here's my attempt:

http://static.flickr.com/29/62426321_aebbe37acc.jpg?v=0

What's everyone's take on the Club FiveSix controversy? I was thrilled a couple years ago when I saw that Barnett was going to take the initiative to open a place in the vicinity of downtown. I think it showed that even outsiders see potential in that area and it also, I believe, helped change some race related perceptions about the city of Green Bay. I understand the frustrations of those living in that area but I personally thing the city was a little quick to pull his liquor license. It looks bad from a racial perspective (since other bars in the area have had worse problems and have retained their license) and also in terms of keeping the area appealing to investors (the city not appearing to be anti-business). It's a bad situation all around but I believe the city is doing a poor job of handling it. Now I haven't had to deal with the noise and such so it's easy for me to say that the city is being a little harsh. Any other perspectives on the issue?

BTW, on the topic of Packers investing in downtown, I seem to remember reading in the past that Rob Davis (long snapper extraordinaire) donated a significant amount of money to relocate the Admiral Flatley Memorial when that was one issue that was stalling the approval of Astor Place. Quality move by another person with no Green Bay roots especially since this would have netted him no financial gain.

As for the Nick Barnett / Club 5-6 thing.....I stayed up till about 1:00 AM last night watching the city council meeting about this....Prior to watching this, I thought that Nick was getting a raw deal and that the city was not handling it properly (originally I felt the same way you do). But, after watching the meeting and hearing more of the story from the perspectives of the neighbors, the police, and Nick himself, I thought the city council ended up doing the right thing...Again, based on the information that was presented. I really wish Nick well, I really want something to be viable and work in that building, and he invested a lot into it. But, he didn't do himself any favors....if he had said the right things instead of what he said, they might have given him another chance. Instead, he offered very few solutions to the problems and then tried to play the race card.. This was a tough one though, no simple solutions, really.

Again I really do hope that Nick can clean this thing up and continue to operate his business. The people who go there and cause the trouble are most to blame, but Nick has to do more to keep the trouble out. The last thing he needs as a Packer player is for the place to get even worse. .

Wow I just noticed this "Part II" thread is over 200 posts already...mostly due to my constant blathering. My wife says I'm obsessed, I guess she's right on this one.

Help me understand this Younkers/Pranges building thing...<<Edit: OOPS I originally put JCPenney's. Meant Pranges. Sorry>>>

Is this how the conversation at the Younkers/Prange's headquarters meeting?: (imagine this:)
**************************************
CEO: OK folks, we've got this large store in downtown Green Bay on a prominent street intersection.
How can we increase sales?

(lots of chin scratching...hmmm's...)

Jennings: Hey! I've got it!! Let's brick in all of the windows!! Yeah, that'll do it!! Let's not stop there! Then let's paint the whole building a crappy white color and put the cheesiest cheap looking awning we can find on it!

CEO: By jove, Jennings, you're brilliant! You deserve a raise! Call up the brick contractor in Green Bay and let's get started bricking it in right away. And not just the upper floors. Let's brick in the street-level picture windows where they have the christmas display tradition. Bah Humbug to that! Oh, and let's gut the interior too and put in some cheap drop-ceiling and plastic. Get rid of all of that damn wood. We can't have that!
*****************************************

Tell me...Just how the hell else does this happen?? Freakin' unbelieveably stupid. Consequently, the store grids to a halt, shuts down, gets condemned...and now we're stuck looking at this monstrosity in the middle of our downtown.But, hey, it's hindsight now. The building will be torn down soon. Put it out of it's misery I guesss...

Below: before photo: a classy building, and an 'after' picture below it..taken today)

http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/images/Historic-Other/Pranges-Younkers_Building%20002.jpg

http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/images/Historic-Other/Pranges-Younkers_Building%20004b.jpg

Good take on the JC Penny building. That's pretty absurd.

As for the Barnett thing, my information is only taken from the newspaper. If your opinions changed after observing the meeting then I'm sure you have much more relavent info than I have. And it's never smart to play the race card (unless you're OJ). It just makes people more defensive. Seems unlikely but maybe he could make it go as just a restaurant.

Puant, I remember a week or two ago you posted a picture of the Bellin Building and mentioned that when built, it was as tall as the tallest buildings in Chicago. That still shocks me. Downtown must have been a happening place. I'm sure back then you didn't have to travel far at all away from downtown to find vacant land to build office buildings. It's interesting that they decided to throw caution to the wind and build upward. Must have been huge news at the time.

Good take on the JC Penny building. That's pretty absurd.

Puant, I remember a week or two ago you posted a picture of the Bellin Building and mentioned that when built, it was as tall as the tallest buildings in Chicago. That still shocks me. Downtown must have been a happening place. I'm sure back then you didn't have to travel far at all away from downtown to find vacant land to build office buildings. It's interesting that they decided to throw caution to the wind and build upward. Must have been huge news at the time.

The Bellin building was as tall as the engineering technology would allow buildings to go at the time, that's why it was as tall as any of the tallest in NY or Chi. Still, this city pushed the envelope and made that bold move. And not only with the Bellin Building; within about 10 years of each other, the Minihan-McCormick building, Hotel Northland, Courthouse, and other superb buildings were put up. These buildings were most excellent by any city's standards. Have you ever seen the Hotel Northland's old ballroom? People had pride in their city back then. What happened? I have a hard time beliving it's all just economics....the good old buildings were successful for like 70+ years, until the advent of retarded things like the mall and urban sprawl.

Well I've yammered too much again today. I'll see if I can let you guys have this board for a while.

Comp Plan

If I've not mistaken, the comp plan is updated every 20 years... something like that. In addition, the Vetter-Stoss plan was added to the comp plan a year and a half ago. So those would be the latest renderings, obviously. Huh, I just reminded my self that the Vetter-Stoss plan was added to the comp plan by a UNANIMOUS vote, that was a fun day!

Five-Six

I wish he'd get a chance, but I can see where the residents are coming from. In the end that probably isn't the best place for such a club. I'm not sure comparisons between it and, for instance, Hip Cats are valid, becuase even though Hip Cats has more police calls, it isn't right next to a residential neighborhood. If 5-6 were in the Schauer and Schumacher building, there'd be no problem with it either.

So I guess when you decide to put your establishment by the residential, the residents have a reasonable expectation of order on and around their property (especially when their property pre-dates the club). Is it directly Barnett's fault, no. At the same time, the city has a duty to provide an orderly neighborhood, so I can understand the council's action. I'd have given the club a chance to live up to Alderman Wery's term-sheet, but I'm not sure not doing so is unfair either. Barnett chose the location by his free-will, so he has to live with the responsibilities of that location.

Prange's

:soapbox:

Remember, when they build Port Plaza, the downtown was failing. Port Plaza saved the downtown (for 20 years). Everyone was building those malls, that was what you did 30 years ago to revitalize a struggling downtown. Obviously, in the end it was the wrong decision long-term, but I can't blame them too much for doing it.

Today, everyone is using residential to save their downtowns. That's the "mall" of the 2000's. However, we can avoid repeating the mall failure scenario with the residential by learning the ovarall lessons of why the mall ended up ruining the downtown: don't rely on one property with one owner for success (condos inherantly avoid this), make sure all developments integrate smoothly with the rest of the downtown, make sure developments are as adaptable as possible, make sure you have successful public spaces, and NEVER view the downtown as a finished product that doesn't need work.

Okay, I feel better now. As for Prange's specifically, my guess is that along with the rest of the mall-ization of the area, they wanted to turn that into a big-box style building. Suburban mall anchors don't have the windows, so I'm thinking they wanted to be like that. Again, my guess is that many other similar downtown department stores did the same thing with (short-term) success. It is a shame though, isn't it?

Bellin Building

Oh how I love this building, if only someone would fix it up.

I'm pretty interested in the time period in which this was built (post industrial revolution, pre WWI). There was great confidence in progress and many great structures were built (Eiffle Tower, White City in Chicago...) and that is summed up by Burnham's "Make no small plans..." quote that I used to have in my signature. The flip side is that much of this was built on the back of sweat-shop labor...etc. But I do love the confidence and civic-pride of the time.

One must remember, though, that while philanthropy was something the rich did in big ways back then, (see: Rockefeller, Carnegie, et all) there was a large element of ego involved as well. I could be remembering totally wrong, but I think the Bellin Building was built to be taller than one of the buildings Puant mentioned because of a "rivalry" between Bellin and another prominant, wealthy resident. I mean, building a tall building and putting your name on it is downright Trump-esque. Not that I mind... if two people today were trying to top each other by building 25 and 30-story buildings in town I'd let them try to out-do each other with great pleasure! I'm going to look up the history of this tonight to get my facts straight.

http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/images/Historic-Other/Pranges-Younkers_Building%20004b.jpg

That picture almost made me throw up in my cubicle. That is horrible.. I will never understand why someone thought that was even close to a good idea.

This bricked-in building was Prange's not JCPenny's as I originally typed. So oops, I made a mistake...a minor one though compared to bricking in these windows..

Here is some historical pics of downtown Green Bay. You can also go to this link to find hundreds of other pictures.

http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/whi/results.asp?pageno=7&keyword1=Green+Bay&search_type=basic&sort_by=date

1) NW view of Washington St. 1889
2) Green Bay's downtown 1889
3) View of the harbor 1889
4) Main St looking East 1890
5) Washington St. w/ cable cars 1905
6) Washington St. 1905

http://images.wisconsinhistory.org/whi_images_new/700004120047/0412000566-l.jpg

http://images.wisconsinhistory.org/whi_images_new/700004110096/0411001179-l.jpg
http://images.wisconsinhistory.org/whi_images_new/700004120047/0412000575-l.jpg

http://images.wisconsinhistory.org/whi_images_new/700004110096/0411001181-l.jpg

http://images.wisconsinhistory.org/whi_images_new/700004120043/0412000525-l.jpg

http://images.wisconsinhistory.org/whi_images_new/700004120047/0412000574-l.jpg

What did you guys think of BayFest? I was going to mention the location of the WIXX stage was poor, but after seeing the new grass on the Leicht Memorial Park I can see why they didn't have it more in the open park. Next year will probably be a little better since it was their first year downtown. It was nice to spend some time downtown though. I went out at the bar's Friday and Saturday night and was really unimpressed with the amount of violence there. There were cops everywhere and people were fighting in a lot of different place. What is with the drunks everywhere trying to pick fights. We had a couple behind us saying to my friend, "Are you a $1.50 girl, do you think I can buy her!" Fortunately my friend's boyfriend kind of ignored them. Two mins later there was a drunk who said to my friend's friend, "What a hot pu$$y she is!" and then the guy was trying to get in a fight with her boyfriend. I really think downtown is getting worse and worse with these drunk idiots.

After a week of vacation, I'm glad to see that not much has happened here in Green Bay. (I was afraid I would have missed the Younkers Demo) It was great, I was able to make it a full week without a computer. Anyways... I was able to get out and do a little exploring of some great cities including Chicago, Indianapolis, Louisville, Cincinnati and Lexington on our trip to the Smokey Mountains.

It is kind of depressing being back.... however I was able to make it back in time to check out Bay fest and I guess I was a bit disappointed. I somewhat agree that when the turf becomes more established, I would expect better use of the park. From what I overheard people really missed the rides, hopefully they bring them back too.

It is unfortunate to hear about all the poor behavior downtown, but from what I remember late night has always been like that. I really felt much more comfortable in dt Chicago then I do walking around in dt Green Bay at Night. Even being at Bay Fest I noticed that so many people really just have no respect or manners whatsoever, how hard is it to throw away your garbage; or not push your way through a line; or smoke in a crowd; or refrain from poor use of language?????? Maybe this just really bothers me, whatever.

Since I am babbling, I am kind of pissed off that the 56 didn't get another chance. I have been there a few times and the behavior was much more controlled at all times including bar close then it is anywhere on Washington Street. I guess the proximity to residential is the key. What do you think the soon to be neighbors on Washington Street are going to think??? I'm not sure that I would want to live anywhere near to either.

I think all of the problems in the downtown stem from the lack of diversity in age catagories that frequent establishments. Unfortunately only those in the early to early middle age groups frequent the establishments that are currently downtown. Therefore, this age group is the only one seen around downtown, and get into the most trouble. I think more establishments should start opening that serve to older clients. We are entering a time period not seen before in the US, the baby boomer retirement period. Soon there will be many more from this age group looking for things to do in their freetime. I think to clean up the downtown we should bring in more of this demographic which might off set the current population that causes the most trouble. Granted most of the older patrons would not likely visit the current establishments, but would need more geared to their likes, such as Club 40's, a throw back to the big band era, with a dinner club setting, or a 50's/60's themed bar/restaurant, etc. I think we need to balance out the downtown more, then maybe some respect can be learned by the younger ones.

I really like this idea. But I think we should put necessity before luxury. There is a grocery chain called "Trader Joes" that is quite unique and has a maritime theme. TJ's are all over D.C., where I reside, and will soon be in Madison. They are not low price, but they are very comparable to other stores and shopping there if acutally fun; no warehouse feel. A store like this would serve as an anchor for other unique stores, or lesser know companies, like Caribou coffee. For a Rainforest cafe GB would need massive mobs of people; but thinking big is good :) Check them out at TraderJoes.com
I do not work for Trader Joes, nor am I affiliated with them in any way, shape or form.
Last thing Green Bay needs to become is so upscale yuppie land, people want that go to Door County, Green Bay is a blue collor city and stores like this just does not fit here.

Geez Louis, I don't remember this forum as being a catalyst for idea bashing; I thought it was for idea-sharing. But since you started it, your tunnel-vision clad rhetoric is the reason Green Bay's downtown sucks, and has sucked for quite some time...because people like you don't want anything to progress, you want stagnancy to remain, just as long as you can cash your check on Friday night and blow all $600 of it at the bar, err tavern. Yeh, good idea, don't let the yuppies in, they don't have any money!

Whoa Fillmore, take a deep breath, it's going to be okay. Perhaps GBMPhilips would have been better off saying something like, "I don't think those sort of places are suitable for the Green Bay market," but it wasn't that bad.

In response to GBM's comments: it seems to me that those sorts of stores would be desireable to many of the people moving into the downtown. Basically, it comes down to the free market, if there is demand for a Trader Joes in an area, then something like that is likely to come along, as it should, and the success of such a place isn't an affront to the "blue collar" people who don't choose to shop there (although some of those same people may want to go there as well). To say that we don't need a store because we don't want a certain type of customer is to me irrelevant. The market can make that determination on its own without your or my interference.

Furthermore, to invite a class of people to spend their money elsewhere will only hurt us in the end, as it will hurt businesses in the area with creates jobs, buys things, and pays taxes... all things we shouldn't just give away because we don't like yuppies. I mean, when yuppies wipe their butt, that TP is creating blue collar jobs. It won't help one blue collar worker if you stop selling them TP just because you don't like them.

Further back to Emerald City's comments about the types of entertainment downtown, I suspect again that the market will take care of that problem. It seems a large portion of those buying condos downtown are boomers, and the more of them in society in general and in the downtown in particular, the more that there will be places to serve them.

------------

We must trust the free market. Cities need planning, but not micro-managing. If a certain type of people want to live and be downtown, then business that serve them will be successful, we must encourage those businesses and have the right incentives for them, but ultimately they will come. The problem now is that there are NO PEOPLE to serve, but I think that we're heading in the right direction to change that.

Since I am babbling, I am kind of pissed off that the 56 didn't get another chance. I have been there a few times and the behavior was much more controlled at all times including bar close then it is anywhere on Washington Street. I guess the proximity to residential is the key. What do you think the soon to be neighbors on Washington Street are going to think??? I'm not sure that I would want to live anywhere near to either.

I was going to try and stay off this forum for a while because I babble too much....besides, I thought, there's not much going on as far as development goes anyway..everything seems to be at a standstill downtown...

But, since I cant stop babbling, I thought I'd weigh in on what GB surveyor asked about the new people moving to downtown in close proximity to the rowdy noisy people on Wash:

I haven't talked to the neighbors close to 5-6 club in person, but listening to their comments at the city council meeting on TV, I gathered that their main problem was not so much the noise as it was the destruction of property, public urination, drugs, knives, guns shooting, etc.

Now, the people living on the waterfront on Washington will have to deal with the same issues; however, the destruction of property, as in cars getting smashed, etc should be less of a problem on Washington than on Broadway near 5-6 because their cars will be parked securly underground, out of harm's way. Most of the people living in the upper floors won't see all the rest of the tomfoolery, they'll be well above the street. Only the noise will bother them, but I would guess there would be some good noise-proofing on a building like Astor Place.

As long as the ground level has some good, powerful hoses and a maintenence guy to wash away all traces of what happens at the street level early in the mornings, I don't think the residents have to worry too much about what goes on. It is after all part of city living, and they are the "urban pioneers" of this city who will have to brave that wild unruly frontier for a few hours on weekend nights. It's a fontier for this city, it really is.

Besides that, they have many other hours & days to enjoy the good, pleasant things about downtown living (waterfront, pedestrian things, etc). I still envy these people in some ways (and I ain't no yuppy).

Last thing Green Bay needs to become is so upscale yuppie land, people want that go to Door County, Green Bay is a blue collor city and stores like this just does not fit here.

Geez, last time I was in Green Bay I didn't see the WHOLE town driving around in pickup trucks with gun racks. A little diversity away from the dozen or so ShopKo's, Walmarts, K-marts isn't a bad thing.

Sorry, I had 5 cups of coffee yesterday and was all jittery. I didn't mean to offend anyone, or make them angry. But I still think Trader Joes would do quite well downtown. :)

Everyone knows De Pere needs a new bridge to accommodate the volume of traffic, but what is up with this design? I would have to agree with this person's opinion on the new bridge. It doesn't fit in with the surrounding historic area. Kind of reminds me of the new Soldier Field mixing with the Greco-Roman architecture and columns.

Green Bay Press-Gazette article (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060609/GPG07/606090687/1273)

http://cmsimg.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=U0&Date=20060609&Category=GPG07&ArtNo=606090687&Ref=AR&Profile=1273&MaxW=300

^^ I think the new bridge will be very nice. That image makes it look more stark than it will be. The Art Museum and 6th St. viaduct in Milwaukee are examples of modern, white structures that fit in great in their surroundings. When its built it will be fine. (of course some people won't like it, but that is almost unaviodable)

I'm not a big fan of building things to look pseudo-old so that they "fit in" with their surroundings. The cost of materials and labor to accuratly duplicate old structures is such that doing so becomes cost-prohibitive. I think a design like this is fitting with the times in which it is being built, while not overpowering its surroundings.

Besides, what is "old." I mean, in De Pere and Green Bay (and a lot of other place) you hear people who want everything to reflect the old look, but forget that the old buildings are of many different styles that add up to old charm becuase they have become, well, old. I mean, compared the the revival style of the courthouse, the chicago style Bellin Building was thoroughly modern when it was built, as was the art-deco style Northern building, and so on. Those buildings are of their time (as in, modern when they were built) but over time have become part of the fabric of old downtown. By contrast, Baylake Bank is a building that is trying to be somthing from a time that has past, and is somewhat of an aesthetic failure. Baylake would have been much better served by a facade that is a more contemporary style.

Not that you can't ever do retro, but I think this bridge is very appropriate for De Pere. In 70 years it too will be a part of "old downtown De Pere," but a better part because it will represent its era.

Personally, I think the new bridge is a cheap uncultured pile of junk that was chosen purely by economic factors rather than civic pride. It's only saving grace is supposed to be the new lighting scheme. There was a bygone era that actually took pride in what structures looked like as well as their functionality. Past citizen's economic blights were no different than ours today, the difference was that they understood civic pride and acted accordingly, rather than personal savings of a few tax dollars. But the people have spoken, and now we have to live with their decision for the next decades of the new bridge's life.

Cost should be the bottom line on any project like this. Its a bridge, it's only fucntion is to provide a means for traffic to get from one side of a river to the other. To waste millions of dollars just so it can have a certain look is a waste of taxpayer dollars.

I rest my case about civic pride.

Interesting picture of the old bridge next to the one built in the 1930's.

http://www.co.brown.wi.us/Library/history-genealogy/DP%20bridge.jpg




I do like the Columns at the entrance of the new bridge.

http://us.f13.yahoofs.com/bc/43cdde8bmf101ca37/bc/4+new+bridge.jpg?BCijBkEBCKF4P5gt

Nice pictures urban

I like this DePere bridge discussion. It's interesting to hear everyone's point of view on it.

Meanwhile, for those of you who have not seen the Riverfront Lofts lately:

People are moving in, the finishing touches are being put on. The detailing is making it look very nice. It's modern, maybe not for everyone, but I'm all right with it. Here are some pics from today:

http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/images/Historic-Other/2006-June_Lofts.jpg

http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/images/Historic-Other/2006-June_lofts3.jpg

Not bad, eh?

There must be some people in the lofts now, while I was driving home last night I noticed some lights on and it looked like some of the blinds were shut.

As far as the DePere Bridge goes, I think I still prefer the single 2 lane bridge concept over the approved 4 lane one along with the addition of a southern 'by-pass' bridge. I know that studies were done and such, but I personally think you can manipulate studies to be how you want people to perceive them. The population may not be there now to support the southern bridge trip amounts, however hwy 57 carries a boat load of traffic that I think would use the southern by-pass, which would make downtown DePere much more pleasant buy reducing the traffic volume. I know that some may see my thoughts as evil as I am promoting additional sprawl, however a top notch transportation system needs to be maintained and improved on.

While on the transportation subject, how do people feel about the expansion if 41 to 6 lanes in the GB Metro?

I feel that is totally unneeded, except for maybe 2 hours a day there is plenty of capacity. If they just updated the on/off ramps to current safety guidelines and tried to keep local traffic local there would be a huge improvement in congestion during peak times. Maybe implement ramp metering?

Complex OK'd near proposed Ashwaubenon Boulevard (Link (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060614/GPG0101/606140575/1207/GPGnews))

By Patti Zarling
pzarling@greebaypressgazette.com

ASHWAUBENON — The Village Board on Tuesday paved the way for a project that fits into the Ashwaubenon Boulevard proposed for a core part of the community.

Trustees approved plans for an 11-story retail/condominium complex at 821 Morris Ave., east of the Pioneer Credit Union building. Blueprints for the site show temporary parking where a future boulevard could exist.

The building will include restaurants and retail space on the first floor and office space on the second and third floors. The fourth and fifth floors will include condos and a variety of amenities including a fitness center, indoor theater and hospitality unit for condo owners' out-of-town-guests, according to development company SCM.

The sixth to 10th floors would house 2,200-square-foot to 2,400-square-foot condos, and the top story would be a large penthouse. The building will include underground parking.

Groundbreaking is expected to occur this fall and the project will take about a year to complete, developers say.

Village officials say the project melds with the boulevard concept, a proposed pedestrian-friendly strip that would run south from the Resch Center to Bay Park Square mall. The concept calls for three districts spreading south from the Resch Center to the mall: an entertainment/sports area to the north, a village center and a mix of retail and housing to the south, anchored by the boulevard.

Trustee Mark Williams expressed some concern that the height of the building exceeds the 10-story limit recently proposed by the village's Building Heights Committee, but Trustee Ken Seidel noted it was only a coincidence the two proposals are circulating at the same time.

Well Ashwaubenon always seems to make things happen. Sure wish Green Bay wouldn't have as many hurdles as they do when it comes to these kind of proposals. Sounds like the developer at the Five Rivers Resort in Oshkosh wants to quit their project, because the City of Oshkosh " has too many barriers to entry and is not development-friendly." Here is the link below to SCM's website, but still nothing as to what the complex will look like.

http://www.scmcompany.com/images/properties/ash/holmmorrismap.gif

SCM (http://www.scmcompany.com/Properties/Ashwaubenon/ashholmmorris.htm)

Last week the City started cutting down some of the trees in the 'islands' of that parking lot in front of Baylake Bank downtown...You know, the one we've been discussing the plans to convert to the "Town Square Park"

At first I was disappointed that the trees were being cut, I wondered why...But now I see that they're also pulling out some of the street signposts and other things in/near this parking lot..

They are doing this on the south & east side of the lot--areas corresponding to the Town Center Park Plan as shown below (from the City's downtown plan).

Maybe they are actually going to follow through with this plan and get this park in place???? Am I too optimistic again?

ANyone else know anything about this?

http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/images/TownSquarePark-DowntownGB_Design_Plan.jpg

You are too optimistic. They won't do anything that will reduce the total number of spaces in that lot. There are discussions about rearranging that parking so that a small portion (equal to two rows of cars and the drive between them) on the Washington St. side can be made into a plaza, but not on the scope of the town square proposal.

I haven't seen that they are removing trees and signs, I'm kind of surprised to hear that. Accomodating the smaller plaza without losing any stalls requires that those medians come out though, so this sort of work would eventually be needed. I may be totally wrong, but I don't believe any plans have been drawn up for the smaller plaza, and as much as I'd like the large plaza, that doesn't seem to be in the cards for that site.

Dog'gon it, there I go getting all optimistic again. Is there a Pessimism Club I can join or something to keep me from getting my hopes up too much? Seems to me there's got to be a Downtown Pessimist Club that meets daily.

I thought maybe, just maybe, they'd get that park plaza put in place, because that new 800-stall parking garage is right across the street! It's less than 100 feet! 30 extra steps!! Plus, the ramp is only 50 cents/hour as opposed to that surface lot which is 70 cents/hour...and you don't get the shelter from rain,sun,snow etc. in the surface lot.

Anyway...Well then I'm disappointed that they cut down those trees. Based on what they did with Baylake and now this, they are anti-tree, anti-vegetation. Surely there's some leftover Agent Orange stockpiled somewhere that Baylake & the City can get a hold of to totally wipe out any traces of plant life. I'll bring that up at my first Pessimist Club meeting. :jk: ..I'll keep the faith :)

The below article is from the Small Business Times, a Milwaukee publisher. The article ran in their April 28, 2006 issue. Although it doesn't really reveal anything new about the downtown projects it does give an interesting "out of town" perspective.

Titletown Renewal - Milwaukee Firm Plays Major Role in Reinventing Green Bay's Skyline


special report: commercial real estate
By Andrew Weiland, of SBT
Milwaukee-based Vetter Denk Architects Inc. is completing one development and is planning three others in a four-block stretch of riverfront property in downtown Green Bay. The projects will dramatically alter the downtown Green Bay skyline and could boost the city's image. "This will be the new Monday Night Football shot (of the city)," said John Vetter, principal of Vetter Denk. "It will show where the city of Green Bay is going and how progressive it can be." "This is going to set the tone for what the new Green Bay is all about," said P. Robert Strong, the city's planning director.
Vetter Denk's Green Bay projects include:
-- The company's first Titletown venture is called Riverfront Lofts, a 26-unit condominium building. The company has already sold 25 of the 26 units. The $10 million, five-story building has a variety of condos, one to three-story units with between 860 and 3,500 square feet of space, which are priced between $165,000 to $800,000. Its construction will be complete by the end of May.
-- The company plans to build a $35 million, 17-story condominium building, called Astor Place, just south of Main Street on the current site of Green Bay's Admiral Flatley Park. The building will be the tallest in the state outside of Milwaukee, Vetter said. It will have 95 condominiums and 19,000 square feet of retail space. The condominiums will be priced between $200,000 and $1.4 million. So far, 45 of the 95 units have been reserved. Vetter Denk plans to begin construction on that project in the fall. It will take about 18 months to build.
-- The company plans to build River Center between Riverfront Lofts and Astor Place. The site is a vacant former Younkers store, most of which will be demolished. River Center will be a $35 million to $50 million mixed-use development with 60,000 to 80,000 square feet of office space, a 100-room hotel, 25,000 to 30,000 square feet of retail space and about 60 loft apartments. The project will also include a new 15,000-square-foot Green Bay children's museum. It will consist of several buildings between six and 14 stories tall.
-- The company also plans to develop a site at the corner of Walnut Street and Washington Street, which is currently used as a surface parking lot. The company's preliminary plans, called River Tower, are for a $20 million to $40 million mixed-use high-rise building with residential condos, office space and retail space. The height has not been determined. The company has an option to develop the site, which city officials had identified as the best site for the downtown's tallest building before Vetter Denk proposed its Astor Place plans. "We felt that was the premier site in downtown Green Bay," Strong said. "We still expect it to be a significant building."
Vetter Denk began working on development projects in downtown Green Bay about 2-1/2 years ago. The company received a call from a Green Bay resident who was familiar with the company's work, asking the firm to do projects to improve the city's downtown. The man said that Green Bay "could really use them," Vetter said. The Green Bay man came to Milwaukee and met with Vetter Denk executives, and later they went on a tour of Green Bay. "The problem with Green Bay, the way we saw it, was there was no heart to the downtown," Vetter said. "We saw that as a problem, but we also saw it as an opportunity."

The company targeted the area between Main Street and Walnut Street along the east shore of the Fox River as the key area of Green Bay that was poised to become the new heart of the downtown. The area is across the river from the Neville Public Museum and is next to the now vacant downtown mall. That portion of the riverfront had been neglected, Vetter said. "It was a classic, Midwest post-industrial city that had turned its back on its most valuable resource, the Fox River," he said.

The stretch of riverfront was barren, except for parking lots and a warehouse. Today, it is the site of a massive transformation. Next door to the almost-completed Riverfront Lofts building, Nicolet Bank built a new four-story, 83,000-square-foot corporate headquarters, which was completed last fall. The Nicolet Bank site is the only property in the four-block area between Main and Walnut streets that is not controlled by Vetter Denk.

In addition, the city plans to build a $12 million boardwalk along the east side of the Fox River between Main and Walnut streets. The boardwalk will be paid for by a combination of tax incremental financing (TIF), state and federal grants and private donations. The boardwalk will have an upper level near the buildings and a lower level along the water, where boats will be docked. The boardwalk will be about 50 feet wide with some larger areas where crowds can gather to watch performances, Strong said.

"We're creating this environment of interesting spaces where things can happen," he said. Vetter Denk worked with Boston-based Stoss Landscape Urbanism to design the boardwalk concept. The two firms also worked together to design the planned Erie Street Plaza in Milwaukee's Historic Third Ward. Vetter Denk gave the boardwalk conceptual plans to the city, at no cost, in exchange for exclusive development rights for the properties along the east side of the river between Main and Walnut streets, except for the Nicolet Bank property. The boardwalk will be part of a 15-mile long trail. "This is going to be a destination on that trail," Strong said.

Eventually, the city will also build a walkway on the other side of Fox River, opposite the boardwalk. That walkway will provide a softer, more natural setting to complement the Neville Museum and Veterans Park. Other developments are occurring downtown, in part because of the momentum created by the Vetter Denk projects, Strong said. A vacant former Boston Store building, located next to the former Younkers building, was acquired by Baylake Bank. The bank is occupying the first floor of the building and leased the 80,000-square-foot second floor to APAC Customer Services, which will move a call center from Allouez (a Green Bay suburb) to the building. The APAC move will bring about 1,000 jobs into downtown Green Bay.

More businesses are thinking about moving downtown, Strong said. "I've had property owners in the downtown that have actually been receiving calls," Strong said. "A lot of this is all coming from the excitement of the initial plan (by Vetter Denk)." Even so, Vetter Denk's plans were not embraced by everyone in Green Bay right away. The company, which is receiving millions of dollars in TIF financing for its Green Bay projects, had to work to convince the community that there was a demand for urban living in the city's downtown. "It's a very provincial town that does not easily welcome outsiders," Vetter said. "It took a lot of work to gain respect and trust in the city."

Before Vetter Denk arrived, there were no residences in Green Bay's central business district that could be purchased. Only rental apartments were available downtown. However, today, in addition to Vetter Denk's projects, a 130-unit downtown apartment building is being converted to condos. "There are people out there that would love to live in an urban environment if you offer the right product at the right location," Strong said.
Vetter Denk Architects Inc.
Location: 614 N. Broadway, Milwaukee
Owners: John Vetter and Kelly Denk
Employees: 10
Web site: www.vetterdenk.com
April 28, 2006, Small Business Times, Milwaukee, WI

Thanks Urban, for reminding me what got me really excited about the possibility of a rejuvinated downtown. A little rekindling jolt of hope.

One other thing I wanted to mention:

Did you hear that the Valley Fair Mall in downtown Appleton (which closed its doors after the Washington Commons) already has revitalization plans, and they're set to begin tearing down most and redeveloping the site this summer or fall already? I can't seem to find it online, but I heard the story somewhere..

Chalk up Appleton as another city that can turn things around quickly. Meanwhile nothing happens to our old Port Plaza mall.

Thanks Urban, for reminding me what got me really excited about the possibility of a rejuvinated downtown. A little rekindling jolt of hope.

One other thing I wanted to mention:

Did you hear that the Valley Fair Mall in downtown Appleton (which closed its doors after the Washington Commons) already has revitalization plans, and they're set to begin tearing down most and redeveloping the site this summer or fall already? I can't seem to find it online, but I heard the story somewhere..

Chalk up Appleton as another city that can turn things around quickly. Meanwhile nothing happens to our old Port Plaza mall.

You can hardly compare the 2 properties. Valley Fair is more like compairing East Town Mall. It is fairly close to 441 and thus more suburban. The Avenue Mall (I think) is the downtown Appleton Mall which is basically empty, however still open.

It seems like all development is really slow now so I wouldn't expect anything to happen to Port Plaza mall unless the owners really truely want to turn it around and not just sit on it and let its value increase because of other developments

From the Press-Gazette:

A news conference is scheduled this afternoon to discuss future plans for the Bellin Building, at South Washington and East Walnut St.

Downtown Green Bay Inc. will hold a news conference with Steve Schneider of Safford Building LLC., to announce a vision for the historic building at 130 E. Walnut St., which was built more than 90 years ago and at eight stories tall was Green Bay’s first ‘skyscraper.’

Green Bay Major Jim Schmitt will be at the press conference to discuss the significance of the real estate purchase.

Look for additional information about the Bellin Building in Wednesday’s Press-Gazette

---------------

This sounds promising. The Bellin Building is one of my favorites, and it would be great to at some point see it fixed up to its former glory. First step would, I'd guess, be putting it to good use to generate the money to fix it up. I can't wait to hear more details...

You can hardly compare the 2 properties. Valley Fair is more like compairing East Town Mall. It is fairly close to 441 and thus more suburban. The Avenue Mall (I think) is the downtown Appleton Mall which is basically empty, however still open.

It seems like all development is really slow now so I wouldn't expect anything to happen to Port Plaza mall unless the owners really truely want to turn it around and not just sit on it and let its value increase because of other developments

I think that the mall in DT Appleton is actually holding its own, if not improving. The first floor is over 50% filled IMO, and the third floor has a lot of governmental/educational offices. The second floor is still looking empty, but with the Fox Cities Children's Museum expansion nearly complete, I see activity picking up at this mall soon. One advantage that Appleton's downtown mall has over GB's is that it is fairly small and compact, with no empty shell department stores bringing it down. It is more the way a downtown mall should be.

Well I'm excited about this!
From WBAY-TV
New Plans for Old Bellin Building

June 20, 2006 05:37 PM CDT




By Jason Allen

New plans for a 91-year-old building in downtown Green Bay, on a corner of prime real estate, were made public Tuesday.

Safford Building Group, headed by a local former telecommunications executive, recently bought the controlling share of the Bellin Buchanan Building, estimated to be $1.4 million. The building is on the corner of Washington and Walnut streets on the eastern edge of the Fox River, at the foot of the Walnut Street Bridge. When it was built in 1915, the eight-story structure was Green Bay's first skyscraper.

The building still looks a lot like it did when it was built in the early 20th century, and the new owner wants to keep that historic look while adding some modern touches.

The Safford Building Group has a three-year renovation plan. It begins with repairs in the next three months, preserving the terra cotta on the outside of the building, and adding lighting on the building's pillars.

There are already plans to open a coffee shop, convenience store, and a large, upscale restaurant on the ground levels, all within the next year. They hope to fill 80 percent of the building's office space within 18 months.

"We have good tenants," president of the investment group, Steve Schneider, said. "They're excited.

Safford Building Group hopes to recruit more high-tech companies to call the building home. The Bellin Building has been office space for doctors, dentists, and other professionals, including Schneider, who felt compelled to make it more than an office.

"Having had my office in this building for the last few years, I kind of fell in love with the building."

He said Green Bay's work redeveloping downtown played a big part in the decision to do this.

Mayor Jim Schmitt said plans for the building are very much in line with what the city wants downtown. He especially liked the decision to keep the historic look instead of starting from scratch.

According to Channel 5, the old Bellin building's elevator still has a "trained elevator Operator". Does that mean there's a guy there who just runs the elevator? Well he gets to keep his job anyway.

According to Channel 5, the old Bellin building's elevator still has a "trained elevator Operator". Does that mean there's a guy there who just runs the elevator? Well he gets to keep his job anyway.

Evidentally, yes, it does mean that there's a guy there who just runs the elevator. I've been in that elevator once, and there was no operator, but I have hear about there being an operator.

^^ I don't know about that bulding, but Appleton's 2nd tallest (the 12 story one, I think its called the Zuek building) had an elevator operator until just a couple years ago. He operated one of the building's 2 elevetors, while the other elevator was automatic at the time. Now that he's retired, they are both automatic.

Well I'm excited about this!
From WBAY-TV
New Plans for Old Bellin Building

June 20, 2006 05:37 PM CDT




By Jason Allen

New plans for a 91-year-old building in downtown Green Bay, on a corner of prime real estate, were made public Tuesday.


It's nice to see some synergy taking shape in Green Bay. You have to admit, with the APAC move to downtown, Let Me Be Frank Productions moving to the renovated Meyer Theater, The new Nicolet and Bay Lake bank buildings, the sold out River Lofts, and now this announcement, that dowtown Green Bay is undeniably moving in the right direction. Also, don't forget what Broadway was like just ten years ago.

I'm sure there will be some that won't like the changing city. But, I think Green Bay is big enough to retain its blue-collar haunts while offering amenities to its growing white-collar population. Personally, I think it's nice to see the city embracing this diversity in what it now has to offer.

Yes there is still a gentleman the runs the elevator in the Bellin Building. I really lie the idea that they are going to remodel this building, it will help balance the more modern look that Vetters is bringing to his buildings. Did you know that this was actually a seven story building originallybut when a new building was being built in the downtown area that two doctors who owend the Bellin Building added the 8th floor to keep it the tallest down there.

Alterra or Caribou

I couldn't be much happier about the plans for the Bellin Building (although I'll be a bit sad if they re-name it, oh well). I can't wait to see how it looks all cleaned up and with new lighting, it should be a real gem. It's great to have that chicago-style building on the main intersection downtown. I'd have been very upset if anyone came along wanting to tear that down, but now it seems that it will be restored to its former self.

They need to have a nice big US flag on that flag-pole on top too. Put some nice lights on it so it can be flown at night, it would be a real beacon and help define the building, and who doesn't like to see a nice flag flying like that?

I wonder what, if anything, they'll do to the brown brick west and south sides of that. Obvoiusly it would be very expensive to put a facade on there, but it would be nice to see that part cleaned up too as it faces the river.

GBM, I didn't know that it was originally 7-stories untill I read about it in the Press-Gazette today. I guess it makes some sense now, looking at the building. I think it's pretty funny that they'd add that just to keep it as the tallest!

but Appleton's 2nd tallest (the 12 story one, I think its called the Zuek building) had an elevator operator until just a couple years ago. He operated one of the building's 2 elevetors, while the other elevator was automatic at the time. Now that he's retired, they are both automatic.
Hi araman0. It's called the Zuelke Building. Completed in 1932, 12 stories and 168 feet tall.

From the Press Gazette:

Schneider said the group envisions making the rooftop a functioning ninth floor.

This threw me off a bit. In the story they refer to the 9th floor as the penthouse but everything else I've read makes it sound like the building has 8 floors. Is anyone aware, is the 9th floor just an open roof? I know they did the press conference from the rooftop yesterday but it was hard to tell if there's any kind of structure up there. I'm wondering (based on the quote) if they're planning on building upward or if they'll turn it into some kind of rooftop lounge/terrace (a great option in my opinion).