Just keep Schmitt and Vetters away from the project or all we will get is a square building that is simply ugly or a hole in the ground.

Pessimism won't get this off the ground. Let's all hope the year planning option turns into a stadium all GB residents can understand and take pride in.

Pessimism won't get this off the ground. Let's all hope the year planning option turns into a stadium all GB residents can understand and take pride in.

I agree, but I feel like I need to get some thoughts out. For once I actually read some of the comments on the P-G site, most were positive, however someone raised a great point. Is this the highest and best use of the riverfront??? After sitting empty for basically as long as I can remember, now is the right time to develop. After thinking about that I concluded that if at some point in the future there was a better use then a baseball stadium it could be torn down. There are some concerns I have, for one is the season structure of the northwoods league, it is so damn short, and another is the parking situation. I also think that its going to really be a stretch to use this facility 100 days a year. Anyone else have any thoughts?

Just keep Schmitt and Vetters away from the project or all we will get is a square building that is simply ugly or a hole in the ground.

Maybe you should consider running for mayor. I would really love to see the direction this city would take...

Maybe you should consider running for mayor. I would really love to see the direction this city would take...

A new article this morning. Among a few of the tidbits they mentioned were:

-This will be a privately owned and funded project and the city will not operate and manage it. This was stressed by Economic Director Derek Lord.

-The city has worked with Mr. Royle for the past six months as there concern was that this will be used for more than baseball as well. This project needs to be succesful and it sounds like Mr. Royle has a plan to alleviate these concerns.

-The partner is Smet Construction.

-Same size as and seating as T-Rattlers stadium with better amenities. He even said in the article that this is a once in a lifetime opportunity and they will make a splash.

-If everything goes to plan, construction in 2011. Working off of Joannes lease.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090919/GPG03/909190637

Fellas, I know that we have had plenty of discussion of this project here and what all it brings, but I have to stay that I am extremely stoked! The thing that I like is that this group wants to make a splash and is thinking big (same size as Grand Chute stadium? AWESOME!). Especially if they have a plan to incorporate this project with other uses, more power to them and to Green Bay! With that said, I do believe that continued investment in Joannes is/would be good for urban and neighborhood development, this project can help add a coolness factor to downtown. An anchor for south Broadway, family orientated, a destination point, increase in foot traffic. This is by no means a cure-all, but it is another piece to the puzzle. I understand that a lot needs to be done and a planning option is just a step, but I am having a hard time right now tempering my enthusiasm :banana:.

I agree that other uses beyond baseball will be needed, but at least 34 Bullfrogs games to start is 34 more reasons to attract people to downtown that we don't currently have. The facility could immediately be an extension of Bayfest, Fire Over the Fox and a great bookend for the Farmer's Market. Talk about taking the Leicht at Night concept to a whole new level. GB will finally have the waterfront ampitheater that Oshkosh got in the Leach..!! The cool factor should this become reality is endless.

I agree that other uses beyond baseball will be needed, but at least 34 Bullfrogs games to start is 34 more reasons to attract people to downtown that we don't currently have. The facility could immediately be an extension of Bayfest, Fire Over the Fox and a great bookend for the Farmer's Market. Talk about taking the Leicht at Night concept to a whole new level. GB will finally have the waterfront ampitheater that Oshkosh got in the Leach..!! The cool factor should this become reality is endless.

I'm not against the project. It does keep people in Green Bay which is good. I just don't how many people it will bring to the prime downtown area. The location is located near the slums (I guess I could say the same about the current location). Too far for most to walk to Broadway or Washington Street. It's like the farmers market, people don't leave the market & visit downtown. Best of luck with your project. Maybe it will be the 1st step in turning that area around. Just invest in a good security system.

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/pedalpub.jpghttp://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/Fietscafe.jpg

Not sure if something on this was posted before. If so, my apologies. As some of you may know, a state legislator from Forest Junction — located just south of De Pere on Highway 57/32 — is proposing that commercial beer/liquor quadricycles be legal in Wisconsin.

It's a bicycle with four wheels with room for up to 12-17 pedaling passengers, is driven by a nondrinking "professional driver," is also known as a Pedal Pub, and is said to be popular in the Netherlands. Alcohol is not provided, it's BYO. Top speed: 5 mph. The first in the U.S. appeared two years ago in Minnesota. Above are images of quadricycles I pulled off the Internet. I think one of those vehicles belongs to Puant.

Someone wants to bring the Pedal Pubs next year to the Lambeau Field area and possibly downtown, alcohol or not.

www.fox11online.com/dpp/mobile/local_wluk_pedal_pubs_could_come_to_green_bay_200909080930_rev1

www.pedalpub.com

An overview of the proposed legislation is at: www.mail-archive.com/bikies@lists.danenet.org/msg01067.html

The pedalpub is a huge success in Minneapolis and very safe. There are of course restrictions on which streets it can run and limited speeds.
I think there will be a problem getting Green Bay to approve. Didn't the city even ban hot dog vendors downtown a few years ago unless it's for an event? Ashwaubanon might go for this especially on game days.

Hey Night Rider, last time I checked Broadway IS downtown.

I agree, but I feel like I need to get some thoughts out. For once I actually read some of the comments on the P-G site, most were positive, however someone raised a great point. Is this the highest and best use of the riverfront??? After sitting empty for basically as long as I can remember, now is the right time to develop. After thinking about that I concluded that if at some point in the future there was a better use then a baseball stadium it could be torn down. There are some concerns I have, for one is the season structure of the northwoods league, it is so damn short, and another is the parking situation. I also think that its going to really be a stretch to use this facility 100 days a year. Anyone else have any thoughts?

I too read the posts on the P-G site and was surprised by the number of positive posts. As for the best use of the parcel, I think that a baseball stadium is a good fit for now. You gotta remember that it's surrounded by blight and that makes it a good transition for the area as being a cornerstone of some sort for future development. We know already that the coal piles to the South will be the next step. But a decade after that, the warehousing to the North may be redeveloped. Who's to know? In the meantime the stadium will be there producing tax money for the city. The alternative is to let it sit vacant for another 5-25 years, waiting for a developer and collecting no taxes. If the stadium does fit the requirements for something like T-Rat league that's another step that baseball in GB could take.

If Royle can make it go, we should be thankful that he's made a positive impact on the quality of life in the metro area. He's already done that by giving us three years of Bullfrogs play, let's hope that he can give us a few more decades.

I still think that the Joannes site is best. However, I have no experience running a baseball team. At this point the Bullfrogs seem to want to invest in our downtown (more on this in a bit), and I say great. They seem to want to work with the city to make it a destination for as many days as possible. Certainly a stadium there can't possible detract from the downtown, and I don't doubt that it will play a nice role in continuing the downtown's momentum. I look forward to seeing more concrete plans. This is a big project and it's going to take the 'frogs time to put things together, so the planning option will be great. It seems that they have had enough time to investigate the idea and must feel it's feasible. If they come up with a good plan (which I suspect they will) I'll support it whole-heartedly.

As for whether this is downtown or not, it is in the Broadway district, which to me is one of the downtown districts. At the same time, it's the fringe of downtown. I don't think that's a bad thing, but it will take some work to weave it into the downtown fabric that we're trying to build. For me, this furthers my belief that the city needs to be branding and promoting the entire riverfront from south of Mason up through Leicht Park and the mouth of the East River. Add a baseball stadium to a mix with the CityDeck, Leicht Park, the Neville Muesum, the Children's Museum, the Life on the River sculptures, the Fox River Trail, the Porlier St. Pier, Veteran's Park, etc., and that's quite an area being built. Each piece on it's own isn't enough, but add all that up and you have a great diversity of spaces, attractions, and nearby businesses. This combined area is what needs to be promoted, and each part should be focused on equally. That to me is the first step in weaving the stadium site into an integral part of downtown.

Finally, in the PG comments:

Let's give credit where credit is due. The idea of a stadium on the Fox River first appeared quite some time ago on a blog about Green Bay on blogger/blogspot, and neither Royle nor Schmitt were involved. From what I saw, Royle stumbled upon the site...and when the P-G got involved, then Schmitt got involved... but it seems like any credit for the idea belongs to someone else. That blogger seems to have some great ideas for the stadium, and I wish that the P-G would put their investigative skills to work and involve that blogger with their stories.

Hahahahahahaha. I guess Puant gets all the credit for the Baseball Stadium idea!!!!! I'm not sure the commenter has an accurate view of how this developed, buuuuut, full credit to Puant for putting ideas out there that people are seeing and for his work to generate enthusiasm for ideas downtown. Good job!

Finally, in the PG comments:



Hahahahahahaha. I guess Puant gets all the credit for the Baseball Stadium idea!!!!! I'm not sure the commenter has an accurate view of how this developed, buuuuut, full credit to Puant for putting ideas out there that people are seeing and for his work to generate enthusiasm for ideas downtown. Good job!

Oh man. I thought I made it clear that this was NOT my idea, and that I simply wanted to see if someone else's idea of a stadium here would fit on that site. Once I determined that it would fit, then I went kind of nuts with the idea and created the renders. Too bad I don't post comments on the P-G forum or I'd make that correction.

Actually, I first got the idea from our own GBMPHillips!!!! But I've heard that former mayor Jadin also had thought of this. So, I don't know who's idea it was, but it makes sense to a lot of people. I simply wanted to spice the idea up a little more to try make it more sexy I guess....maybe I should do that for "Site 4" next....

It was Jadin's idea about 6,7 years ago.

I am happy to see this project gaining some momentum.

Again,this is not a be all and end all project. It's a signature facility that can feed into other projects. This whole thing is a puzzle with different size pieces. Parking ramps,steak houses and coffee shops alone won't get this done.

For the negative energies here I say a few things. One,the riverfront is exactly the kind of spot you put this stadium. It's about creating atmosphere. Sitting in this park on a warm July night looking out into what is hopefully an emerging skyline would be cool as hell,fun and exciting. It's how it's done. Look at other cities.

I think also..when you stay in a hotel in another city you tend to look for stuff to do around the hotel. You probably don't venture out too far unless you know the city extremely well. I think people staying at a DT hotel might appreciate cheap entertainment w/i blocks of their room. There are no movie theaters..no bowling. No nothing other than to drink.

This park is the last hope to get a signature entertainment building DT. Other than an IMAX someday everything has been built in the burbs.

As far as being 'too far' from the other districts. All I can say is are you f'ing serious?

It's called taxis. It's called bike taxis (I bet those little peddal cabs would make a killing carting people from the park to Rebublic or Hagermiester and vice versa).

Its call get off your lazy a-s. It is not too far.

What do you think they do in Chicago? Getting foot traffic flowing from the stadium over the bridge and to the parking lots is how you get people into the bars,shops,clubs and eateries.


As for keeping the park where it is. More uninspired,safe,boring same old same old.

I'll tell ya what. I have been to ONE frogs game. Out of sight out of mind. I forget about them because they aren't located in an area I ever go to in town...nothing else over that way. If the new park is built it will be a 12 minute walk from my place and I would probably go to 1 game a week average. I also would pass the park everyday on my way home and it would serve as a reminder. Hey,thats right the frogs are home tonight...I think I'll get dinner at the game and check it out.....



The frogs aren't going anywhere. You could very easy have 2 or 3 touring acts play each summer as well as a dozen local and regional acts. Add in other family events. I don't know about 100 days a year...not to start..but 75 is doable.


And for the other hot topic.....
I love the idea of Starbucks. I happen to like Starbucks. Downtowns should be a mix of local and national brands. There is nothing wrong with having a Starbucks or Dunkin Donuts mixed in with your local spots. Again,this 'either or' attitude that just sucks.

I went to Daily Buzz 2 times and was not impressed. The smoothie I got there was gross and I would rather pay .50 more at Starbucks and enjoy my drink than to have to dump it out while walking over Walnut St. bridge because it's yuck.


Sometimes we just have to admit the national guys do do it a little better than the locals.

Yeah,Blackstone is really good for what it is but sometimes it would be nice to be able to walk down Washington and grab a Big Mac.

Just my 2 cents.


I would say that if what we've been doing in thi city for the past 20 some years was working we wouldn't have this need to redevelop and to change course.

Most of the nay sayers are just flat out scared to try something a little bit off the path we are used to.

I am fine with somebody not liking a particular idea but those folks almost never have a better alternative in mind.

Sure...the stadium may bomb and Starbucks might be gone in 10 months but dang it...we need to start having some b-lls and TRY something else. Same old same old it NOT working anymore.

Hey Night Rider, last time I checked Broadway IS downtown.

I said "prime downtown area". I never said it wasn't downtown. I could probably make a argument it isn't downtown though. Not every address on Broadway is downtown. Enough said.

A few thoughts:

This park is the last hope to get a signature entertainment building DT.

This isn't the last chance for anything. It's just the best chance so far.

As for keeping the park where it is. More uninspired,safe,boring same old same old.

I'll tell ya what. I have been to ONE frogs game. Out of sight out of mind. I forget about them because they aren't located in an area I ever go to in town...nothing else over that way. If the new park is built it will be a 12 minute walk from my place and I would probably go to 1 game a week average. I also would pass the park everyday on my way home and it would serve as a reminder. Hey,thats right the frogs are home tonight...I think I'll get dinner at the game and check it out.....

Well, certainly the new location would be more prominent, but at the same time your personal attendance isn't evidence for anything other than what's good for you personally. There are people on the East side who may find a move downtown to be less convenient. Plus, they are evidently outgrowing their facility at the current location, so it seems people are finding their way there.

We can disagree about what location is best, and I certainly see the merits of a downtown location. I also believe that our near-downtown neighborhoods are important and feel that the current location serves some of those neighborhoods and can be a catalyst there. I take some offense to your statement that my view is "More uninspired,safe,boring same old same old." I don't think it's any of that. My argument is just more pro-neighborhood than simply pro-downtown. There's rational reasons to support either view.


I love the idea of Starbucks. I happen to like Starbucks. Downtowns should be a mix of local and national brands. There is nothing wrong with having a Starbucks or Dunkin Donuts mixed in with your local spots. Again,this 'either or' attitude that just sucks.

Sometimes we just have to admit the national guys do do it a little better than the locals.

This is a subjective statement, but certainly chains succeed for a reason. The only point I'd like to add is that the lack of chains downtown isn't so much because the city, or anyone else with influence, is opposed to their existence. Chains are almost never early adopters. It takes having local shops succeed, it takes increasing the population downtown, among other factors, to attract chains. In general terms, the presence of chains is more of a sign that we'd be succeeding than an ingredient you seek out to create success. They have metrics they look at to determine where their chain can succeed, and it's difficult bordering on impossible to attract them on the hope that things are moving in the right direction. Local entrepreneurs will have that vision and take that risk, national chains rarely will.

As far as being 'too far' from the other districts. All I can say is are you f'ing serious?

It's called taxis. It's called bike taxis (I bet those little peddal cabs would make a killing carting people from the park to Rebublic or Hagermiester and vice versa).

Its call get off your lazy a-s. It is not too far.

What do you think they do in Chicago? Getting foot traffic flowing from the stadium over the bridge and to the parking lots is how you get people into the bars,shops,clubs and eateries.
Yes, some people are "f'ing serious" about it being too far from the downtown. At this point there are 3-4 blocks of industrial area between the brownfield site and destinations that might appeal to someone who's at the ballgame.

Calling people lazy isn't going to get them to walk through that area at night. The fact of the matter is that most people ARE lazy and that's who we're trying to get to downtown. So that's why I, and many others, think that at this point the brownfield site is too far from downtown to have a significant impact on downtown. Hopefully in 20 years there will be continous commericial development along Broadway and then people will be able to exit the stadium and immediately be in a pedestrian-friendly place. But that's not the case right now.

A few thoughts:
This is a subjective statement, but certainly chains succeed for a reason. The only point I'd like to add is that the lack of chains downtown isn't so much because the city, or anyone else with influence, is opposed to their existence. Chains are almost never early adopters. It takes having local shops succeed, it takes increasing the population downtown, among other factors, to attract chains. In general terms, the presence of chains is more of a sign that we'd be succeeding than an ingredient you seek out to create success. They have metrics they look at to determine where their chain can succeed, and it's difficult bordering on impossible to attract them on the hope that things are moving in the right direction. Local entrepreneurs will have that vision and take that risk, national chains rarely will.

Agreed. Every downtown has to start somewhere. It depends mostly on the success of local businesses. Our downtown would've never gotten a McDonald's and Taco Bell in 1982 without a few other locally- and nationally-recognized businesses succeeding in the 1970s. It took 3-5 years to adopt those types of places downtown, even with the Port Plaza Mall shopping center down there.
Unfortunately, those restaurants are no longer there, I'm hoping, like a lot of people here to see some chains return in the future, not only for the cheap eats, but also for the benefit of having wi-fi connections for laptop computers among other things. Having different businesses downtown borders on many perils and promises, kind of like what you said.

Calling people lazy isn't going to get them to walk through that area at night. The fact of the matter is that most people ARE lazy and that's who we're trying to get to downtown. So that's why I, and many others, think that at this point the brownfield site is too far from downtown to have a significant impact on downtown. Hopefully in 20 years there will be continous commericial development along Broadway and then people will be able to exit the stadium and immediately be in a pedestrian-friendly place. But that's not the case right now.

Well said Kramerica. I put many miles on my shoes this year in Madison & Washington DC. Maybe part of it is because it's easier to use the Metro then drive a car in DC. It's just a different mentality here. Come winter, the walk to my car can be too far on those cold days.

Speaking of walking...am walking to the packer game in a few hours. GO PACK!

Couldn't local bars near the Cherry Street ramp sponsor a shuttle or two for transportation to and from the game. I'm thinking of the countless bars and eateries that sponsor shuttles to the Brewers games in the Milwaukee area. Those akin to going to the bars could do so after the game, and those who don't could simply walk a block to their car on the Cherry Street ramp. I know there are many families who attend the games, so that could also be addressed with a Bullfrogs-sponsored 'Non-alcoholic/Family' shuttle or something. Just a thought.

Couldn't local bars near the Cherry Street ramp sponsor a shuttle or two for transportation to and from the game. I'm thinking of the countless bars and eateries that sponsor shuttles to the Brewers games in the Milwaukee area. Those akin to going to the bars could do so after the game, and those who don't could simply walk a block to their car on the Cherry Street ramp. I know there are many families who attend the games, so that could also be addressed with a Bullfrogs-sponsored 'Non-alcoholic/Family' shuttle or something. Just a thought.
They could do that, but there apparently isn't a market for it or else they'd be doing it for the games at Joannes.

Couldn't local bars near the Cherry Street ramp sponsor a shuttle or two for transportation to and from the game. I'm thinking of the countless bars and eateries that sponsor shuttles to the Brewers games in the Milwaukee area. Those akin to going to the bars could do so after the game, and those who don't could simply walk a block to their car on the Cherry Street ramp. I know there are many families who attend the games, so that could also be addressed with a Bullfrogs-sponsored 'Non-alcoholic/Family' shuttle or something. Just a thought.

They could do that, but there apparently isn't a market for it or else they'd be doing it for the games at Joannes.

I'm thinking it's a better idea than Kramerica is giving it credit for. Especially if you have some sort of open sided bus that was really easy to load and unload. The distances involved between the ballpark and the destination would be shorter and as such service could be more frequent with the same number of busses. It could help with parking by making other lots/ramps available. Heck, we can't even say it couldn't work with Joannes because, to my knowledge, it hasn't been tried. I'm not saying it would work, but it's the sort of thing that the On Broadway and DGBI districts could organize for the benefit of their constituent businesses. Rent a bus out as they are now for gallery nite, and if it works see what can be done to make it even better, and if it doesn't work then we know.

I'm thinking it's a better idea than Kramerica is giving it credit for. Especially if you have some sort of open sided bus that was really easy to load and unload. The distances involved between the ballpark and the destination would be shorter and as such service could be more frequent with the same number of busses. It could help with parking by making other lots/ramps available. Heck, we can't even say it couldn't work with Joannes because, to my knowledge, it hasn't been tried. I'm not saying it would work, but it's the sort of thing that the On Broadway and DGBI districts could organize for the benefit of their constituent businesses. Rent a bus out as they are now for gallery nite, and if it works see what can be done to make it even better, and if it doesn't work then we know.

I like your idea about getting DTGBI and On Broadway involved.

It could work on a Fri., Sat. nights stretch of home games. On each of those nights, a different bar like Knuckles or Coaches could do a fan appreciation night by offering a team banner and free drink with a ticket stub after the game. The pick up/drop off location could be on Cherry street right in front of the ramp where there's already designated parking for busses/limos/taxis.

AND

People could register to win one of two game night packages. Either Friday or Saturday night package for two of; dinner, entrance to the game and a spot on the Leinies Northwoods Deck, a free cocktail after the game at a downtown place and transportation from downtown to the game and back.

They could do that, but there apparently isn't a market for it or else they'd be doing it for the games at Joannes.

I think that there's a lot more options that would appeal to people going to BF games downtown than there are near Joannes. I don't think it's a bad idea at all, to be honest.

This is a subjective statement, but certainly chains succeed for a reason. The only point I'd like to add is that the lack of chains downtown isn't so much because the city, or anyone else with influence, is opposed to their existence. Chains are almost never early adopters. It takes having local shops succeed, it takes increasing the population downtown, among other factors, to attract chains. In general terms, the presence of chains is more of a sign that we'd be succeeding than an ingredient you seek out to create success. They have metrics they look at to determine where their chain can succeed, and it's difficult bordering on impossible to attract them on the hope that things are moving in the right direction. Local entrepreneurs will have that vision and take that risk, national chains rarely will.

As much as I'm NOT a fan of Starbucks, I agree with this. The fact that a national chain is interested in downtown implies that they think it's a safe bet. I think that in this economic climate, companies are going to be much more cautious rather than flood the market with new stores, etc. If Starbucks thinks a location downtown is going to succeed, chances are that it will.

Oh...and the only thing I don't like about Starbucks is the coffee. I'm not one of those "evil corporation" people. I stand by what I said last week--I would KILL for an Alterra coffee shop up here. I buy a couple pounds every time I'm in MKE & it's fantastic coffee..

From what I hear the Shopko Express Store isn't performing up to standards & will more then likely shut down. That would be a blow to the Broadway district, so I hope things turn around soon. With the larsen project at a standstill, not sure if they got what they were promised from the city. I hope I'm wrong.

From what I hear the Shopko Express Store isn't performing up to standards & will more then likely shut down. That would be a blow to the Broadway district, so I hope things turn around soon. With the larsen project at a standstill, not sure if they got what they were promised from the city. I hope I'm wrong.
I too hope you're wrong. It would be a blow to the area. I'm sure the economy and slow nearby development play a factor, but that's a tough area for retail. Some other key points to success are the purchasing power of the adjacent residential neighborhood and its location off the beaten path of daytime travelers. For comparison, Walgreens on the corner of Mason & Baird is completely surrounded by residential neighborhoods and is on a much busier corner. Plus I don't see much marketing for that store in particular. It's not very well known. Officials from the Chamber of Commerce and the City both are probably to blame for being good at fishing for big tenants, but it was the Shopko exec(s) that made the bite for the worm, even if it wasn't a real one.

From what I hear the Shopko Express Store isn't performing up to standards & will more then likely shut down. That would be a blow to the Broadway district, so I hope things turn around soon. With the larsen project at a standstill, not sure if they got what they were promised from the city. I hope I'm wrong.

That would be a shame but you can't have a dead downtown and expect businesses that depend on foot traffic to survive. The vision for downtown has been the wrong one for a number of years, and no matter the number of failures some people in this city still do not get it.

Green Bay is NOT ever going to have a major "downtown" they need to stop the focus on TALL buildings and bring in more of what is going to bring people downtown. Bars, restaurants, wood decks and whole food stores are not the answer.....but some people think it is the only answer and refuse to see reality. The Children's museum is the correct idea, now focus and build around that. Broadway is a nice area for a couple of blocks but only focuses on a specific client. The east side of the river has a couple of potentials but for the most part unless you like to drink there is no other reason to be there.

Leicth Partk has potential, three years ago I was the first to suggest the brownfield for a ballpark instead of Jeff pouring money into Johannes, and while I still think that is a great place, they space by Titletown would also be a wonderful location especially if they want to use it for more than just baseball, but again they are missing a real chance.

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/masthead.jpg

There's a for-sale sign outside the Astor House, Green Bay's only (I think) historic bed-and-breakfast inn and one, I believe, of only a couple of b&b's total in the city. It's located on S. Monroe on the edge of the downtown. I've always thought Green Bay should have more bed-and-breakfasts than it does, for a city its size. Not sure why that is. Sturgeon Bay, for example, has more b&b's than Green Bay does, if I'm not mistaken.

Also, Kavarna update: www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090920/GPG0703/909200652/-1/archive

Also, UWGB sets enrollment record of 6,500. I think the goal is to kick that up in time to about 7,500. www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090922/GPG0101/909220535/1207/GPG01/UWGB-sets-record-with-fall-enrollment

Hi everybody, I am new to the forum and wanted to introduce myself quick. I have read the forum now for probably three months but only now decided to get an account. I am a senior at UWGB going for a degree in Urban and Regional Studies emphasis in Urban and Regional Planning, which is why I ended up here. I have lived in Green Bay my whole life and would like to stay here if possible, depends on the job situation.

So here are some quick thoughts on what researchers and professors in the field think about downtown.

Green Bay is currently behind where most other cities are in development. This is a great position to be in because we have the advantage of seeing what has and has not worked in other cities.

Green Bay's biggest problem is communication. There is no discussion between departments before decisions are made. We're finally seeing some signs of this with the new transit routes including other communities around.

A downtown stadium on the Brownfield site would be a good idea as long as it is truely multi-use. Concerts, hosting high school games (hopefully state tournement games), and whatever else they can book there. It would be a good way to get people talking about downtown.

The restaurants downtown are great but it's kinda one sided to the pricey range. Only place I can really afford to eat downtown is Erbs and Gerbs. We really need a more affordable place downtown. And don't fear the big chains either. They all have their places and I doubt that any place down there would close if a chain was added.

Speaking of food a downtown grocery is definitly needed. The markets are fine but are only for the summer and don't provide everything a grocery store would.

And finally the biggest point of all. Downtown housing is the biggest problem. There simply isn't enough of it. Get people to live downtown and most everything else will fall in place. Condos and apartments. People wanna live down there but there aren't enough options. Just this summer I wanted to live downtown but there was really nothing available. The most recently built place, The Flats on the Fox had two single bedroom units available and one two bedroom. Nice places by the way, great views from all units. New places to live are really needed. Look at Milwaukee's development, it's all apartments and condos and they haven't slowed from the recession either. Build more places to live and do it now!

So there's a couple quick thoughts, I know this is a harsh crowd so we will see how this goes.

Thanks,
Milley

Also, UWGB sets enrollment record of 6,500. I think the goal is to kick that up in time to about 7,500. www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090922/GPG0101/909220535/1207/GPG01/UWGB-sets-record-with-fall-enrollment


Yes you are correct. They have plans to expand. They want to add new housing units as well as a whole new academic building. Even in the now four years that I have been here at UWGB they've made significant improvments the the University Union, bookstore and library.

From what I hear the Shopko Express Store isn't performing up to standards & will more then likely shut down. That would be a blow to the Broadway district, so I hope things turn around soon. With the larsen project at a standstill, not sure if they got what they were promised from the city. I hope I'm wrong.

If that turns out to be true, that's a shame. Bad luck that the store opened up just as the stock market was plummeting and the recession became apparent. Also unfortunate the adjacent Larsen Green project may be going into essentially a holding pattern for now because of the economy, if that's an accurate thing to say. Stand to be corrected on that. Also doesn't help that some nearby Dousman Street storefronts have become empty.

I give Shopko Express great credit for doing what it did in opening downtown. That was terrific. But I thought it was odd its new store turned its back on Broadway, perhaps the most positive pedestrian-lively and positive pedestrian-friendly street downtown. No real store windows on Broadway, and the only entrance is off a back parking lot. I'm not sure they even have a sign or much of a noticeable sign on Broadway itself saying Shopko Express is located there. I mean, if you're going to be on Broadway, be on Broadway.

If this closure turns out to be true - and that's certainly an if at this point - perhaps the Shopko space would end up being converted into office space.

By the way, welcome Milley 29. Looking forward to more of your insights.

Yes you are correct. They have plans to expand. They want to add new housing units as well as a whole new academic building. Even in the now four years that I have been here at UWGB they've made significant improvments the the University Union, bookstore and library.

When I went to UWGB years ago the enrollment was in the vicinity of 4,000. It was my understanding that the university when it opened had expected to have 10,000 students by 1980. If that's the case, it would make for an interesting discussion as to why that mark was not met. I have my amateur theories. The recently leaving UWGB chancellor, Bruce Shepard, seems to have done a particularly good job at planning to grow the university and getting state support for it. GB got such a late start, opening as a four-year campus in 1968 (prior to that there was a two-year state campus here). Most of the other four-year schools in the UW system trace their origins to more than a century ago.

Bullfrogs get one-year planning option from RDA: www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090922/GPG0101/90922134/1978

Downtown tour Thursday: www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090922/GPG0101/90922131/1978

Snafu.

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/bilde-10.jpghttp://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/bilde-2-1.jpghttp://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/bilde-1-2.jpghttp://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/bilde-3-1.jpg

Preliminary renders of the proposed Bullfrogs stadium.

Nice renders! My favorite is the first one on left which incorporates many of the elements that we talked about on here that are staple of urban baseball fields; brick, exposed steel and zero setback (entry way is built at street level-AWESOME!). The marina improvements are a great thing as well and this is would be a nice way to start redeveloping that area and add another entertainment option. This seems to have a lot of support!

Shopko-That really blows and hopefully things can change. I have no doubt if Larsen Green was starting to get redeveloped, especially with living options this wouldn't be a problem. Is there any news on this yet???

Milley29-Welcome aboard! I agree with you on the living options. Though I like to see people stake an ownership in downtown, ie condos, lofts, I am sure a couple more apartment buildings could be developed. This would be a good way to build some infill and density and probably more easier financed. A good, quality, urban apartment building would find plenty of takers I think. Urban and Regional Planning always seemed to be a good program at UWGB. Do many/any of the profs have a role (I believe Marcelo Cruz does) with downtown and planning?

Daily Planet Site-Anyone know when this project could be announced? I thought that I had read that a partner was to be named in Sept.?

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/bilde-1-3.jpghttp://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/bilde-11.jpghttp://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/bilde-2-2.jpghttp://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/bilde-3-2.jpghttp://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/bilde-4-1.jpg

Preliminary renders of the proposed Bullfrogs stadium. Sorry about the mixup in my first post on this.

Statement from Bullfrogs Owner and President Jeff Royle (I love Royle, but I would have edited this some):

"Operation “New Pad” presents a once in a lifetime opportunity to change the downtown waterfront for generations to come. With this proposed multi-use sports and entertainment facility, both the facility and the Green Bay Bullfrogs franchise will cement themselves as part of the soul of this great sports community. Predictable plans lead to expected outcomes and doing the unpredictable often leads to extraordinary outcomes. This facility and the Green Bay Bullfrogs have that kind of potential.

In a downtown that has withered and that many suburbanites consider irrelevant, this facility will spark a revival. It will be a great symbol of hope for the future of downtown Green Bay, having an incredible impact beyond baseball. We intend to operate the facility and the Bullfrogs to benefit the community. The facility and the Bullfrogs will be a community asset. The mission statement for the Titletown Entertainment Foundation (TTEF) is to revitalize and reinvigorate the greater downtown region by promotion greater economic and civic prosperity through the Green Bay Bullfrogs Baseball Club and by operating one of the finest multi-use sports and entertainment facilities in the country. TTEF will fulfill this mission by promoting and contributing to local and community-wide economic development, job creation, quality of life and community-wide pride while providing an outstanding venue for affordable family entertainment as well as corporate and community events to Northeastern Wisconsin.

Love. It.

I admit that I don’t follow the Green Bay forum as closely as I should, but wasn’t the downtown location along the river originally proposed by members of this forum? If so, this proposal if proof that all of you Green Bay forumers really are making a difference in the revitalization of downtown! If this stadium gets built, it will be huge for the city, and something that you can all be very proud of. Congrats!

I admit that I don’t follow the Green Bay forum as closely as I should, but wasn’t the downtown location along the river originally proposed by members of this forum? If so, this proposal if proof that all of you Green Bay forumers really are making a difference in the revitalization of downtown! If this stadium gets built, it will be huge for the city, and something that you can all be very proud of. Congrats!

Thanks Araman. I did a search with the keywords "brownfield" and "Green Bay" and found a discussion we had in August 2006 proposing that site. I always thought it would be a cool idea and the renders bring us one step closer.

Let's take advantage of our new power and start talking about a 20-story condo high-rise that could be built on Main and Washington and watch it happen!!!

(Whoops, that was Astor Place)

Urban and Regional Planning always seemed to be a good program at UWGB. Do many/any of the profs have a role (I believe Marcelo Cruz does) with downtown and planning?



Marcelo does have a very active role in On Broadway Inc. and currently is the advisor for any of the planning majors at UWGB.

For the Bullfrogs new "pad" I am very impressed with the renders. If this gets done I think there will be a renewed interest in downtown and especially Broadway. The location is great. Easy access to Mason but there probably will need to be some infrastructure improvements. Good visibility from the bridge.

I admit that I don’t follow the Green Bay forum as closely as I should, but wasn’t the downtown location along the river originally proposed by members of this forum? If so, this proposal if proof that all of you Green Bay forumers really are making a difference in the revitalization of downtown! If this stadium gets built, it will be huge for the city, and something that you can all be very proud of. Congrats!

Yep I came up with that idea a couple of years ago when The Bullfrogs where new and they were talking of sticking millions into Johannes. It made sense then and makes sense today to bring the blue collar working joe into downtown, the ones who will bring families and dollars to spend, not just people who sit on a wood deck listening to some guy play his guitar for tips.

Apparently Puant is consulting with his team of Caveman Attorneys to decide if he should be compensated for providing the design plan for the new stadium. Word on the street is Puant is sitting at some beach soaking it all in....


http://www.nytimes.com/images/blogs/tvdecoder/posts/1007/cavemen.jpg

A couple of additional interesting things I've read or heard about the proposed Bullfrogs stadium. It might have sports turf instead of an all-grass field, to accommodate multiple uses. And non-baseball bookings could be handled by PMI, which also does bookings for the Resch Center, Arena, Shopko Hall and the Meyer Theatre.

A couple of additional interesting things I've read or heard about the proposed Bullfrogs stadium. It might have sports turf instead of an all-grass field, to accommodate multiple uses. And non-baseball bookings could be handled by PMI, which also does bookings for the Resch Center, Arena, Shopko Hall and the Meyer Theatre.

NO PLEASE NO not PMI! Leach tossed them out because they did such a horrible job. Look what they have done for the Meyer since taking over nothing, anyone but PMI!

A few thoughts:

First, welcome Milley29!

Second, regarding the Bullfrongs. I hope as this is put together we get truth in advertising about what this is going to be. The 100 dates a year goal is ambitious, unless you are talking about uses like a restaurant or shop, in which case those would be open much more than 100 days a year. But in terms of the main field, lets say you count April through October as the usable date range due to weather. That's about 30 weeks, or about 210 days. There are, what, 34 Bullfrogs home games. Now lets say they get a concert in there once a week over that entire span (which is completely impossible), that's up to 64 dates. You still have to come up with something another 36 days! I mean, they could have some youth/high school sports, but those are unlikely to be major draws, and even then it's not easy to fill 34 days with that, and more than likely 70 days + because I doubt we'll see more than one or two concerts there a year (baseball parks aren't great concert venues).

I think they should plan for this to be used 34 times a year, plus whatever use is made from any food/retail options, plus one or two special events. Over the June/July/August period that's quite a bit of activity. If there are other events held, that's all a bonus. And I'm not saying all this to be critical, I think the plan can be justified on that amount of use.

I also think it needs to be made clear up front what the city's roll in this will be. The plan is for the Bullfrogs group to come up with the financing package, but what does that include in terms on infrastructure? Is the city going to be expected to create the surrounding boat docks and park areas. How about and road improvements? Now, whatever goes in that site (ballpark or otherwise) is going to want boat docks and public spaces, and I'm not against the city looking at providing the infrastructure to make the project successful. But I do think it needs to be made clear ASAP what that role is so that people aren't blindsided by $5 million (I'm making up numbers) in costs for associated amenities that the city has to provide.

But overall the renders (I assume they are fairly preliminary) look great and this could be a great anchor to grow the southern end of the On Broadway district.

And finally, regarding restaurants, and the cost to eat at them. I've already touched on my view that chains are fine in a downtown but difficult to attract. Similar principles apply to the price-point of restaurants downtown. It needs to be remembered that the restaurant business is difficult, and massively competitive. To make money, you generally need to do one of two things: serve cheap food in large volumes (of customers, not necessarily large volumes of food, though that doesn't hurt), or serve a smaller number of customers with premium food at a premium price. Most of the chains serve on the cheaper food/more customers model. They do this very well, and they do it in the suburbs because it's less risky to do so. What niche does that leave the downtown with? Serving a premium product at a premium price.

Beyond that, look at the spaces available in a downtown. Most of them aren't very large, making it difficult to seat all that many people. So to do volume you must move people through quickly. Alternatively, you charge people more per meal and try to justify the higher price with a premium product.

What we see downtown is a higher proportion of higher-end places (in relative terms... no restaurant in Green Bay is expensive compared to some in, say, Chicago). But there are more affordable places too. Some like Coaches Corner or Titletown have enough space, and the proposal for Hagemeister Park does too. Others like the sub shops or China Palace move people through faster, do a significant take-out business, and/or deliver. And let us not forget Al's hamburgers, which is also not exactly expensive!

So I think there can be a few more low-to-mid priced places in the downtown. Hopefully once the mall is torn down it will create more opportunities for a few larger spaces. A pizza place would be nice, for instance (they can sell by the slice and/or deliver out of a smaller space). I'd also love to see a Hansen's move down as I LOVE their ice cream, and their chicken is delicious (they wouldn't need all that much space either). But in general there is always going to be a high percentage of higher-end places downtown. That isn't because of some failure in city planning or because anyone isn't working to attract less expensive places, it's just a factor of that type of business and the free-market at work.

I too hope you're wrong. It would be a blow to the area. I'm sure the economy and slow nearby development play a factor, but that's a tough area for retail. Some other key points to success are the purchasing power of the adjacent residential neighborhood and its location off the beaten path of daytime travelers. For comparison, Walgreens on the corner of Mason & Baird is completely surrounded by residential neighborhoods and is on a much busier corner. Plus I don't see much marketing for that store in particular. It's not very well known. Officials from the Chamber of Commerce and the City both are probably to blame for being good at fishing for big tenants, but it was the Shopko exec(s) that made the bite for the worm, even if it wasn't a real one.

Interesting analysis, but the store's orientation doomed it from the first. People in the neighborhood (I'm one), and many merchants, were driven CRAZY by the fact that Shopko opened with no windows or doors on Broadway or Dousman, turning its back to us. Those windows on the streets are cosmetic, added for historical conformity.

The manager told me Shopko almost withdrew from the project, objecting to the design and orientation of the store. I understood officials from the City insisted the store face into Larsen Green, and towards the CityDeck and Downtown, although I heard some strenuous objections were voiced, but not heeded.

How could the City and influential stakeholders get it so wrong, bookending the Broadway district with a store that actually turns its back on the street and the neighborhood, while desperately beckoning across the river for customers?

Talk about unclear on the concept! Why so much unnecessary confusion about the nature of the Broadway district?

Interesting analysis, but the store's orientation doomed it from the first. People in the neighborhood (I'm one), and many merchants, were driven CRAZY by the fact that Shopko opened with no windows or doors on Broadway or Dousman, turning its back to us. Those windows on the streets are cosmetic, added for historical conformity.

The manager told me Shopko almost withdrew from the project, objecting to the design and orientation of the store. I understood officials from the City insisted the store face into Larsen Green, and towards the CityDeck and Downtown, although I heard some strenuous objections were voiced, but not heeded.

How could the City and influential stakeholders get it so wrong, bookending the Broadway district with a store that actually turns its back on the street and the neighborhood, while desperately beckoning across the river for customers?

Talk about unclear on the concept! Why so much unnecessary confusion about the nature of the Broadway district?

Completely untrue. The City insisted that the store have an entrance on Broadway but ShopKo said because of security concerns and using their standard suburban style store interior layout - that was not possible. Basically they did not want to man an extra cash register and were concerns about theft. If the City forced their hand, then ShopKo would walk.

^^ I'd like to second GB4Life's comments. City planning wanted the entrance to face towards the corner.

Hmmmm... That's very interesting. On good authority? I heard the City was responsible, not only from staff at Shopko, but also from a couple of frustrated Broadway merchants. If the store goes down, it would be good if the City made their position clear with the merchants and neighbors.

The Shopko staff were also very frustrated that signage from Dousman was being limited by the City. More recently (last week) several merchants along Broadway were told by a city inspector they must remove their flags--the colorful ones that mark trendy, gentrifying business districts coast to coast. I understand they are asking Zima to intercede for them.

I recall that the City of Appleton went to the mats with Walgreens when they were planning their store at College/Richmond/Memorial intersection (NW corner) in the downtown area several years ago, but prevailed - getting it laid out on the site so that one side and the front entrance were as close as possible to College Ave, with the main parking area on the side closest to Richmond St, giving it a much more 'urban' feel than their more normal corporate suburban layout. The store is still there nearly ten years later and appears to be doing well.

See:
http://www.bing.com/maps/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=44.262207~-88.416687&style=h&lvl=18&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1

and:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=44.261805,-88.41592&spn=0,359.989014&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=44.261808,-88.415733&panoid=irPdc5MYqe6CuaZXqSlgng&cbp=12,299.33,,0,0.61

Enjoy!

Mike

I give Shopko Express great credit for doing what it did in opening downtown. That was terrific. But I thought it was odd its new store turned its back on Broadway, perhaps the most positive pedestrian-lively and positive pedestrian-friendly street downtown. No real store windows on Broadway, and the only entrance is off a back parking lot. I'm not sure they even have a sign or much of a noticeable sign on Broadway itself saying Shopko Express is located there. I mean, if you're going to be on Broadway, be on Broadway.

If this closure turns out to be true - and that's certainly an if at this point - perhaps the Shopko space would end up being converted into office space.


I think you put your finger on a major reason why ShopKo is not doing well... it turned it's back to Broadway... if you've been to downtown Chicago or Milwaukee... there are plenty of "express" type stores - Osco's and Walgreen's... etc - BUT you can tell they are open - you can look into the store... you can walk off the main street to enter the store.

If they had even an entrance of Dousman it would have helped. I would guess as soon as they leave Walgreens or Oscos will move in after remodeling and putting the door on Dousman or Broadway.

Originally the designs for the building was to be set back on the lot with parking in front of it... that would have been even worse... at least there is a building with zero setback that can be fixed by the next tenant...

The manager told me Shopko almost withdrew from the project, objecting to the design and orientation of the store. I understood officials from the City insisted the store face into Larsen Green, and towards the CityDeck and Downtown, although I heard some strenuous objections were voiced, but not heeded.

How could the City and influential stakeholders get it so wrong, bookending the Broadway district with a store that actually turns its back on the street and the neighborhood, while desperately beckoning across the river for customers?

Talk about unclear on the concept! Why so much unnecessary confusion about the nature of the Broadway district?

Interesting revision of history. OBI asked over and over to put the door on Broadway and helped move the stair tower to more on the corner instead of down the Dousman side of the building, which would have permanently blocked door or access to the building from Dousman. ShopKo NEVER threatened to withdrawn over putting the doors on the back side... they threatened to withdraw over __OBI's objections__ to putting the door on the back side. The city basically came in and told OBI to accept whatever it took to get ShopKo into the space... and this is what we got. :(

Full Story. (http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/news/news_wluk_greenbay_hospital_goes_green_with_living_roof_200909231044_rev1) I hope some of the new developments we are hoping for get some of the same eco-conscious treatment. Rooftop environments like this make a considerable impact on the heating/cooling costs of a building. There was an independent documentary about this topic last year on PBS. It's all very interesting.

Largest "green" initiative in Green Bay

Updated: Wednesday, 23 Sep 2009, 5:41 PM CDT
Published : Wednesday, 23 Sep 2009, 10:57 AM CDT

* Laura Smith

GREEN BAY - With the help of a crane, workers are installing dozens of perennials on the roof of a new addition at St. Mary's Hospital.

This "so-called" living roof is said to be the city's largest "green" initiative.

"It's new to the area, and that's why we're very excited about it," said St. Mary's Hospital Plant Operations Director Dean Kroll.

16,000 square feet will be green, while 6,000 square feet will be used for walking paths and seating.

"The reason it's so meaningful to us is that what we're building with this addition is a cancer center," said St. Mary's Environmental Services Director Corrine Vercauteren.

Interesting analysis, but the store's orientation doomed it from the first. People in the neighborhood (I'm one), and many merchants, were driven CRAZY by the fact that Shopko opened with no windows or doors on Broadway or Dousman, turning its back to us. Those windows on the streets are cosmetic, added for historical conformity.

The manager told me Shopko almost withdrew from the project, objecting to the design and orientation of the store. I understood officials from the City insisted the store face into Larsen Green, and towards the CityDeck and Downtown, although I heard some strenuous objections were voiced, but not heeded.

How could the City and influential stakeholders get it so wrong, bookending the Broadway district with a store that actually turns its back on the street and the neighborhood, while desperately beckoning across the river for customers?

Talk about unclear on the concept! Why so much unnecessary confusion about the nature of the Broadway district?


I'm sorry, but I REFUSE to believe that the success or failure of a store is based on which side of the building the door is located. I don't really like the orientation of the building either, but let's be realistic--if Shopko Express fails downtown, it's because there is not a market for it at this time--not because the door faces the wrong direction.

As much as I would like to have seen a door on the corner of Broadway & Dousman, I can understand why they did what they did. There is no parking on the street, and I can understand that a store that is trying hard just to make it, can't staff an extra person every day to make sure that shoplifters aren't robbing them blind out the "second" door.

It's easy to see something that we don't like happen & try to place blame, but IF the store doesn't make it, it's probably just that the timing wasn't quite right yet.

I'm sorry, but I REFUSE to believe that the success or failure of a store is based on which side of the building the door is located. I don't really like the orientation of the building either, but let's be realistic--if Shopko Express fails downtown, it's because there is not a market for it at this time--not because the door faces the wrong direction.

As much as I would like to have seen a door on the corner of Broadway & Dousman, I can understand why they did what they did. There is no parking on the street, and I can understand that a store that is trying hard just to make it, can't staff an extra person every day to make sure that shoplifters aren't robbing them blind out the "second" door.

It's easy to see something that we don't like happen & try to place blame, but IF the store doesn't make it, it's probably just that the timing wasn't quite right yet.
What I have come to conclude is that you simply cannot mix urban and suburban styles and expect it to succeed. I am downright fear full of the Bullfrogs potential new pad along the river. I recall reading that there is plenty of land for parking. FAIL FAIL FAIL If you look at many of the urban baseball parks in this country you will notice the lack of DEDICATED parking. So even if we can get 50 days of use out of this facility I DO NOT want to see a sea of asphalt parking to accommodate those 50 days, never in a million years will the cost of that parking be paid off by the Bullfrogs. I guess that I am a little worried that the city will be asked to pony up for infrastructure improvements and they will go towards a parking lot... I do not call that progress

What I have come to conclude is that you simply cannot mix urban and suburban styles and expect it to succeed. I am downright fear full of the Bullfrogs potential new pad along the river. I recall reading that there is plenty of land for parking. FAIL FAIL FAIL If you look at many of the urban baseball parks in this country you will notice the lack of DEDICATED parking. So even if we can get 50 days of use out of this facility I DO NOT want to see a sea of asphalt parking to accommodate those 50 days, never in a million years will the cost of that parking be paid off by the Bullfrogs. I guess that I am a little worried that the city will be asked to pony up for infrastructure improvements and they will go towards a parking lot... I do not call that progress

With all due respect, "urban" vs. "suburban" style is defined by having an entrance on the street side vs. somewhere else? I'm relatively confident that Shopko has people competent enough to realize that if that really is the problem, then they need to put a new entrance on the corner & hire another worker instead of shuttng the store down. I just don't see that as the key problem with the store.

What I have come to conclude is that you simply cannot mix urban and suburban styles and expect it to succeed. I am downright fear full of the Bullfrogs potential new pad along the river. I recall reading that there is plenty of land for parking. FAIL FAIL FAIL If you look at many of the urban baseball parks in this country you will notice the lack of DEDICATED parking. So even if we can get 50 days of use out of this facility I DO NOT want to see a sea of asphalt parking to accommodate those 50 days, never in a million years will the cost of that parking be paid off by the Bullfrogs. I guess that I am a little worried that the city will be asked to pony up for infrastructure improvements and they will go towards a parking lot... I do not call that progress

This past Summer I took a walk down by Joannes during a game because I was interested in seeing if there was really a parking problem there. That being one of the points for having a new stadium somewhere else. I was walking down Walnut and there wasn't many cars at all in those lots, maybe 15-20 cars. I then walk up to the apex of the footbridge to get a view inside the stadium and there was hardly anybody in the place. I walked over by the Kurtz Ave. lot and there wasn't many cars in that lot either.

Based on that experience, parking may not be a problem with a stadium configuration similar to the one Puant proposed. But that also brings up the issue of whether or not the attendance figures the Bullfrogs released are accurate. I think they can play a few more seasons at Joannes before they might be ready for a new stadium. If there's really some party other than the Bullfrogs who have interest in that location, maybe we should hear their proposal too.

With all due respect, "urban" vs. "suburban" style is defined by having an entrance on the street side vs. somewhere else? I'm relatively confident that Shopko has people competent enough to realize that if that really is the problem, then they need to put a new entrance on the corner & hire another worker instead of shuttng the store down. I just don't see that as the key problem with the store.

Well, I smell what you are saying however I dont think that you grasp the difference of settings. An Urban store does not require a parking lot. A suburban one does. Think of it like building a house with a garage and not putting a door to the house from your garage. An urban setting doesn't do well with cars and that is good. If the point is to have an urban store then build a 3-4 story apartment building where the parking lot is. Problem solved.
Critical mass is what enables an urban fabric to succeed
btw...I have not been to said store, however my downtown peeps who have been there complain of the limited selection of products, maybe that’s it?

This will be in more than one post because of the size. My apologies.

A couple of years ago for my own greater enjoyment I looked at the issue of Bullfrogs attendance and what the team might expect to draw in upcoming years. First I went to the Northwoods League's 400+-page annual Media Guide, which publishes annual attendance figures for all teams in the league - past and present - since it was founded in 1994. Using census data, I then determined what the official metropolitan population figure was for each current team in the league. (For the three teams in the league with "metro" populations under 100,000, it's officially called a micropolitan - not a metropolitan - statistical area.) I looked at the U.S. census for 1990 and 2000 and at the last year a Canadian census was done (2006). (There's one team in the league from Ontario.) For the record, there are 14 teams in the league. Six others have folded, all within the first six years of the league: Dubuque, Austin, Grand Forks, Minot, Kenosha and Manitowoc.

Based on that basic analysis, I came up with the following chart as to what teams in the Northwoods League typically can expect to draw on average for a game given the population size of their metro or micro areas. The first number is the metro/micro population, the second number is what the team should average in attendance per game, plus or minus 500. With one exception, all of the current established teams in the league reached their attendance projection as I listed them below within one to seven years of starting up. Most of the teams took a few years to build their markets and attendance.

0 - 49,000 500
50,000 - 99,000 1,000
100,000 - 149,000 1,500
150,000 - 199,000 2,000
200,000 - 249,000 2,500
250,000 - 299,000 3,000
300,000 - 349,000 3,500
350,000 - 399,000 4,000
400,000 - 449,000 4,500
450,000 - 499,000 5,000
500,000 - 549,000 5,500
550,000 - 600,000 6,000

Green Bay's official metropolitan population as of 2000 was 282,599. That includes Brown, Oconto and Kewaunee counties. So that would mean, if the above projections hold true, the Bullfrogs could expect to average in time around 3,000 fans per game, plus or minus 500. In their case, I might put the expectation at 2,500, since the Bullfrogs are competing with a well-established minor league team in Appleton just 30 miles away. A good new stadium here, though, could counteract that. The Bullfrogs drew an average of 1,000, 1,300 and 1,100 their first three years, in that order. Attendance in the Northwoods League has increased the vast majority of years, but numbers were down some throughout much of the league last season due largely, it's thought, to the economy.

My analysis is pretty simple, basic, amateur stuff and does not take into account such things as local factors. For example, Duluth is the one established team in the league that underperforms it market. But its official metropolitan area is huge in geographic size and extends some 150(?) miles north to the Canadian border. That'd be quite a commute to a game. Plus, Duluth is a big hockey town, uses an old, largely unimproved minor-league baseball stadium, and has cool summers. The stadium there is located near Lake Superior, and temps can drop 20 degrees in minutes or fog rolls in. And the city itself has been losing population in recent decades.

By the way, most teams in the NWL have stadiums with capacities around a 1,000 to 1,500 above their actual or projected average attendance. So a Bullfrogs stadium of 4,500 would be about right for baseball here. For the times you might get larger crowds, there's always standing room. And I'm assuming the Bullfrogs would build with the possibility of future expansion in mind if ever that might be needed. Madison is the largest team in the league. It averages 6,000 fans in a 7,500 stadium. Its largest Mallards crowd ever was 10,000. Madison's metro population is close to double Green Bay's.

P.S. Green Bay's largest crowd so far is 2,300. The Bullfrogs have reached or exceeded 2,000 up to a half-dozen times to date. I've been to some of those games and it's great fun, especially if they're winning. Low crowds run 600-800, but that should be improving as time goes on.

I recall that the City of Appleton went to the mats with Walgreens when they were planning their store at College/Richmond/Memorial intersection (NW corner) in the downtown area several years ago, but prevailed - getting it laid out on the site so that one side and the front entrance were as close as possible to College Ave, with the main parking area on the side closest to Richmond St, giving it a much more 'urban' feel than their more normal corporate suburban layout. The store is still there nearly ten years later and appears to be doing well.

See:
http://www.bing.com/maps/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=44.262207~-88.416687&style=h&lvl=18&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1

and:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=44.261805,-88.41592&spn=0,359.989014&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=44.261808,-88.415733&panoid=irPdc5MYqe6CuaZXqSlgng&cbp=12,299.33,,0,0.61

Enjoy!

Mike

The outcome of a retail venture depends on a confluence of circumstances, but accessibility and perception will make it or break it. I think Shopko may soldier on a while, but due to this conceptual mistake, the store faces significant challenges, and they know it.

Regarding the mismatch between the store and its context, I wouldn’t want to see such a significant misjudgment minimized or dismissed. Analyzing it is the only way to avoid repeating the same mistake. Resources are limited, and this is a $4.5 million building, meant to anchor the district.

“Smet Construction Services, the Green Bay Area Chamber of Commerce, Shopko Express, On Broadway, and the City of Green Bay are pleased to be working together on this project”--from the original press release. A lot of firepower, really. Lots of vision, commitment, and hard work, deserving the accolades. Yet in the end they didn’t get it right, and that spotlights a problem. You have to wonder, what prevented the City from digging in and changing minds over at Shopko, especially since it was in Shopko’s best interest to get it right?

I think the root of the problem is a critical lack of clarity about the specific nature of the Broadway district. Apparently, Shopko didn’t actually understand what it was buying into by locating on Broadway. But moreover, did the City understand?

Tower Park, that is an excellent analysis. Thanks for that.

Certainly shows that GB is a 3000+ a night town with the right facility. Would be very unfair to compare what their attendance at Joannes is now as a pro or con to building a new ballpark. It's oil and water comparison. By Towers chart they have average around 75% capacity every year in a very limited facility. Shows a lot of promise if you ask me..!! Timber Rattlers went from 76,000 fans their last year in the Joannes like Goodland Field in 1994 to nearly 210,000 their first year at the newly built Fox Cities Stadium.

Not to take any sides one way or another, but I can't help but observe that the Rattlers' stadium has a self-contained parking lot in about as fringe-suburban of an area as one can get. A sellout crowd will about fill the parking lot and an expended stadium there would require additional parking lot space as there are zero sidestreets in the area where the overflow can go.

Unlike the rattlers, from what I can tell, the planned new Bullfrogs' stadium will have available sidestreet parking space for overflows.

I still can't help but note, too, that there is another venue in the general area that does this on a much, much larger scale and with an on-site parking area that is almost an afterthought, it is so small. I'll let you guys try to figure out what I'm thinking of.

Mike

Not to take any sides one way or another, but I can't help but observe that the Rattlers' stadium has a self-contained parking lot in about as fringe-suburban of an area as one can get. A sellout crowd will about fill the parking lot and an expended stadium there would require additional parking lot space as there are zero sidestreets in the area where the overflow can go.

Unlike the rattlers, from what I can tell, the planned new Bullfrogs' stadium will have available sidestreet parking space for overflows.

I still can't help but note, too, that there is another venue in the general area that does this on a much, much larger scale and with an on-site parking area that is almost an afterthought, it is so small. I'll let you guys try to figure out what I'm thinking of.

Mike

you have me curious.... where?

Well, I smell what you are saying however I dont think that you grasp the difference of settings. An Urban store does not require a parking lot. A suburban one does. Think of it like building a house with a garage and not putting a door to the house from your garage. An urban setting doesn't do well with cars and that is good. If the point is to have an urban store then build a 3-4 story apartment building where the parking lot is. Problem solved.
Critical mass is what enables an urban fabric to succeed
btw...I have not been to said store, however my downtown peeps who have been there complain of the limited selection of products, maybe that’s it?

OK, by that analysis, if Shopko Express had a front door, it would be URBAN, right? I'm really not trying to argue your point - I agree with you, in theory. My point is, if it were as simple as "urban" vs "suburban", parking lot vs no parking lot, or entrance on Broadway vs parking lot on the back side vs Titletown, Shopko would have done it already. If the store is failing and creating an entrance on the corner would fix it, they would do it. I think it goes far beyond that.

I think that Shopko took a HUGE leap of faith in opening the store downtown, and I give them a ton of credit for that. I sincerely hope that the store succeeds through this tough economic time - but if they don't, I don't think it's fair to place blame on the orientation of the building or the location of the entrance or the parking lot. They took a big risk & stood to profit from it if it worked, but they knew there were risks from the beginning.

Last point, then I'm going to bed - there was ONE POST about a rumor of the store not doing well - the ONLY thing we've heard along those lines - and we're quick to point out all of the faults, all of the reasons why we know better than those who were involved in bring Shopko Express downtown in the first place. Interesting..

Not to take any sides one way or another, but I can't help but observe that the Rattlers' stadium has a self-contained parking lot in about as fringe-suburban of an area as one can get. A sellout crowd will about fill the parking lot and an expended stadium there would require additional parking lot space as there are zero sidestreets in the area where the overflow can go.

Unlike the rattlers, from what I can tell, the planned new Bullfrogs' stadium will have available sidestreet parking space for overflows.

I still can't help but note, too, that there is another venue in the general area that does this on a much, much larger scale and with an on-site parking area that is almost an afterthought, it is so small. I'll let you guys try to figure out what I'm thinking of.

Mike

The place that immediately comes to mind is Camp Randall Stadium in Madison.

Unlike the rattlers, from what I can tell, the planned new Bullfrogs' stadium will have available sidestreet parking space for overflows.

I still can't help but note, too, that there is another venue in the general area that does this on a much, much larger scale and with an on-site parking area that is almost an afterthought, it is so small. I'll let you guys try to figure out what I'm thinking of.

Mike

I'm guessing you're talking the Meyer. And if you are, that's a great point. I mean there is the Cherry ramp down there nearby. In regard to the Bullfrogs new pad, I do wonder what they plan to do with parking, the most recent renders do not show any. I took a ride past the area and the lot provides plenty of space to add a surface lot. Also, I see this as being a south entrance, or gateway to the Broadway district. There will need to be a significant amount of infrastructure improvements.

^^
Have any of you ever heard of 'Lambeau Field'?

:ohno:

Mike

I just got to take a tour of the CityDeck. Upon closer inspection... I continue to be impressed. The things they are doing are quality. I think the lighting is going to be very nice, sort of subtle actually, but I like that. The pavers look good, and the decking/benches seem like great stuff. They are putting beams in for the first pier, and that's helping me envision that. I'm sure you'll be surprised to hear that I think it looks nice. It sounds like they will start laying sod next week, so that will make a bit impact.

I also like how there are different areas to it. I mean, it's clearly a unified area, but at the same time there are parts that are more plaza-like and parts that are more park-like. Even with the seating there is a variety of types of benches and areas to sit in. I think people will develop favorite areas where they always go, and it will make the space more personal to people. It's going to be really a quality amenity, and that's before the largest piers get built.

Two more things of note: I was wrong about the bench areas being places where the piers also get accessed from. The current plan is that there be no railing in front of those benches. I support that plan, I don't think it's a problem. The lakefront in Chicago has no railings, and it's fine. What they do have in Chicago is a few ladders affixed to the wall so that people can climb out if they fall in. I'd do that here. But the reality is that nobody seems to think there won't be a railing there for long. So what kind of railing they put in is going to be key.

The other key thing is obviously what happens with Prange's. From what I've heard things sound more promising from a financing point of view, but that building needs to be built for the CityDeck to come off well. I hope we see action on that yet this year.

The place that immediately comes to mind is Camp Randall Stadium in Madison.

Within an hour of each other down the I94 corridor are two distinct examples of opposing styles.

First you have Miller Park, with it's expansive parking lots that eat up a lot of urban space, and then you have Camp Randall which has very limited surface parking.

I suppose one could call both successful, but you have to be careful what you define as successful. I've personally spent many hours tailgating at Miller Park, and I think that model of fan tailgating is what drives the expansive lots to support the stadium. It's hard to imagine Brewer's baseball without it.

With that thought, how could the tailgating model be done better, or friendlier to the environment? Surely Miller park would continue to be successful without the outer lots. Ideas like shuttles from local businesses, light rail from the intermodal station, walkable trails or lanes from nearby south side neighborhoods, etc all would help. Could some of these ideas be financed by fans alone? I'm not certain $12 for non preferred (not sure on the exact price, I have only used preferred parking for the last five or six years) would cover the cost of transportation for fans. The key may be to separate the tailgaters from the people who simply use the lots to park and walk to the game.

What about a different type of tailgater friendly parking lot, with green space for your personal picnic areas? Instead of having a continuous pavement area, separate the rows of parking with green space including grass, trees and shrubbery.

Sorry for the rambling post that doesn't really relate to the Bullfrogs, but I had a bunch of thoughts on the topic being a person who attends sporting events frequently. I'm really certain that limited on site parking along with neighborhood street parking will work for the Bullfrogs. Hell, it works at Joannes with the larger crowds already.

I'm really certain that limited on site parking along with neighborhood street parking will work for the Bullfrogs. Hell, it works at Joannes with the larger crowds already.

If the parking already works at Joannes why not just put in more seating there to accommodate larger crowds? Is Joannes too small for a second level of tiered seating?

I took a ride past the area and the lot provides plenty of space to add a surface lot. Also, I see this as being a south entrance, or gateway to the Broadway district. There will need to be a significant amount of infrastructure improvements.

There is some parking provided on site... but I'm guessing by the time they build... the coal piles might be gone... and the space under the Mason street bridge can be utilized for parking as is done with the Summerfest grounds...

plus the side streets area available similarly to what is done around Lambeau Field and the games at the Resch Center (many side streets are used even when the lots are not full to avoid the parking fees)

If the parking already works at Joannes why not just put in more seating there to accommodate larger crowds? Is Joannes too small for a second level of tiered seating?
That parked died when they tore down the old grandstand, When I was a kid going there was always special felt like a real ballpark but when the city ignored it for so long it got to be a real dump. It has served its purpose and now it is time for this city to move on. If people are against it in Green Bay there are several nice sites outside the city, then they can continue to have their wood deck and ugly developments downtown that hold little interest to people. Gee maybe the mayor can give Vetter an never ending option on the brownfield also after all hate lose such an innovative developer.

Wow, many very good posts recently! Some very good facts, figures and thoughtful analysis here...something you don't find anywhere else, even in the 'professional media'. It's why I keep reading this forum. Thanks to all of you for posting and welcome! to our new posters.

I'd like to throw out some "ballpark figures" :hahano:on the parking situation at the 'brownfield site' and compare that to the parking currently at Joannes. Here's what I found:

Brownfield parking:

First, I am with GBSurveyor in that I would not want to see this turn into yet another 'sea of asphalt'. That said, I think there are some ways to provide ample parking without creating too much of an asphalt nightmare. I think the parking can be tucked into niches that are left by the RR tracks, under Mason St, and other places that are not suitable for buidings but can be used for parking.

Keep in mind, An acre of surface parking will hold about 130 cars, leaving aisle space, ingress/egress, and so on. I think this is a conservative estimate.

If you put the stadium up against the river, that leaves about 3 acres of parking immediately adjacent to the west, between the stadium and the RR tracks as seen in my renders below. This could hold close to 390 cars, maybe a little less because you'd have some space for plaza walkways and such near the stadium.

On the area north of the boat slip, in my musing renders, I had envisioned restaurants, but also some office buildings. With offices, the parking can be used during the day for office workers and then as they clear out in the evening, the spots would be open for ballgames. With proposed new buildings, there is still 2-3 acres more of parking there (perhaps another 350 cars)

Additionally, there are some awkward pieces of land sandwiched between railroad track spurs just to the west-northwest of the brownfield. One triangular piece would not be very suitable for a building, but is almost an acre and seems like it is best sutied for parking provided that train safety is heeded. (130 cars)

Not sure if this could be worked out, but there is almost 1.5 acres of space underneath the Mason St bridge, could be more parking, as DMklutz mentioned above. (perhaps 175 cars).

THere are some other existing parking lots just a hundred or so yards to the west, like at the County Health Department which has a lot that holds probably around 75 cars. These too would be mostly empty at game time.

Further, you have street parking on Broadway in both directions plus easy connections into the neighborhoods for more on-street parking along streets like Clinton and Chestuut and Maple. These areas are all well within a short walk.

All told, my measurements show that even after development there is probably enough parking for well over 1000 cars within just a couple hundred yards (an easy walk) of the stadium, plus more if you count on-street..

Then you also have boat access, with the very good possibility of water taxis bringing people in from various other areas. Transit is also right there. There should be absolutely no issue whatsoever as far as getting people to the brownfield stadium, if one is ever built.

Also to keep in mind--You guys brought up Camp Randall --here you have 70,000 fans cramming into an "inner city" stadium with virtually no large surface parking nearby, and it works just fine. Neighborhoods like this have an uncanny ability to absorb a lot of cars without the need to simply throw down acre upon acre of surface parking.

How much parking does the existing stadium at Joannes have? The small lot to the south of Joannes stadium is only about 1 acre in size (140 cars) the other lot to the north is about 2 acres (260 cars). For mor parking, people have to walk farther. Almost 300 yards from the stadium you have the parking behind East High next to the track(maybe 100 cars). Baird Street is more than a few hundred yards away and doesn't offer much for on-street parking. You only have a bit of on-street parking along Kurtz; If you use the foot bridge to walk over the river, it's about a 400-yard walk to the parking lots at Riverside Ballroom and the Teamsters (these all told are about 3 acres / 390 cars). Add that all up and Joannes parking situation is worse than the Brownfield's.

I know these renders are now old hat, but you can see some of the parking I am talking about here (http://picasaweb.google.com/gBayPacker/BrownfieldOfDreamsGreatIdeaForBullfrogsStadiumClickToView#). The numbers may be a bit different on my renders than above.

Puant...excellent, excellent..!! End of the day, Joannes will continue to serve it's purpose and the improvements the Frogs have made would leave East and Preble one of the finest high school and legion fields in the state. Now the Bullfrogs have to find a lot of money before a shovel ever hits the ground on the riverfront. It will be very interesting to see how the fundraising and raising of capital goes and if they need financing, how much and if a local bank will step up to the plate. Yes, times a little tough right now but we have to find a way to progress forward and this project could really jumpstart things downtown. The city found $12 million for a boardwalk, I sure hope if the Bullfrogs need some assistance to make this project happen the city, the county and this community step up and make this thing happen..!

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/1250281338.jpg


http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/joannes.jpg

... but I'm guessing by the time they build... the coal piles might be gone... and the space under the Mason street bridge can be utilized for parking as is done with the Summerfest grounds...

Excellent point. The city for years has been talking about the possibility of having the coal piles moved, perhaps to some point downriver north of the downtown. To me, the question is where and would the C. Reiss Coal Co. be able/willing to make such a move. Would the money be there for that kind of relocation?

That park died when they tore down the old grandstand.

Agreed. When the old wooden high-back Joannes Stadium grandstand was torn down around the 1980s and the seating was replaced with the above (photo), that really changed the feel of the place. And, if I'm correct, attendance for what had been a successful Green Bay Blue Ribbons team, an amateur baseball team in the Wisconsin State League, dropped off. The Bullfrogs when they came in redid/rebuilt what you see in the color photo above, including some considerable expansion of seating and the construction of a much bigger press box.

The first photo above shows Green Bay in its minor-league baseball heyday at Joannes ca. 1950. The minor-league team there started out as the Green Bay Bluejays (or Blue Jays) in 1940 and was known for one year (1941) as the Blue Sox before going back to the Bluejays name. In 1960 it became the Green Bay Dodgers. The team folded after the 1960 season.

I'd like to throw out some "ballpark figures" :hahano: on the parking situation at the 'brownfield site' and compare that to the parking currently at Joannes.

Great work on the parking situation, Puant. I think you're right. There would seem to be far more parking possibilities at the brownfield site then available at Joannes. I think I heard someone from the city say they'd also be looking at the possibility of running trolleys to any new stadium from other parking site(s) elsewhere.

City looking at purchasing a wooden roller coaster for Bay Beach: www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009909260653

media2.fox11online.com/pdfs/Bay_Beach_Master_Plan.pdf

Below is an earlier article on the topic.


Roller Coaster, New Ferris Wheel in Plans for Bay Beach
by Paul Srubas, Green Bay Press-Gazette
January 16, 2008

A wooden roller coaster and a Ferris wheel large enough to be seen from the Leo Frigo Memorial Bridge are some of the improvements under consideration for Bay Beach Amusement Park.

Members of Green Bay's Park Committee heard a report this week from Schreiber/Anderson Associates, a Madison-based architectural company charged with designing upgrades at Bay Beach.

The company based its design in part on input from citizens groups set up after Green Bay bought up the last of the 23 acres of land west of the existing park.

"This is the culmination of what's been going on for at least the last 20 years of acquiring land," parks director Bill Landvatter said.

Chris Thiel and Aaron Wiliams of Schreiber/ Anderson pitched a plan that includes the installation of four "featured attractions" - the roller coaster, Ferris wheel, a high-visibility tower ride that gives a view of the park and water, and a spray-and-play fountain.

The plan would add five more rides to the existing seven "tot rides," and to add six rides to the five existing "family rides."

The old Ferris wheel, bumper car building, giant slide, ponies and the train would remain, although the latter would have twice the ground to cover under the plan, which includes a second depot.

The goal of the design was to keep the traditional look and feel of Bay Beach, so lawns, trees and other plantings would be expanded, Thiel said.

"The character of this park now is a park," Thiel said. "It does not want to be Great America or Disneyland. It's Bay Beach. The picnic areas flow into the ride area, so we tried to maintain vegetation and add to that, and interweave the picnic areas into it."

The plan includes a new parking lot on the far western edge of the park, a large multi-purpose lawn with adjoining park shelter, equipped with bathrooms, an expanded area for the rides, with pedestrian-friendly walkways, and a boardwalk running the length of the park. There also will be a trolley to transport people across the park.

A series of buildings near the park's center could be used for concessions, arcades and gift shops, Thiel said. Additional shelters and maintenance buildings would allow the pavilion to be put to better use, and that includes using it for winter activities, he said.

A grassy area behind the pavilion could serve as an outdoor amphitheater, and there's a plan for a viewing pier out into the bay behind that.

Restoring the beach and building a walkway to Renard Isle also were in the plan, although Thiel acknowledged the environmental issues associated with the island, which has been a depository for polychlorinated biphenyls sediment dredged from the Fox River.

"That's another discussion for another time," he said.

Ideally, Landvatter would like to see Phase I of the improvement project started in 2009. That likely would include the installation of the wooden roller coaster to help increase revenue for continued development, Thiel said.

Other aspects of the phase would be building some of the pedestrian paths, moving existing rides westward and putting in new plantings.

The second phase would focus on the pavilion, main park entries, parking lot and the eastern half of the boardwalk. And the third phase would involve installation of new rides, the arcade buildings, a second train depot and work on most of the open spaces to the west of the ride area.

The next step is to firm up the plan and present it to the City Council at its Jan. 29 meeting with some cost estimates of the phases.

Schreiber/Anderson would incorporate any last-minute changes provided by the public or council and wrap the plan up for February or March, Landvatter said.

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/RedasManagerofGBBluejays1942150dpi.jpg

One more image from the Green Bay Bluejays' past. I'll stop posting now. Obviously I've had too much time on my hands this Saturday afternoon. I'll shutup.

Tower Park....Where are you getting those GB Bluejays photos...AWESOME. Please post more..!

To show you how old Joannes is and the lack of updates over the years...those same light poles in your 1950's era photo, are still at Joannes today...!! WOW. They should have saved the grandstands and replaced the light poles down the road. That alone makes a case that it's time for GB and baseball to step up to the plate and get that baby built downtown on the riverfront.

Personally I'd find it really objectionable if the city gave money to Royle to build the park. I am not sure if that's what you're suggesting or not. A loan would be one thing, or if the ballpark were city property leased to Royle, that would be another. The Packers are their own thing and the .5% doesn't phase me, but they've been around for more than 80 years. Maybe when the Bullfrogs are a beloved civic institution that have been around for at least a half century, but not earlier. I do wish Royle well, but I believe it will be a hard sell to the banks. The new market credits will help, of course. But banks are sitting on their assets for the time being. They'll only give money to those who don't need it. For the banks, giving loans is all about security, if the loan is being secured with a baseball stadium... well, that would be a hard thing for them to offload.

I remain hopeful, however. But it will take an It's a Wonderful Life-sized miracle. Unless there's some significant piece of info that's not public.

I was sure that this would surface...

Royle told the RDA he envisions a parking lot for 1,100 vehicles.

Hardy what I would ever consider a vision.

Here is the editorial link (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090927/GPG0602/909270645) from the P-G

Personally I'd find it really objectionable if the city gave money to Royle to build the park. I am not sure if that's what you're suggesting or not. A loan would be one thing, or if the ballpark were city property leased to Royle, that would be another.

Nativist, you may want to rethink your stance. I completely agree with your post...maybe you should revise it :) We are on the same page this time.

Cool, I like finding consensus. I have a a good conservative/libertarian friend and whenever we agree on something (even if it's for different reasons) we walk away with certainty that we must be right. For me the principle is: public money should support public infrastructure and utility (CityDeck); private money should support private business. Things like the City Revolving Fund are one thing, where public money is loaned to private businesses in order to stimulate economic growth, create jobs, etc. I think that's a win-win (if done with good judgment). But outright spending taxpayer money on something that would be Royle's personal property is quite different. If the tax credits aren't sufficient, then I think that should be that as far as the city goes. A loan of some kind might be in order, but I don't believe the city has the money to make a loan sufficiently large for this project. And if it did, arguably this wouldn't be the best use for it. I'd rather see it used for transportation infrastructure, tearing down the mall, building a hydroelectric dam, or whatever.

Anyone care to do an economic analysis? What are ticket prices now? How much are people willing to pay to see amateur athletes? Personally, I think I'd balk at much more than 8 dollars. I'd think it should be on par with movie ticket prices. What would be the debt service on 12 million dollars be? Don't get me wrong, I would love to see this park built—I am for it. Just yesterday I was on the East side of the river staring at the 'greenfield' site and imagining how beautiful it would be. But I don't think it's magical somehow, the normal economics apply.

I believe the plan calls for using the remaining acres north of the stadium on the north side of the marina inlet for parking to start. That site is still a "brownfield site" and the parking lot would serve as a cap. The master plan calls for much of that space to be developed over time while smaller pocket lots are created to replace the parking stalls that will be lost on the north end as development comes.

For me the principle is: public money should support public infrastructure and utility (CityDeck); private money should support private business. Things like the City Revolving Fund are one thing, where public money is loaned to private businesses in order to stimulate economic growth, create jobs, etc. I think that's a win-win (if done with good judgment). But outright spending taxpayer money on something that would be Royle's personal property is quite different. If the tax credits aren't sufficient, then I think that should be that as far as the city goes.

I'm with you guys on this too. As cool as this stadium might be, this community (myself included) would have a sour taste if we have to pay taxes for it. Just because the city put up money towards the CityDeck doesn't mean it should automatically pour money into this ballfield.

Since I do want to see this stadium get built so much, I really hope that tax dollars are not needed. There has got to be another way.

Anyone care to do an economic analysis? What are ticket prices now? How much are people willing to pay to see amateur athletes? Personally, I think I'd balk at much more than 8 dollars. I'd think it should be on par with movie ticket prices. What would be the debt service on 12 million dollars be? Don't get me wrong, I would love to see this park built—I am for it. Just yesterday I was on the East side of the river staring at the 'greenfield' site and imagining how beautiful it would be. But I don't think it's magical somehow, the normal economics apply.

I'm with you on this. $8 or so seems like a fair price for a ticket.

I also wanted to comment more specifically on Danillo's analysis from a few days ago. We cannot seriously bank on this stadium being used for much more than baseball. A couple concerts, perhaps, but not a multitude of events, Danillo's thinking made a lot of sense.

And lastly, this stadium certainly would be a major improvement on the downtown, but nobody should be thinking that this single thing will somehow be "the savior". It's a piece. A major piece, but that's all.

Some of you folks are getting way ahead of yourselves on the issue of the proposed Bullfrogs stadium. At this point, the team is not proposing the city "give money" to it for any new stadium. Let's see what the team comes up with if it's able to put together some kind of a final stadium proposal down the road. It could be no proposal happens at all, if a financing package can't be arranged.

Having said that, I will note that the Oshkosh City Council just voted last month to provide $1 million out of a total estimated cost of $1.7 million for repairs to the Grand Opera House in the city's downtown. Although there was discussion back and forth, the vote was unanimous! You'd never get that kind of political support in Green Bay, a town where the local politics are often bitter and divisive because they've been dominated for decades by the conservative Guy Zima and like-minded recruits of his on the City Council and County Board. I'll also note that the principal editorial writer for the Press-Gazette - Warren Bluhm - is a libertarian conservative himself, so it's no surprise the paper's editorial regarding any future Bullfrogs stadium took the tone it did.

I'm surprised the tone on this board - of all places - has already turned against the Bullfrogs. Geez, Royle just made his preliminary proposal last week! I'd like to propose Green Bay sell Bay Beach. What business is it of the city to be running an amusement park . . . or the county running a golf course . . . or the county owning the Resch Center, the Arena and Shopko Hall. And I take back my vote supporting the temporary 0.05 county sales tax for Lambeau.

I believe the plan calls for using the remaining acres north of the stadium on the north side of the marina inlet for parking to start. That site is still a "brownfield site" and the parking lot would serve as a cap. The master plan calls for much of that space to be developed over time while smaller pocket lots are created to replace the parking stalls that will be lost on the north end as development comes.

Hopefully they don't build too much parking to the north, it would act as a separation from the rest of Broadway. The stadium needs to be integrated into the district and not feeling miles away. People need to be able to have a meal at Titletown or Hinterland and be able to walk to a game or event.

Tower Park....Where are you getting those GB Bluejays photos...AWESOME. Please post more..!

The photo of Joannes Stadium ca. 1950 is through the Neville Public Museum. If you look closely, especially in the grassy outfield area, you'll see the words "Neville Public Museum" lightly encrypted over the photo. If you're interested, you could purchase from the museum with permission a physical or electronic copy of the photo - without the encryption - for something like $25 per photo or whatever. If you wanted, you could make an appointment and check out the museum's photo archives. Its archives include the old-photograph collection of the Press-Gazette. There's a possibility the Green Bay Park & Rec Department might have some old photos of Joannes too. Possibly. I know of a retired Bluejays player - Maurice "Moose" Berner - who lives in Green Bay and has old photos of the team, his old Bluejays warmup jacket, I believe, and at least one old Bluejays scorecard. And perhaps Frank Howard might have some old photos.

The photo of the Bluejay in the dugout is said to be manager Dick "Red" Smith in 1942. Smith also played or coached for the Packers.

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.rickandbecky.com/buckeye/Red%2520as%2520Manager%2520of%2520GB%2520Bluejays%25201942%2520150%2520dpi.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.rickandbecky.com/buckeye/Red%2520Smith.htm&usg=__f2ITTVgwPBXlgUrBVcpVtFQJskM=&h=699&w=573&sz=198&hl=en&start=1&um=1&tbnid=ghVQxT-jpIxI_M:&tbnh=139&tbnw=114&prev=/images%3Fq%3DGreen%2BBay%2BBluejays%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1

By the way, under the old grandstand at Joannes in the pedestrian corridor there was a large metal wall plaque that stated when the stadium lights were erected, in the 1940s. The year on the plaque might have been 1940, when minor-league ball came to Green Bay.

For information on the Bluejays/Blue Jays/Blue Sox/Dodgers - including league standings and even some team attendance records - you can go to The Encyclopedia of Minor League Baseball, Second Edition at:

www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Wisconsin_State_League
(when Green Bay was in the then-minor league Wisconsin State League)

www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Illinois-Iowa-Illinois_League
(when Green Bay was later a member of the Three-I League)

plus some partial, incomplete information at www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Green_Bay_Bluejays

also: www.baseball-reference.com/minors/park.cgi?id=WI009
(the reference here indicates Joannes Stadium may have been damaged by a tornado in 1957, but the grandstand wasn't demolished then)

Sit back and relax... this is going to take a while! So much to comment on. So many good ideas, so much good information. Lots to say, away we go...

That parked died when they tore down the old grandstand, When I was a kid going there was always special felt like a real ballpark but when the city ignored it for so long it got to be a real dump. It has served its purpose and now it is time for this city to move on. If people are against it in Green Bay there are several nice sites outside the city, then they can continue to have their wood deck and ugly developments downtown that hold little interest to people. Gee maybe the mayor can give Vetter an never ending option on the brownfield also after all hate lose such an innovative developer.

See, here's why I usually ignore what you have to say. You make a good point (that you think it's time to move on from Joannes) with some historical perspective, then you follow it with some mean-spirited drivel that has nothing to do with your main point and shows little understanding of how cities work and a refusal to talk about what's happening in real terms.

The CityDeck compliments something like a new ball park. Please show me a downtown that has succeeded without investing in public spaces. I'm not going to argue that you should like the design of the CityDeck (though I think it's great) because that's a matter of taste. But given the available land in the downtown, the general concepts of the CityDeck are sound. And let us not forget, general levy city tax dollars aren't being used for it, so it's not like your taxes are going up to pay for it (unless your arguing against the state spending money on economic development, which hasn't ever seemed to be your point). And the CityDeck plan has already sparked associated development that wouldn't have otherwise happened.

Look, you hate the mayor for some reason I don't understand (apparently he chews gum or something, I don't know), but were our political system gets in trouble is when people let petty personal differences get in the way of their better judgment. As far as I can tell, the mayor supports the stadium idea, he agrees with you, but you try to paint it as though he's going to undermine it somehow. It's a shame, I think you could bring an interesting perspective to the discussion, but then you go and cloud it with snarky insults that make me question the motivation for everything you say.

All told, my measurements show that even after development there is probably enough parking for well over 1000 cars within just a couple hundred yards (an easy walk) of the stadium, plus more if you count on-street..

Just an outstanding analysis. Thanks for that. 1,000 cars is a lot for all but the most crowded nights. And if the demand is there to fill the park, that also indicates that people are more motivated to go. When people are motivated to go, they are more willing to walk a bit farther.

Parking is going to be a challenge here. I think the key truth is that there is going to be surface parking. It's necessary for the success of the ballpark, and ramp parking will be too expensive. My hope is that some steps can be taken to make it as attractive as possible. Even lots like the Cathedral lot and many of the lots on Main St., where they've installed the brick and iron perimeter fences, look significantly better than they did without the fences. Some tress can go a long way to break up a sea of asphalt as well. Plus, long term there's an opportunity for the parking to serve whatever ultimately goes where the coal piles are as well.

Hopefully they don't build too much parking to the north, it would act as a separation from the rest of Broadway.

I totally agree. While I believe there will need to be surface parking, to the degree it can be south of the ballpark will be really helpful integrating the ballpark with the downtown.

Personally I'd find it really objectionable if the city gave money to Royle to build the park...

I think this is an interesting issue. I'm not sure the city should "give money" to the 'Frogs for a park, but there are areas the city can and should (and I'd imagine will) help. First the city can help with improvements in the nearby areas that will help the stadium succeed. I'm in particular thinking of the riverfront infrastructure on that site. I've said before that the city needs to be thinking about the entire riverfront and how that space can integrate into a whole greater than the sum of its parts. This is a major piece to that. It's public space just as the CityDeck is, and I think a similar funding mechanism is in order to help make that happen.

Add into that the portion of the brownfield site north of the ballpark, and there could be increased interest in development there due to a ballpark and riverfront improvements. I don't know if that area's already part of a TIF district, but TIF is the tool created specifically for situations like this, and the whole idea of the ballpark is to be catalyst for the area... to create Increment. To that end, aside for the pubic spaces, there's perfect justification to use TIF to assist in the stadium costs to the degree that locating there is more expensive that a suburban greenfield site. Again, that's what TIF is for. Beyond that the city can play a role in helping secure financing and grants. So, I don't think the city should raise taxes for this like the county did (via referendum) with Lambeau, but that doesn't mean there aren't mechanisms in place whereby the city can contribute to the project.

Anyone care to do an economic analysis? What are ticket prices now? How much are people willing to pay to see amateur athletes? Personally, I think I'd balk at much more than 8 dollars. I'd think it should be on par with movie ticket prices.

I think the Rattler's ticket prices are a good guide. They too have a modern stadium, and the product is similar. I certainly don't think the 'Frogs could exceed the Rattlers prices. The Rattlers charge $8.50 for box seats, $7 for bleachers, and $5 for the lawn.

Which reminds me, I hope if this stadium gets built it has plenty of lawn seating. Its great. It reduces the size of the seating that needs to be built. Plus they are great for families because the kids don't need to be stuck in a seat the whole time.

Some of you folks are getting way ahead of yourselves on the issue of the proposed Bullfrogs stadium. At this point, the team is not proposing the city "give money" to it for any new stadium.

The city found $12 million for a boardwalk, I sure hope if the Bullfrogs need some assistance to make this project happen the city, the county and this community step up and make this thing happen..!

So, one of my favorite subplots of this board is the ongoing gag whereby ifyoubuildit pretends they aren't someone from or closely associated with the Bullfrogs. Uh-huh.

So in response to Tower Park's statement that "the team is not proposing the city "give money" to it for any new stadium," I think that the talk on here comes from ifyoubuildit's statement which I've also quoted. Anyway, I don't think people have turned against the Bullfrongs at all, it's just been a discussion of how it should be paid for. I've already outlined my thoughts, and it really isn't dissimilar from what ifyoubuildit suggests, that the city could help via means similar to what was used for the CityDeck... means that didn't increase city property taxes.

City looking at purchasing a wooden roller coaster for Bay Beach: www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009909260653.

Bay Beach is the best. I hope the plans can be fulfilled. I don't think anyone can argue that Bay Beach doesn't have an impact on the quality of life in the area, and hopefully it will become even better.

See, here's why I usually ignore what you have to say. You make a good point (that you think it's time to move on from Joannes) with some historical perspective, then you follow it with some mean-spirited drivel that has nothing to do with your main point and shows little understanding of how cities work and a refusal to talk about what's happening in real terms.

The CityDeck compliments something like a new ball park. Please show me a downtown that has succeeded without investing in public spaces. I'm not going to argue that you should like the design of the CityDeck (though I think it's great) because that's a matter of taste. But given the available land in the downtown, the general concepts of the CityDeck are sound. And let us not forget, general levy city tax dollars aren't being used for it, so it's not like your taxes are going up to pay for it (unless your arguing against the state spending money on economic development, which hasn't ever seemed to be your point). And the CityDeck plan has already sparked associated development that wouldn't have otherwise happened.

Look, you hate the mayor for some reason I don't understand (apparently he chews gum or something, I don't know), but were our political system gets in trouble is when people let petty personal differences get in the way of their better judgment. As far as I can tell, the mayor supports the stadium idea, he agrees with you, but you try to paint it as though he's going to undermine it somehow. It's a shame, I think you could bring an interesting perspective to the discussion, but then you go and cloud it with snarky insults that make me question the motivation for everything you say.

Very well said. I sometimes feel so agitated that I must comment, but always seem dismiss the comment because of the useless line or 2 that provides so little useful discussion. I get this strange feeling that GBM was one of activists at the Health Care town hall forums a while back...

Some of you folks are getting way ahead of yourselves on the issue of the proposed Bullfrogs stadium. At this point, the team is not proposing the city "give money" to it for any new stadium. Let's see what the team comes up with if it's able to put together some kind of a final stadium proposal down the road. It could be no proposal happens at all, if a financing package can't be arranged.

Having said that, I will note that the Oshkosh City Council just voted last month to provide $1 million out of a total estimated cost of $1.7 million for repairs to the Grand Opera House in the city's downtown. Although there was discussion back and forth, the vote was unanimous! You'd never get that kind of political support in Green Bay, a town where the local politics are often bitter and divisive because they've been dominated for decades by the conservative Guy Zima and like-minded recruits of his on the City Council and County Board. I'll also note that the principal editorial writer for the Press-Gazette - Warren Bluhm - is a libertarian conservative himself, so it's no surprise the paper's editorial regarding any future Bullfrogs stadium took the tone it did.

I'm surprised the tone on this board - of all places - has already turned against the Bullfrogs. Geez, Royle just made his preliminary proposal last week! I'd like to propose Green Bay sell Bay Beach. What business is it of the city to be running an amusement park . . . or the county running a golf course . . . or the county owning the Resch Center, the Arena and Shopko Hall. And I take back my vote supporting the temporary half-percent county sales tax for Lambeau.

I don't really get the feeling that people here are turning against the bullfrogs. We have seen glimmers of what the development may look like, some we like some we don't. It seems to me that there are vastly different opinions represented on this board and everyone seems to be sharing the opinions of the community in general. It never hurts to speculate what can or can't happen. I think that talking about issues before they are public can facilitate better design.

I believe the plan calls for using the remaining acres north of the stadium on the north side of the marina inlet for parking to start. That site is still a "brownfield site" and the parking lot would serve as a cap. The master plan calls for much of that space to be developed over time while smaller pocket lots are created to replace the parking stalls that will be lost on the north end as development comes.

I think that would be a great idea, to develop over time. I would really hate to see all that land turned to parking even for an interim use. It would be nice to be able to leave it grass or some surface that is more environmentally friendly then asphalt

It is interesting how the discussion about the ShopKo Express is happening at the same time as the discussion about the ballpark. I do think it was a huge mistake for the drug store not to have a Broadway entrance, for the reasons many have already expressed. It could be an easy fix though. There IS a delivery door that faces Broadway and maybe those dumb fake windows could be turned into real ones. Those fake windows kill me.

The same mistake can be made with urban ballparks. In some places, the ballparks are "walled off" and have no connection to the neighborhood they are in. Other cities have made their ballparks more open and part of the neighborhood. The streets near these parks are busier and more vibrant. This park COULD be a real asset for Broadway.

I am kind of torn. I would love to see a well-designed ballpark downtown but would hate to have the Bullfrogs leave Joannes. I think they are a huge asset to that neighborhood and to East High.

The president of Save Green Bay Metro (savegreenbaymetro.com) advocates for a Green Bay RTA:

www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090929/GPG0602/909290489/1269/GPG06/RTA-is-one-way-to-continue--improve-local-bus-service


Below is the latest model of bus unveiled by Green Bay Metro. Actually, it's a photo of a Green Bay bus system "streetliner" taken at Walnut and Washington in 1937, the year streetcars were replaced here by buses. This style bus, with the rounded back, was still being used in the city in the 1950s. The bus system in those days was operated by the local electric/gas utility, Wisconsin Public Service Corp. Just happened to come across this the other day.

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/1250529710.jpg

I don't really get the feeling that people here are turning against the bullfrogs. We have seen glimmers of what the development may look like, some we like some we don't. It seems to me that there are vastly different opinions represented on this board and everyone seems to be sharing the opinions of the community in general. It never hurts to speculate what can or can't happen. I think that talking about issues before they are public can facilitate better design.

Good point, GBSurveyor. Thank you.

The president of Save Green Bay Metro (savegreenbaymetro.com) advocates for a Green Bay RTA:

www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090929/GPG0602/909290489/1269/GPG06/RTA-is-one-way-to-continue--improve-local-bus-service

The Green Bay bus system has had so many changes in the past few years. They are always changing routes and service times that most riders have no idea where and when a bus will come.

With that being said, I think the route changes they made recently were good ones. Buses seem to be much more on schedule and the routes seem to waste less time.

The biggest complaint I have is that over the years service has been reduced to the point where I try to avoid taking the bus. Many routes I used in the past went from running every 1/2 hour to every hour.

The biggest complaint I have however is that the last bus is now at 8:15 or 8:45 depending on the route. If I want to go out to Bay Park, I have to leave before 8:30 to take the bus home. Not very useful in my view.

I don't know if forming an RTA will help these issues and I think many of the people in the area who drive will never support due to their fears of having to pay extra taxes to support something that they will never use.

In Chicago it is so different, Many people use public transportation and even many who don't use it understand its need and support it.


http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/1250529710.jpg

I love this picture!

^^
Also the ad for the Packers.

:cheers1:

It is very interesting in that at their peak, there was LRT service throughout the all of the cities in NE Wisconsin, including interurban lines connecting them such that at one time it was possible to travel between many parts of Green Bay and as far as Fond du Lac and Omro using only electric-powered light-rail transit.

I once saw a map of the Green Bay LRT lines, but forgot where they all went. I do know that Bay Beach Park was a terminal stop on one of them.

Mike

^^

Yes, there was a streetcar line that ran to Bay Beach (once called Bay View Beach). For many years Bay Beach was considered a resort-like area outside the city, literally and figuratively, with forest and/or field and/or marshland between it and the city, I believe. Later much of that area was filled in with the urban street grid — and the Bay Beach Wildlife Sanctuary was created — and the Bay Beach vicinity eventually was annexed to the city.

I PROMISE not to inundate this board with historical photos. It's just that a number of things have come up lately and I happened to come across some old images. Below is the end-of-the-line of the Walnut Street streetcar line on an August afternoon in 1920. The line ended at what was then Hagemeister Park, the first home of the Packers and located where the Green Bay East High School building now sits. When East was built, a new City Stadium that became the Packers' third home was constructed behind it. People took the Walnut Street streetcar over the years to Hagemeister Park, City Stadium and to Joannes Park and Joannes Stadium. They say Joannes Stadium was built in 1929. I promise to stop now.

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/1250281347.jpg

^^

I PROMISE not to inundate this board with historical photos.

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/1250281347.jpg


I really like all the historical photo's. I also love going to the Nevillle and looking at some of the history that is on display there.

If you feel like this is not the place for all this great info then contact Puant. I am sure that he could give you access to the now famous blog.

I was wondering to myself where you are just finding these interesting pictures...

I was wondering to myself where you are just finding these interesting pictures...

Just quick Google subject and image searches on the web. Sometimes advanced searches.

As far as I'm concerned you can post away, Tower Park. I'm loving the photos.

I stopped by the CityDeck after eating lunch at China Palace (which is, I'll add, like $7 all you can eat). They have started laying sod on the south end. It really makes a difference. I've been really happy with how things have looked all along, but now with grass it looks almost finished. It's going to be great. I don't think it can really live up to its potential until the larger piers and the docks are added, but this upland portion is very nice.

It could be an easy fix though. There IS a delivery door that faces Broadway and maybe those dumb fake windows could be turned into real ones. Those fake windows kill me.

They could put in a door from the corner Glass walled area. The delivery door and the "windows" off Broadway are where their storage area and the pharmacy are located and cannot be opened according to ShopKo as it would compromise security. Also the windows on Dousman are where their coolers are for cold foods, snacks, drinks and beer/wine. So again there is nothing to open, unfortunately.

To open the windows would require quite a bit of remodeling and reorienting the store layout from what ShopKo requires.

At least they "activated" the windows from the original weeks where it was just semi-reflective gold panes - it almost looks like you are looking into the store.

If you feel like this is not the place for all this great info then contact Puant. I am sure that he could give you access to the now famous blog.

Famous or floundering? I certainly could use another author to help liven the blog up. Tower Park and I have had a 'private discussion' about this. SSC is a good forum for these photos too. Whatever it takes to get them "out there" I guess.

This is why I'm 100% behind Jeff Royle (see link). Although sometimes, in my opinion, I wish he might say or do things differently — and keep in mind I have no experience or expertise whatsoever in sports management (or a lot of the other things I talk about on this forum) — Royle has the fire-in-the-belly, the energy, the vision, the talent, the smarts and the resourcefulness to make the Bullfrogs happen now and into the future. And a new stadium as well. People like that don't come around all that often. And Jeff's still a young man.

www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090930/GPG0211/90930053/1978

Update on CityDeck project with two-minute video: www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009910010590

Here's a story bucking a trend...

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090930/GPG03/909300525


Hat-cetera moves to Broadway location
September 30, 2009


A ribbon-cutting ceremony for Hat-cetera is scheduled for 11 a.m. Thursday at 109 N. Broadway.


The owner is Sam Abrago, who opened his store in September 2008 at 2321 S. Oneida St., Ashwaubenon.

Hat-cetera moved to the Broadway District on Sept. 3.

The store specializes in men's and women's hats, as well as accessories, canes, theatrical hats, fittings and specialty orders. Hat-cetera carries hats from Finesse, Stetson, New York Hat Co. and others.

Refreshments will be provided.

The Web site is www.hatcetera.com. The telephone number is (920) 494-4287.

— Richard Ryman/Press-Gazette



Seems this store is moving FROM Ashwaubenon TO Green Bay! There is a typo in the column though, the stores website is www.hat-cetera.com, not www.hatcetera.com

:cheers:

Update on CityDeck project with two-minute video: www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009910010590

Tower,
I read your earlier post (prior to being edited). Actually read it a couple times, luckily I copied the text and pasted it into my notes so I could review later.

That sort of brainstorming is exactly what I needed! So, thanks for posting that.

I am very encouraged by the response of the blog and I do plan to continue it. A new development: I now have a nice new mobile device (thanks to another long-time SSC forumer for helping me get set up with that!). I think this iPhone can help me get my thoughts down while on the run. So, watch for future posts there.

Next Get-Together
Moving on, we are getting close to time for another SSC get-together. I don't have any tours lined up or anything like that yet, so let's just get together for an informal hang-out. Mark Thursday, Oct 22 on your calendar. The time will be 7 PM, the place to be determined soon. Feel free to email me at Puant1@gmail.com with any suggestions.

Tower,
I read your earlier post (prior to being edited). Actually read it a couple times, luckily I copied the text and pasted it into my notes so I could review later.

That sort of brainstorming is exactly what I needed! So, thanks for posting that.

I am very encouraged by the response of the blog and I do plan to continue it. A new development: I now have a nice new mobile device (thanks to another long-time SSC forumer for helping me get set up with that!). I think this iPhone can help me get my thoughts down while on the run. So, watch for future posts there.

Next Get-Together
Moving on, we are getting close to time for another SSC get-together. I don't have any tours lined up or anything like that yet, so let's just get together for an informal hang-out. Mark Thursday, Oct 22 on your calendar. The time will be 7 PM, the place to be determined soon. Feel free to email me at Puant1@gmail.com with any suggestions.

Updates posted at Packerland Annals!

packerland.blogspot.com

Great to hear the good news, Puant, on all fronts! I had removed my post because, on second thought, I thought maybe it was offensive or babbling. Or more babbling than usual. Good luck October 22! Have to work that night but look forward to a report on the meeting in the Packerland blog. Will catch the December one.

Does anyone have any updates on the Daily Planet site? I see it everyday and can't wait for more information on it!

Is it possible to cheer for both the Pack & Brett? Dang, this sucks. Can't wait for the show!

Is it possible to cheer for both the Pack & Brett? Dang, this sucks. Can't wait for the show!

Hey, I love Brett as much as the next guy. I'm a season ticket holder and shareholder. But I just don't understand the dilemma here.

1) If you're a Packers fan, you cheer for the Packers.

2) If you're a Packers fan, you hate the Vikings.

3) The bandwagon Vikings fans don't deserve Brett (did you hear them booing and see them leaving before Brett's winning TD pass last Sunday?).

4) If you're a Packers fan, you have to give Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy the benefit of the doubt that they did everything they could to accommodate Brett but still look out for the organization. Therefore, I blame Brett more than the Packers on the divorce.

5) If you're a Green Bay Development fan, you cheer for the Packers so they can maximize tourism revenue and area businesses can continue to use the Packers as a selling point for their companies, their community, and their employees. <had to put this one in to meet the relevance standard on this forum> :)

4) If you're a Green Bay Development fan, you cheer for the Packers so they can maximize tourism revenue and area businesses can continue to use the Packers as a selling point for their companies, their community, and their employees. <had to put this one in to meet the relevance standard on this forum> :)

Good points. Also, does the packers anti-roundabout stance leave a sour taste in your mouth? (had to mention the roundabouts to meet the relavance standard in this forum).

Mostly I just enjoy watching him play, no matter which team. & part of me would like to stick it to the Big Guy (Thompson) for cutting him.

I will be hoping for a packer win (nothing to do with tourism revenue & area businesses).


**on a side note I see Squiggy will be earning some money for the childrens museum for every touchdown Rogers throws ($100 each). Hopefully he lights it up with a boatload of TD's!

I'm with you guys on this too. As cool as this stadium might be, this community (myself included) would have a sour taste if we have to pay taxes for it. so YOU speak for the community, interesting. I know just as many people who are annoyed with the CARP WALK ALONG THE RIVER and that public money was used on it. Just because the city put up money towards the CityDeck doesn't mean it should automatically pour money into this ballfield.RIGHT why would the city put money into something that would actually improve and help the downtown when we can sip our lattes and listen to guitar players along THE CARP WALK, we can all feel so urban then.

I do want to see this stadium get built so much, I really hope that tax dollars are not needed. It would be nice to see tax dollars used to help more of the community instead of a failed developer and failed projects.


a piece. A major piece, but that's all.oh is that all? well then it is sure to never be built knowing how this city works

Hopefully they don't build too much parking to the north, it would act as a separation from the rest of Broadway. The stadium needs to be integrated into the district and not feeling miles away. People need to be able to have a meal at Titletown or Hinterland and be able to walk to a game or event. actually it would be nice with this stadium if a more family friendly Broadway will develop.

Mr. Phillips, seeing as I actually spend time on Broadway and see many families there, I'm really at a loss in trying to figure out what your vision is. The Farmer's Market is extremely family friendly, so are the many festivals. The restaurants are full of kids. There used to be a toy shop, but they went out of business. You seem to have some kind of class bias that I don't think jibes with reality. I think you have some notion that what you think is representative of something, when it's not. What's your vision? McDonald's playland? What do you have against individual small business owners with their own ideas? Why do you hate people who play guitar? The fact is that businesses like Chuck E. Cheese's have had every opportunity to move downtown but their corporate bosses evidently don't care enough about downtown Green Bay to take the risk and invest the money. We are very fortunate that there are small businesses who are willing to take that risk; because no one else will. OBI tried for years (still is) to recruit these kinds of national brands, but do you know what? They have no interest. All you seem to do is run down the people who are putting the money down to make downtown a success.

And what you derisively call the carp walk... I was down there with my family (I have two kids under the age of 4) two weeks ago and do you know what? We weren't the only family there. There were at least four others; which I think is pretty good for a random weeknight in late September. So, evidently, my family doesn't count in your analysis. I think you'll find that a.) the people you portray as snobs aren't, they can't afford to be, and b.) you're the only snob around: because evidently, despite being born and raised in Green Bay, Wisconsin, I don't count because I drink espresso.

I'm shocked to hear that you're in favor of GIVING tax payer money to a private business.

Ingredients

2 pounds carp
1 cup chopped celery
1/3 cup butter
1/3 cup flour
I cup chopped onions
1 1/2cups lima beans
1 1/2cups corn nuggets
2 tbs. thyme
1 tsp. MSG
salt and pepper
1 quart heavy Cream
1 tsp. garlic powder


Directions


Cook the carp in a microwave and take off
the skin. Mix the butter and flour. Then,
simmer carp, vegetables, thyme, salt and pepper
slowly in cream until thickened.

Some history. First there was this:

It's really nice to know that all we need is a $12,000,000 boardwalk and we become a first class city. It's still a major waste of money, if Vetter needs this albatross to make his property have value then Vetter should be financing it. Eventualy it will be renamed the Jim Schmitt RIver Walkway and a big plague will be posted with Jimmies name in 2 Foot NEON letters for all to see.

The reality here is that while $12 milion sounds like a lot, you can't remove the funding source from your thinking and just focus on the big number. The funding for the boardwalk comes from increased property values, and with out the boardwalk there would not be those same value increases. Beyond the projects that face the river, there's a host of other projects and improvements that almost surely would not have happened without the boardwalk plan. For instance, APAC moving downtown as well as other business relocations, the improvements to the Bellin Building, possible construction at the Daily Planet site, not to mention that the boardwalk plan will increase the desirability of the mall site and therefore the value.

So, considering the funding source and the improvements tied to it, I'd say the boardwalk is a pretty good value from a purely economic standpoint. Beyond that, it will be a great pubic amenity that will be used by, I think, a much broader demographic range than you think, GBM. Look, I know you want the city and the downtown to succeed, but you don't like the boardwalk and I don't pretend to think I can change your mind on that. Fair enough. I'd just say to keep an open mind because it just may turn out better than you think, and I hope in a few years you'll head down and enjoy this new feature.

Sounds like something I wrote recently, except then the response was:

Ok I have been convinced that the boardwalk is a good thing and a positive for downtown. Its nice to see business moving back downtown but are too many coming before the people move in?

Huh. Then later:

It would be interesting to hear how you feel the current administration has failed and what the platform is of the challanger that you feel will be a good change for the City. Care to elaborate?

Its really just a personal issue. He has a very arrogant air about him, I think the way he has handled downtown has been ok, but I don't think one person should have been given free reign to all of the major projects, especially now that we see the waffle that seems to becoming from that developer. But its just something about the mayors personality that makes my skin crawl, I felt that from the time he announced he was running last time and just continues today. I don't really trust him.

So there it is. It has never had anything to do with the Boardwalk being a bad thing, or that it's a bad idea. Just pettiness.

Check out Vetter's website (http://www.vetterdenk.com/) Watermark even makes an appearance on the site. I drove through the Beerline area in Milwaukee in late summer and that has come together nice. In fact a lot of downtown Milwaukee is looking pretty good these days. New condo's and apartments just about everywhere.

Check out Vetter's website (http://www.vetterdenk.com/) Watermark even makes an appearance on the site. Wow there is some false advertising. :banana:

The DOT is looking for input on design options for overpasses, columns, noise barriers and decorative fencing for the upgrade of Highway 41 to six lanes in Brown County. Below are some of the options. On the DOT link, click on "Brown County" to the left. From the DOT Highway 41 link: "DID YOU KNOW? The US 41 Project is the largest road construction project in the history of northeastern Wisconsin." That answer probably includes the six-lane upgrades for both the Winnebago County and Brown County portions of Highway 41. They recently demolished the Howard Johnson's along 41 in Oshkosh for the six-laning there.

http://us41wisconsin.gov/csdfeedback

www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20091008/GPG0101/910080570/1978

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/brickfence_over.jpg


http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/overall_arch.jpg


http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/rockfence_over.jpg


http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/hwy_archrockoverall.jpg


http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/localbrick_overall.jpg


http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/90109_localrock_overall.jpg


http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/website_signsupport2.jpg

Check out Vetter's website (http://www.vetterdenk.com/) Watermark even makes an appearance on the site. I drove through the Beerline area in Milwaukee in late summer and that has come together nice. In fact a lot of downtown Milwaukee is looking pretty good these days. New condo's and apartments just about everywhere.

In addition to what's recently been built in Milwaukee, I read there's something like five additional tall-building projects — ranging from 18 to 30 stories — currently planned or soon to be approved there. St. John's on the Lake. The Moderne. Transera. Van Buren & Kilbourn. Rivianna.

The DOT is looking for input on design options for overpasses, columns, noise barriers and decorative fencing for the upgrade of Highway 41 to six lanes in Brown County.

That will be a headache of grand proportions while that's being done! Very nice pics. Once it's done, the road should be a lot safer.

A design option for the overpasses is to have tiles with symbols on them, like fish, turtles, or trees. I have seen them on the northern portion of 41 near Oconto. Very tacky. Save the money please.

Other than that, I am very excited to see this project progress. I use the freeways frequently for work and it is very much needed.

Whoop de doo. We're spending a Billion (bbbillion) of our public dollars to upgrade a freeway. A Billion. Can you even fathom how much money that is? Why don't more people get upset about this? I mean, Whoo hooo. So where are we driving to? We can now get to nowhere in a few minute's less time. So what? Oh, and I had to laugh at those renders. I mean, did they have to go as far as showing sidewalks with people walking "comfortably" along this freeway? What a bunch of holy crap. So what if the overpasses have some brick? People are zooming by at 75 mph, they won't even hardly notice. And that will all start to look like crap in just a few years anyway. Also, making this 6 lanes won't make it any "safer". That is a common misconception. If anything, the freeway will get less safe as people now start to weave across multiple lanes instead of just a couple.

Whoop de doo. We're spending a Billion (bbbillion) of our public dollars to upgrade a freeway. A Billion. Can you even fathom how much money that is? Why don't more people get upset about this? I mean, Whoo hooo. So where are we driving to? We can now get to nowhere in a few minute's less time. So what? Oh, and I had to laugh at those renders. I mean, did they have to go as far as showing sidewalks with people walking "comfortably" along this freeway? What a bunch of holy crap. So what if the overpasses have some brick? People are zooming by at 75 mph, they won't even hardly notice. And that will all start to look like crap in just a few years anyway. Also, making this 6 lanes won't make it any "safer". That is a common misconception. If anything, the freeway will get less safe as people now start to weave across multiple lanes instead of just a couple.

Completely agree.

GBM I DEMAND A RANT ON TAXPAYER MONEY BEING WASTED. :lol:

1) Where you see people walking are the city streets going UNDER 41. That is not 41 itself.
2) If you look at the Marquette Interchange in Milwaukee you can see how nice it can look when you add a little detail to the project. Personallly, I love how it turned out in MKE.
3) The costs need to be taken into perspective. Hwy 41 is more than just a road. It is THE major artery running through GB and is dire need of repair. There are spots on HWY 41 N between Main in De Pere and 172 where the concrete is so uneven it feels like I'm leaving the road when I move from one slab to another. Just terrible (and unsafe).
4) This project will do more than just carry locals to and from work/school, etc. It is also a main road that businesses and tourists occupy. If done correctly, this project could do a lot to bring a face lift to a large stretch of the greater GB area.
5) Whether you like to use them or not, you have to realize that nearly 100% of the people in this area utilize this stretch of road at sometime. I would much rather see my money go towards something that is utilized/needed by the greatest number of tax payers.
6) I am all in favor of other types of transportation (train/bus/light rail), but I am all realistic that even with the greatest setup and infrastructure in the world, the ridership on these would still not even scratch the surface of Hwy 41 in the GB area. Logistically, the communities are just not set up for mass transit to work like it does in larger cities. As the city grows and density increases I'm sure there will be more demand, but that system at its peak would still server far fewer people, and $ for $, I'm guessing it would be more expensive.

Just my 2 cents. I would love to hear what some alternatives are to not repairing 41. Realistic ones, please...

I agree. Regardless if one agrees with continued investment in vehicle transportation, the improvements that are possible to the Highway 41 corridor over/under pass structures will be significant. Other areas have done this as have been mentioned like the Marquette Interchange and the High Five Interchange in Dallas and they look great. You actually do notice it more than one would think. Money is going to be spent regardless, may as well make it look more appealing. It is time this area took more pride in how things look, and although a small improvement with a HUGE price tag, it all is just a small piece of the puzzle.

1) Where you see people walking are the city streets going UNDER 41. That is not 41 itself.
2) If you look at the Marquette Interchange in Milwaukee you can see how nice it can look when you add a little detail to the project. Personallly, I love how it turned out in MKE.
3) The costs need to be taken into perspective. Hwy 41 is more than just a road. It is THE major artery running through GB and is dire need of repair. There are spots on HWY 41 N between Main in De Pere and 172 where the concrete is so uneven it feels like I'm leaving the road when I move from one slab to another. Just terrible (and unsafe).
4) This project will do more than just carry locals to and from work/school, etc. It is also a main road that businesses and tourists occupy. If done correctly, this project could do a lot to bring a face lift to a large stretch of the greater GB area.
5) Whether you like to use them or not, you have to realize that nearly 100% of the people in this area utilize this stretch of road at sometime. I would much rather see my money go towards something that is utilized/needed by the greatest number of tax payers.
6) I am all in favor of other types of transportation (train/bus/light rail), but I am all realistic that even with the greatest setup and infrastructure in the world, the ridership on these would still not even scratch the surface of Hwy 41 in the GB area. Logistically, the communities are just not set up for mass transit to work like it does in larger cities. As the city grows and density increases I'm sure there will be more demand, but that system at its peak would still server far fewer people, and $ for $, I'm guessing it would be more expensive.

Just my 2 cents. I would love to hear what some alternatives are to not repairing 41. Realistic ones, please...

I dont think that there are any realistic alternatives to repair. That streatch needs to be rebuilt, I think that everyone agrees on that end. Safty improvements need to be constructed. What I question is the need for the amount of expansion that is proposed. I dont think that you need the right to travel freely at peak times w/o delays. If its that bad go early or take a different route. I think we should have peak tolls to pay for this waste. I cant wait until we have electric cars and our highways are still funded with the gas tax. But whatever, thats my point of view. I like the looks of some of these "enhancements", but are the costs justified? Who would't choose granite over formica or tile over vinyl. I think that if you can add a little detail and it doesn't cost 2x more then fine, from what I have been told this community sensitive design is adding a heafty cost to this project. I just dont see myself sitting along 41 playing my guitar sippin latte

Also, making this 6 lanes won't make it any "safer".

Maybe you haven't driven your pedal bike on the HWY lately. But when you're going 65 MPH and have to slam on the brakes because of traffic hold ups, it's a huge safety issue. I don't know what study you dug up, but I can find a stat or study to make any point I want also. The fact is my wife is forced (due to the economy) to drive about 45 miles one way to get to work. In your fantasy world everyone lives downtown, walks or bikes to work. In reality, people are forced to drive to work to pay the bills. Plus this is AMERICA! If I want to live out in Lena or Appleton to be near family, then drive to work 100 miles, we can. Gov't shouldn't try to restrict movement to accomplish a downtown community pipe dream. Just take the taxes from the fuel & use it for transportation, not another group or social program.

If they want to just put a ugly concrete overpass, fine, I'll live with that. Just like you'll live with a ugly piece of concrete downtown.

Geez, no highways, no parking lots, no parking ramps, what's next?

MY 3 cents.

Maybe you haven't driven your pedal bike on the HWY lately. But when you're going 65 MPH and have to slam on the brakes because of traffic hold ups, it's a huge safety issue. I don't know what study you dug up, but I can find a stat or study to make any point I want also. The fact is my wife is forced (due to the economy) to drive about 45 miles one way to get to work. In your fantasy world everyone lives downtown, walks or bikes to work. In reality, people are forced to drive to work to pay the bills. Plus this is AMERICA! If I want to live out in Lena or Appleton to be near family, then drive to work 100 miles, we can. Gov't shouldn't try to restrict movement to accomplish a downtown community pipe dream. Just take the taxes from the fuel & use it for transportation, not another group or social program.

If they want to just put a ugly concrete overpass, fine, I'll live with that. Just like you'll live with a ugly piece of concrete downtown.

Geez, no highways, no parking lots, no parking ramps, what's next?

MY 3 cents.

If you choose to drive 100 miles, hey good for you, you must have plenty of time to spare. Some people like driving, which is fine. When I use 41 I NEVER have a problem with traffic, maybe a holiday weekend, but then I take the back roads.
Maybe we should reduce the speed limit to 45 so you wont be in as much danger. People that drive 65 when traffic counts are high shouldn't be on the road, thats just dangerous. That's the same person that thinks by adding another lane will make it safer while still traveling at a high rate of speed with people still mergeing in and out of lanes. :ohno:

If you choose to drive 100 miles, hey good for you, you must have plenty of time to spare. Some people like driving, which is fine. When I use 41 I NEVER have a problem with traffic, maybe a holiday weekend, but then I take the back roads.
Maybe we should reduce the speed limit to 45 so you wont be in as much danger. People that drive 65 when traffic counts are high shouldn't be on the road, thats just dangerous. That's the same person that thinks by adding another lane will make it safer while still traveling at a high rate of speed with people still mergeing in and out of lanes. :ohno:

How can you saying earning a living is "choosing"? Oh, that's right, for many people welfare is a job. The speed limit is 65, if traffic is moving at 65, that's what you go. By your calculation a single lane would be even safer or better. It's like you people are living in some fantasy world of "sim city".

Sigh.

Darn, I will be on the road for the next meeting...Well thats too bad, I was going to bring FREE LAPTOPS for EVERYONE! I guess I'l just have to sell them.

Well I to feel 41 is going to be a little overdone.

It is possible to create a safe road without adding lanes, and in terms of a freeway (limited access highway), making 41 safer/better could easily be done by fixing I-N-T-E-R-C-H-A-N-G-E-S. It is the interchanges that cause problems on 41, not "not enough lanes."

Yes Oliver, 41 is a main road, it is currently there, in place, being used...What some of us are trying to say is NOW give us some alternatives to traveling all while 41 will still be there, being used. Yes 41 does need improvements, want my idea?
-improve the interchanges overall; by eliminating weaving, longer ramps, and obviously the interchanges with 29 and I43 need to be rearranged (again, those are interchanges)
-improve sight lines so drivers are able to see further ahead
-new pavement
This can all be donewithout the expensive part of "adding lanes."
This suggestion above by me would cut the price tag, that savings could be used to implement alternatives such as more and better bus service.

Night Rider - please tell me where the government is trying to take away or restrict movement. Last time I checked the roads and highways are still there, just like I mentioned above. And where exactly is this area with "no highways, no parking lots, no ramps?" Those areas are still uhh, everywhere.

like I said before, its time for ALTERNATIVES. When it comes to transportation, why do people not want a choice? but with everything else in life its "I want choices!"

Oh wait, This IS America, Night Rider, if i want a choice of how to travel, then i should have one. Just like how you want the choice to drive 100 miles to work and live in Lena or Appleton to be near family.

Puant: you are absolutely right. They're planning to have sidewalks along 41, plus crosswalks and roundabouts. If you've ever navigated a roundabout at 65 mph, it's quite thrilling. We have a cat. We plan to walk our cat along the freeway once the sidewalks are in.

Sigh.

Darn, I will be on the road for the next meeting...Well thats too bad, I was going to bring FREE LAPTOPS for EVERYONE! I guess I'l just have to sell them.

Well I to feel 41 is going to be a little overdone.

It is possible to create a safe road without adding lanes, and in terms of a freeway (limited access highway), making 41 safer/better could easily be done by fixing I-N-T-E-R-C-H-A-N-G-E-S. It is the interchanges that cause problems on 41, not "not enough lanes."

Yes Oliver, 41 is a main road, it is currently there, in place, being used...What some of us are trying to say is NOW give us some alternatives to traveling all while 41 will still be there, being used. Yes 41 does need improvements, want my idea?
-improve the interchanges overall; by eliminating weaving, longer ramps, and obviously the interchanges with 29 and I43 need to be rearranged (again, those are interchanges)
-improve sight lines so drivers are able to see further ahead
-new pavement
This can all be donewithout the expensive part of "adding lanes."
This suggestion above by me would cut the price tag, that savings could be used to implement alternatives such as more and better bus service.

Night Rider - please tell me where the government is trying to take away or restrict movement. Last time I checked the roads and highways are still there, just like I mentioned above. And where exactly is this area with "no highways, no parking lots, no ramps?" Those areas are still uhh, everywhere.

like I said before, its time for ALTERNATIVES. When it comes to transportation, why do people not want a choice? but with everything else in life its "I want choices!"

Oh wait, This IS America, Night Rider, if i want a choice of how to travel, then i should have one. Just like how you want the choice to drive 100 miles to work and live in Lena or Appleton to be near family.

I think there is a lot of truth to what you're saying. I used to drive 41 daily, and my wife does now. There are certain areas that bottleneck every day, & they are always around the on/off ramps. Re-designing these would go a LONG way. That said, 41 was designed and built years ago, for the traffic of years ago. If we make incremental changes now, it will be better now. But what about 10, 20, 30 years from now? With today's traffic I agree with your statements 100%, but we do need to look forward a little more than that.

I like the discussion going on. Getting a lot of views and opinions.

It is possible to create a safe road without adding lanes, and in terms of a freeway (limited access highway), making 41 safer/better could easily be done by fixing I-N-T-E-R-C-H-A-N-G-E-S. It is the interchanges that cause problems on 41, not "not enough lanes."

Yes Oliver, 41 is a main road, it is currently there, in place, being used...What some of us are trying to say is NOW give us some alternatives to traveling all while 41 will still be there, being used. Yes 41 does need improvements, want my idea?
-improve the interchanges overall; by eliminating weaving, longer ramps, and obviously the interchanges with 29 and I43 need to be rearranged (again, those are interchanges)
-improve sight lines so drivers are able to see further ahead
-new pavement
This can all be donewithout the expensive part of "adding lanes."
This suggestion above by me would cut the price tag, that savings could be used to implement alternatives such as more and better bus service.

I partially agree with this statement. Improving the interchanges will help a great deal, and that is all in the works. One of the worst interchanges IMO is the Oneida/41/172 going north. You have about 1/8 of a mile for oncoming cars to get all the way left and those heading onto 172 to merge right. A lot of break lights going on.

Onto some other points, I do believe that adding an extra lane may actually make it safer. I have not done near the amount of reading for learning as many on this board, but I see an extra lane being extremely useful as it acts as a merge lane. Those that want to go faster and longer distances, stay in the left lane. Those that are at a mid-speed or need to get off within the next 1-2 miles use the center lane so you are ready. This leaves the right lane open for those coming onto the freeway or those exiting. I think this will drastically improve the 172/Oneida/41 section I just mentioned. Think of all the cars heading north on 41 that can now stay in the far 2 left lanes and don't need to worry about the merging cars coming off Oneida.

As for the price tag, I would love to see the costs associated with each bridge design broken down to a per person level. If it is going to cost me an extra $5 to get some decorations on the overpasses and noise barriers I am all for it. Again, I agree with whoever said that these little things can go a long way in instilling some pride and making the GB area more welcoming.

Now onto the gas tax. I know this is vicious circle, but as a highway user and avid driver, I would expect that every penny I put into the gas tax would go back into making my roads better. To be honest, I am not sure where all the money goes (not sure the gov't does :nuts:), but I would be a bit disappointed if I pay out the nose in gas tax and they use it for other projects than roads. I know it happens, but that is also why I don't have a problem with them spending money back on the roads.

Tolls are an interesting idea, especially now that they can be electronic. Problem with tolls is that it is usually for much bigger highways. If we have 2-3 lanes and you have a toll, I would think you would need 1 lane for manual payments, which essentially causes more backups and limits you to 1-2 useful lanes for those that don't need to stop.

As for the speed limit, it will be interesting to see how it works. In a lot of urban areas, the more lanes the lower the speed limits, as you see in Milwaukee and Chicago. As traffic usage increases I wouldn't be opposed to having it drop to 55 between Scheuring and Velp (for example) if it really makes it that much safer.

Anyway... its Friday. Happy weekend all.. time for a :cheers:

Night Rider - please tell me where the government is trying to take away or restrict movement. Last time I checked the roads and highways are still there, just like I mentioned above. And where exactly is this area with "no highways, no parking lots, no ramps?" Those areas are still uhh, everywhere.

like I said before, its time for ALTERNATIVES. When it comes to transportation, why do people not want a choice? but with everything else in life its "I want choices!"

Oh wait, This IS America, Night Rider, if i want a choice of how to travel, then i should have one. Just like how you want the choice to drive 100 miles to work and live in Lena or Appleton to be near family.

Gov't restricting movement. In a matter of a few years forcing everyone to drive a tin can or electric car. The idea of a mileage tax is floating out there, so when we are all driving electric cars they can go after us. What I was trying to say was mainly that gov't shouldn't try to prevent people from moving to the country by keeping roads to small. Thus forcing people to take public transportation and live in a "downtown utopia". Kind of like restricting health insurance options in the future....(Just had to throw that in there, disregard that :) ).

I'm glad you want choices. People can walk, bus, bike, taxi, carpool & drive them self. I would love to have one of those rocket launchers. I pay for my choice to drive my car with the gas tax.

The no highways, no parking lots, no ramps, just reflect the goal of some on this board. Hating the highways, hating a parking lot, & then hating the alternate ramp.

I'm having a bad day, I'm not trying to come down on any of you all. Just hoping to contribute a alternate point of view. Go ahead & let me have it some more :)

Puant: you are absolutely right. They're planning to have sidewalks along 41, plus crosswalks and roundabouts. If you've ever navigated a roundabout at 65 mph, it's quite thrilling. We have a cat. We plan to walk our cat along the freeway once the sidewalks are in.

Are you serious? Where do you see plans that will put sidewalks and roundabout on 41? From what I saw no one would hit a roundabout at 65. If you exit you would hit a roundabout. I can't tell if your joking or not. You walking a cat completes the image. :)

Gov't restricting movement. In a matter of a few years forcing everyone to drive a tin can or electric car. The idea of a mileage tax is floating out there, so when we are all driving electric cars they can go after us. What I was trying to say was mainly that gov't shouldn't try to prevent people from moving to the country by keeping roads to small. Thus forcing people to take public transportation and live in a "downtown utopia". Kind of like restricting health insurance options in the future....(Just had to throw that in there, disregard that :) ).

Well I don't really see it as being forced to drive a tin or electric car, that may be our only option. No one really knows how much oil is out there or what the worldwide rate of consumption will be. $4 gas wasn't that long ago, and if we start to see an economic recovery, you can bet demand is going to surpass where it was early 2008. The current system of gas tax will not work as more hybrid/electric vehicles are on the road. There needs to be a system in place to maintain and EXPAND the current roads we already have, be it a milage tax or sometype of use tax. Also the governments are already strapped for cash, when you start expanding roads you increase the burden by increasing the amount of upkeep required, extra snowplowing/salting and so on.

The no highways, no parking lots, no ramps, just reflect the goal of some on this board. Hating the highways, hating a parking lot, & then hating the alternate ramp.
I don't ever recall anyone ever being against highways, parking lots or ramps. We all know that there is a place for them. Sometimes the placement of them makes them the topic of displeasure in a sustanable environment or what you refer to as "downtown utopia".

Anyways I hope you have a better weekend. No Pack and a chance of snow. WOW I love Wisconsin:cheers:

I like the discussion going on. Getting a lot of views and opinions.

Onto some other points, I do believe that adding an extra lane may actually make it safer. I have not done near the amount of reading for learning as many on this board...

You have a lot of very good points. Not to blab on and on but if you feel like doing some reading check out the AASHTO (http://www.transportation.org/) website. There is a lot of transportaion info there. If you read too much though, you might end up worrying to much that the roads in this country are on the verge of falling apart.

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/website_signsupport2.jpg

That sign support is hideous. In the Marquette Interchange that's how they do the sign supports, but instead of faux brick it is colored concrete. To me they just look very out of proportion. A nice pole or metal composite would match the mast arm much better and increase the aesthetic appeal as compared to this. Yuck.

The reconstructed freeway should last another 40 years. It would be unwise to reconstruct it in a way that makes it functionally obsolete in 20 years. That's why expansion is warranted. Obviously people want to drive on that road. And since the suburbs are growing, the demand will only get higher.

But I did see someone write that their wife is "forced" to drive 45 miles to get a job. That is not true. She's making a choice. I don't dispute that her current job may pay more or is more in line with her skills or desires than any closer job, but the bottom line is that she could find a closer job. And with our current transportation system, the "penalty" of having to drive 45 miles is not that great. But if congestion gets worse, her job vs commute equation might change. But that's her choice. Nobody is being forced into anything.

Regarding someone's questions on highway funding:

The federal gas tax (about 18 cents/gallon) all goes into transportation. Some of it goes to transit (I think about 10%) and the rest into the Highway Trust Fund, which pays out to the states the federal highway monies. For decades it has been self-funding but just in the last couple years Congress has been adding general funds to the HTF to keep it afloat.

At the state level, Wisconsin's gas tax goes to transportation too. A little bit to transit and the bulk to highways. It too has been self-funding. But in the two state budgets previous to this summer's, Doyle transferred almost $1 billion in transportation funds to the general fund and replaced it with bonding, which just means that future transportation money will be paying off that debt.

So in the State of Wisconsin, federal and state gas taxes do pay for all highway (Interstate, US, and State) construction and maintenance, more or less. It is self-funding; gas tax to pavement. BUT, what about county highways? Or local streets and arterials? Well, those are funded by property taxes, generally speaking. So there's a huge subsidy for cars right there. There is a good argument that property needs access no matter if there are cars or not, and that's what those roads provide, and that's true. But those roads wouldn't be nearly as big or wear out as fast if everyone rode a bike instead of drove a car. So there's obviously a cost there that drivers aren't bearing directly.

Someone mentioned that toll roads are usually big roads. That's not true at all. The urban tollway in Chicago is big to be sure. But I-88 out to DeKalb is only two lanes each way. The Indiana Toll Road is only two lanes each way. Then Pennsylvania Turnpike is mostly two lanes each way. Toll roads can be any size, but the only real requirement is that they are access controlled so that no one can enter or exit without paying the toll. (STH 29 going west from Green Bay could not be tolled because it is an expressway and has at-grade intersections.)

As for toll plazas backing up a two-lane toll road, that isn't the case anymore. New toll plaza design makes all the 'through lanes' express with electronic tolling and those that want to pay cash would go to a toll plaza well off to the side of the through lanes. Or you could set it up so the toll plazas are only as you exit the tollway. Either way, there should be no impediment to the through lanes, no matter how few or many of them there are.

But I hope that Wisconsin never goes the way of tolls. I think the infrastructure (toll plazas, electronics, administration) needed just to collect the tolls is unnecessary and wasteful. (In fact, many toll agencies have come under fire for corruption and waste) What should be done is simply raise the gas tax. (as long as the funds are used solely for transportation) The mechanism is already there and the administrative costs are the same no matter if the tax is 18 cents or 40 cents.

The whole whole argument about per-mile taxing vs per-gallon taxing is a little premature in my opinion. Right now there are approximately ZERO electric vehicles on the road. Hybrids are rare too, but they still use gasoline, although in a more efficient manner. So since nearly all vehicles still use gas, why not just raise the gas tax as the overall fleet fuel efficiency rises? That way if you always own a car that is fleet-average, you'll be paying the same gas tax. And the BIG advantage to that is it encourages people to buy more fuel-efficient vehicles. And overall fleet fuel efficiency is important to our country. If some people want to drive 15 mpg cars, let them but they'll pay for it in gas taxes. But if someone like me wants to buy an efficient small car and then pay less in gas taxes, that's good too. It is a choice people can make. Nobody is forcing them out of their gas-guzzlers. Just incentivizing them to do so. But anyway, my bottom line is that at this point there is no reason to have per-mile taxing since all cars still use gas and not electricity from the grid. And in the initial start-up period of people using those electric cars, I think not having to pay a road tax will be a good way to help break in this expensive but necessary technology.

Now if only we can build some more clean nuclear power plants to power these electric vehicles, then our foreign oil problem would be solved...

If one were to count the number of lanes across 41 as well as the exit lanes it is a whooping 16 lanes across just south of the 41-29 interchange. I just cannot imagine where they will find room to expand in some areas to 8-10 lanes or more. I am just saying..


http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r3/GreenBayWI/41.jpg

Did the Wisconsin DOT have some large windfall of money that they have to spend. Is this why they want to add all the flourishes to the 41 expansion?

Gov't restricting movement. In a matter of a few years forcing everyone to drive a tin can or electric car. The idea of a mileage tax is floating out there, so when we are all driving electric cars they can go after us.

For some odd reason I was actually thinking about this topic recently. Eventually, we are going to have to pay for our roads by some other means than the federal and state gas taxes. I know we all hate paying taxes, but we would hate shitty roads even more.

I agree that it isn't something that needs to be done in the near future unless the new round of electric vehicles really catches on beyond anyones wildest dreams, but I'd be curious on how a mileage tax would be implemented. Guessing some kind of meter attached to the odometer of the electric car. Or for a different way to pay, tax the electricity used to charge the cars. Personal meters for at home charging and charging station meters for on the road charging. Obviously there would be ways to pirate electricity for these means making it hard to keep tallies on, but I'm sure some minds brighter than mine could find a way.


I believe Oliver stated that 100% of the people in the area use 41 some time or another. To a degree, I would agree that the majority of people who live and/or work on the west side do. But I actually never use 41 anymore, well at least south of the 43 interchange. Live in east De Pere, work downtown, family in Allouez and east Green Bay, etc, etc. Wife and I do use 172 and 43 occasionally, but not frequently. Hell, I wouldn't ever use 41 north of 43 if it weren't for my Dad and vacationing in northern Wisconsin.

In summary, for me it is a huge waste of a billion dollars that I contributed to with my taxes. All it really does is allow people and businesses to be located further away from Green Bay. To say the businesses that locate along the route wouldn't be in the area without the huge highway is greatly overstated imho.

anytime there is money being spent on a "nicety" in Green Bay, you guyys all bitch and moan about having to pay for it. it is like that where ever you live. in order for Green Bay to complete with other cities on bringing businesses to the area, they need to make the area look nice, clean, and presentable. you guys are completely right, they could just do it like they did in the seventies and pour concrete and call it could but everything today is how it appeals to the eye.

when a business chooses to relocate somewhere, they look at recreation for the employees in the area, what the transportation system is like and if the area is taken care of. you guys really need to just let the state make the area look appealing for once and go with what they vote on. they can either spend the money outside your front door or they can spend it in another part of the state where the residence want to live in appealing area.

Well, I can't add much to this that hasn't already been said. my views:

41 is a vital lifeline to this area, and it needs to be rebuilt. I'm not sure if 4 or 6 lanes is better, I see both sides. A huge portion of the cost is the 41/29 interchange, and I'm not sure all that is needed, but it will be really nice. But the bottom line is this HAS to be rebuilt, and it's going to cost a lot no matter what.

Moving traffic well counts economically.

It should look nice. I'm not sure there isn't a middle road between bare bones concrete and some of these renderings, but one way or another, this is a primary gateway to our community and it should look nice.

No matter what happens with 41, if it so vital to our economy (and it is) we are foolish to rely on one mode of transportation. There should be rail in the corridor to help improve efficiencies on 41 provide an alternative option to protect mobility in the region.

This idea that figuring out how to fund roads means the government is "coming after us" is just silly. Things don't magically pay for themselves, and no matter what you think about other expenses, transportation infrastructure is absolutely VITAL to the functioning of our economy.

Driving is a heavily subsidized activity. Between the cost of local roads that Krameica discussed, and the fact that gas prices do not reflect the true cost of that gas, we just aren't paying the total cost per mile for our movement.

Finally, opponents of rail transportation often argue that our communities aren't designed for rail. This is at least partly false. Large sections of our cities were built up specifically with such transit in mind. Green Bay had an extensive trolley system along it's current streets. As MGK has pointed out, an extensive system of interurban trolleys connected all the way down to Fon du Lac (one of the bars here in Wrightstown has a photo on the wall of a trolley heading through town...WRIGHTSTOWN!), and with a few small gaps all the way out to Ohio or Pennsylvania. So, that's all gone and isn't going to magically come back, but in terms of what our cities are designed for, it's trolleys, not cars.

How much would it cost to add light rail along 41, as well as improving its existing 4 lanes versus adding additional lanes?

ANyone know about this?
Looking at the Astor Neighborhood Association Minutes from January 2007 and noticed this item. Does anyone know where this site is? The only blue warehouse located in the Astor Nieghborhood District is located south of Mason, that the only one that faces coal piles...

Lakeshore Development, and Bayland Builders, began with a presentation of their plan to develop the waterfront, e. side of the river, s. side of bridge, by removing the blue warehouse. On the Bob Vander Kelen site, which Lakeshore Development has an option on. Small retail store (deli, coffee shop, boat rentals as ideas) for trail users, and reroute the trail closer to the water. 3 stories, 45 units, inside parking for the units, outside parking for guests. Plan for 2 parking spots per unit. Public and private (unit owner) docking. From Cass to Mason St. Detailed pictures were shown. 3000 sq. ft. of retail. Liquor licenses are not foreseen. Bellin Hospital does use some parking under the bridge. Unit prices would be $200,000-350,000 each, 1000-1500 sq. ft. Stone and masonry hardboard (concrete) finish. The city’s design review team would look over any plans. Would like to have a fountain and meeting place at the NW end of the building. Minimum 10’ wide hard surface, and 12-14’ easement around. The new building base would be about 2’ higher than the present building. Mostly private financing, of at least a $10 million project. No timeshares. Mayor Schmitt expressed the city’s interest in developing the waterfront. Comments from the public (about 25 present): concern about the costs of these units, concern about appearance blending with an historic Astor Neighborhood, concern about scenery of the bridge and coal piles (many comments about coal piles and dust). The developers feel that a good % of inhabitants of the new condos downtown are Green Bay area residents, either young professionals or empty nesters. Important to have a wide-enough trail for both bikes and pedestrians. Favorable to be boater-friendly, but not a boat launch. Desire to have more public park setting along the river. The city is expecting an opinion from the Astor Neighborhood Association concerning this proposed development.

http://www.astorneighborhood.org/min...%20minutes.pdf

This is something that Green Bay 4 Life posted in March 2007. Anyone have any idea what became of this scheme?

It should look nice. I'm not sure there isn't a middle road between bare bones concrete and some of these renderings, but one way or another, this is a primary gateway to our community and it should look nice.
I forgot to mention that all those renderings are too "nice" and likely way too expensive. All that's really needed is some painted/stained concrete with a little bit of relief texture or patterns added in. The Marquette Interchange is a good example. We don't need faux brick. People driving on the freeway don't really care about what the overpass looks like. They're just trying to get from point A to point B.

One exception I would make is for the "gateway" to the area. Maybe Lineville Rd or Scheuring Rd overpasses. Those can be nicer than the others in the corridor.

The other big exception I would make is for underpasses, especially where there is/can be a lot of pedestrian and street-level activation. One that comes to mind is the Morris Ave underpass. It is a residential neighborhood and anything to minimize the freeway severance of the neighborhood would be a good thing.

No matter what happens with 41, if it so vital to our economy (and it is) we are foolish to rely on one mode of transportation. There should be rail in the corridor to help improve efficiencies on 41 provide an alternative option to protect mobility in the region.
I agree. And I think that Danillo means rail in the general corridor and not specifically in the median of the corridor. To me, adding rail in a freeway median should be the last option because then the stations are right at the freeway, and that doesn't make for a very good possibility of a dense multi-use neighborhood setting.

A 110 mph train line from MKE to GRB would be a great way to try to reduce congestion on US 41 and to promote dense neighborhoods surrounding the stations.

I think that Danillo means rail in the general corridor and not specifically in the median of the corridor.

Yes. I'm basically defining the area between the river and the highway as the "corridor." I think you'd want the raill to connect the centers of each community along the river, whereas the highway generally connects the edges of each.

Unrelated, I have a camera that I'm trying to get rid of a light leak, so I had it downtown just now. While I was there, a freighter was passing through. Man, I can't wait until the ShopKo Pier is done. That's going to be such an awesome place to stand and watch ships go by. I can't wait.

Also while I was there I saw many boaters out on the river, and thought to myself that all those boaters you see on the river from spring through fall must be a mirage, since we've been told by the CityDeck's detractors that nobody wants to go by that river. So certainly if people don't want to stand near the shore of that river, they can't possibly want to go IN that same river. :nuts:

Are you serious? :)

Yes I am. And on Saturdays they plan to close off 41 between Shawano and Mason for a farmers market. With six lanes, there'll be plenty of room for vendors.

Completely agree.

GBM I DEMAND A RANT ON TAXPAYER MONEY BEING WASTED. :lol:

Ok Amtrak has received over $30,000,000,000 in federal subsidies and have never made a profit. Did you know that the Sunset Limited from LA to New Orleans requires $466 in government subsidies for every paying passenger? But beside funding money losing routes all around the country, maybe you can explain how airlines who fly at 500mph at 30,000 feet can offer satellite tv, on demand movies, music and interactive games, and even WIFI on some flights. But yet Amtrak which runs at a blinding 70mph have no idea how to implement any of this. Just a huge waste of taxpayer money.

Are you serious? Where do you see plans that will put sidewalks and roundabout on 41? From what I saw no one would hit a roundabout at 65. If you exit you would hit a roundabout. I can't tell if your joking or not. You walking a cat completes the image. :)

Thats because they are NO ROUNDABOUTS on 41 nor will there be sidewalks. Its just the anti concrete people being melodramatic and humorous.

May I remind you, gbm, that I was the one who posted the information and images about the Highway 41 design in the first place and did so without any commentary whatsoever. You should be careful about making accusations. And for God's sake, I was having a little fun with Puant's post.

May I remind you, gbm, that I was the one who posted the information and images about the Highway 41 design in the first place and did so without any commentary whatsoever. You should be careful about making accusations. And for God's sake, I was having a little fun with Puant's post.

If you noticed I basically said it was a joke that was posted. Geez unclench the buttcheeks.

Ok Amtrak has received over $30,000,000,000 in federal subsidies and have never made a profit. Did you know that the Sunset Limited from LA to New Orleans requires $466 in government subsidies for every paying passenger? But beside funding money losing routes all around the country, maybe you can explain how airlines who fly at 500mph at 30,000 feet can offer satellite tv, on demand movies, music and interactive games, and even WIFI on some flights. But yet Amtrak which runs at a blinding 70mph have no idea how to implement any of this. Just a huge waste of taxpayer money.
I haven't done any research but I would be curious to see how much federal subsidies the US military receives or provides defending the oil rich allies of ours to provide us the cheap fuel we depend on just so we aren't dependant on rail as a means of transportation like all the other developed nations, but wait a minute, what company would be profitable doing the r&d on aeronautics if commercial airlines didn't use all the technologies already developed by or under contract for NASA or the DOD. As far as I know the railroads are the only transportaion system out there that pays property taxes. Come on people.:ohno:

ANyone know about this?
Looking at the Astor Neighborhood Association Minutes from January 2007 and noticed this item. Does anyone know where this site is? The only blue warehouse located in the Astor Nieghborhood District is located south of Mason, that the only one that faces coal piles...

Lakeshore Development, and Bayland Builders, began with a presentation of their plan to develop the waterfront, e. side of the river, s. side of bridge, by removing the blue warehouse. On the Bob Vander Kelen site, which Lakeshore Development has an option on. Small retail store (deli, coffee shop, boat rentals as ideas) for trail users, and reroute the trail closer to the water. 3 stories, 45 units, inside parking for the units, outside parking for guests. Plan for 2 parking spots per unit. Public and private (unit owner) docking. From Cass to Mason St. Detailed pictures were shown. 3000 sq. ft. of retail. Liquor licenses are not foreseen. Bellin Hospital does use some parking under the bridge. Unit prices would be $200,000-350,000 each, 1000-1500 sq. ft. Stone and masonry hardboard (concrete) finish. The city’s design review team would look over any plans. Would like to have a fountain and meeting place at the NW end of the building. Minimum 10’ wide hard surface, and 12-14’ easement around. The new building base would be about 2’ higher than the present building. Mostly private financing, of at least a $10 million project. No timeshares. Mayor Schmitt expressed the city’s interest in developing the waterfront. Comments from the public (about 25 present): concern about the costs of these units, concern about appearance blending with an historic Astor Neighborhood, concern about scenery of the bridge and coal piles (many comments about coal piles and dust). The developers feel that a good % of inhabitants of the new condos downtown are Green Bay area residents, either young professionals or empty nesters. Important to have a wide-enough trail for both bikes and pedestrians. Favorable to be boater-friendly, but not a boat launch. Desire to have more public park setting along the river. The city is expecting an opinion from the Astor Neighborhood Association concerning this proposed development.

http://www.astorneighborhood.org/min...%20minutes.pdf

This is something that Green Bay 4 Life posted in March 2007. Anyone have any idea what became of this scheme?

This is old and dead. Not coming back. The building itself was not all that urban looking at all. In addition it was based on low to moderate income levels and applying for tax credits. Of all the units it would have only been very few market rate units. In the end it wasn't a good use to activate the riverfront. Sounded good on how they sold it, but the truth is - it wasn't. They didn't get the tax credits because of Flats on the Fox taking so long to get off the ground. That is also why the Alexander Co project and the project on Main Street just west of Webster didn't get the tax credits either. It is what it is. Another in the long list of proposals that have been hyped and failed.

Check Below

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20091010/GPG0211/91010060/1978

Green Bay Bullfrogs owner Jeff Royle submits bid to buy Green Bay Blizzard
BY MIKE VANDERMAUSE • MVANDERMAUSE@GREENBAYPRESSGAZETTE.COM • OCTOBER 10, 2009
Post a Comment Recommend(1)Print this pageE-mail this articleShare

Green Bay Bullfrogs owner Jeff Royle confirmed Saturday he has submitted a final offer to purchase the Green Bay Blizzard indoor football team and could find out as early as today whether the deal will be accepted.



♦ Sign up for news, weather, Green Bay Packers and high school sports text alerts.

“We’ve got our cards on the table, the ball’s in their court,” said Royle. “I hope it works out. I’d hate to see what these guys built go away. It’s not in my control right now. It would be too bad if these guys didn’t take our offer and give us the opportunity to keep arena football here in town.”

Blizzard part-owner Bob Landsee held a news conference Sept. 30 and said the nearly seven-year-old Blizzard franchise would likely fold if it didn’t raise approximately $300,000.

Landsee spoke favorably about an unnamed potential investor on Friday. “I think it’s positive,” Landsee said. “It’s a matter of coming down to some numbers, just like anything else.”

Royle said if the deal goes through the Blizzard would join Arena Football 1, a newly formed indoor league that has imposed a Thursday deadline for franchises to join.

“I’m very certain in talks with the league commissioner that should we obtain the franchise we’ll be welcomed very quickly into this new arena football league,” said Royle.

The Blizzard would continue to play its home games at the Resch Center in the new league beginning next spring, according to Royle. The team has averaged around 6,000 fans per game over the past four seasons.

Royle has been in negotiations with the Blizzard ownership group since Landsee’s press conference 10 days ago.

“I was as surprised as anyone else when the news conference came that their situation was where it was at,” said Royle. “I guess it kind of caught me by surprise. At the same time, as soon as I heard about it, and got talking with some people on my side, the fire in the belly really got going and the juices got flowing about what an incredible opportunity this could be.”

Royle said owning both the Bullfrogs and Blizzard would be “a match made in heaven” because of the opportunity to consolidate front office staffs and cross market among the fan bases.

Three years ago Royle founded the Bullfrogs, a Northwoods League summer baseball team made up primarily of Division 1 college players from around the country. The team plays its home games at Joannes Stadium, but Royle has expressed an interest in building a new baseball facility in Green Bay.

And now he hopes to expand his interests to indoor football.

“I’m a Green Bay guy,” he said. “I love football. I love what (the Blizzard is) doing. I’m a sports enthusiast.

“I think we’ve got a very, very fair offer on the table given the fact the alternative is for them to close down shop. So we’ll see what happens.”



— Wes Hodkiewicz/Press-Gazette

Unrelated, I have a camera that I'm trying to get rid of a light leak, so I had it downtown just now. While I was there, a freighter was passing through. Dan was that you on the underground parking entrance for Aon/Nicolet Bank?

^^ Probably. I was taking photos from there when the ship went by.

OK perhaps I was a bit ornery the other night when I posted the message about the billion-dollar USH 41 upgrade.

Before I give my perspective on why I wrote that, let me first respond to some of the reactions:

1) Where you see people walking are the city streets going UNDER 41. That is not 41 itself.

In the rendering you reference, the street with the sidewalk appears to be 8 lanes. What 8-lane city street is this? I guess I assumed that it was USH 41 with that many lanes.

. In your fantasy world everyone lives downtown, walks or bikes to work. In reality, people are forced to drive to work to pay the bills.

No, that is not my fantasy to have everyone living downtown. I would simply like to see an improved downtown, one that is to visitors, businesses, and yes residents who might choose to live in a downtown environement (there are a lot of people like this out there).

Also, for most Americans nowadays, the house is the biggest expense, and guess what's #2? Cars and all of the related costs (gas, insurance, etc). I'm not against cars but, I think that many Americans (myself included) have come to depend far too much on them and I think we spend way too much of our personal and public dollars on all that is necessary to keep them going.


Gov't shouldn't try to restrict movement to accomplish a downtown community pipe dream. Just take the taxes from the fuel & use it for transportation, not another group or social program.

Last I checked, the WiDOT is the government, and the WiDOT is the agency proposing this massive highway project. So how exactly is government restricting movement here? By talking about building passenger trains as another option? That seems to me to be INCREASING movement, not restricting it.


Geez, no highways, no parking lots, no parking ramps, what's next?

I've got more on this later....

Gov't restricting movement. In a matter of a few years forcing everyone to drive a tin can or electric car. The idea of a mileage tax is floating out there, so when we are all driving electric cars they can go after us. What I was trying to say was mainly that gov't shouldn't try to prevent people from moving to the country by keeping roads to small. Thus forcing people to take public transportation and live in a "downtown utopia".

The no highways, no parking lots, no ramps, just reflect the goal of some on this board. Hating the highways, hating a parking lot, & then hating the alternate ramp.


I'm not about "forcing" people into things they don't like.

I am not saying "No Ramps", "No Highways" etc. Please, please stop generalizing like that. It's not that "All or Nothing" I will explain where I am coming from, after one more response...

I haven't done any research but I would be curious to see how much federal subsidies the US military receives or provides defending the oil rich allies of ours to provide us the cheap fuel we depend...

Exactly!

And there are more of these "hidden costs" of our excessive personal transportation systems that many people are not fully aware of.

*******************************

OK, now to try explain where I was coming from the other night:

I understand that there are different "pots" of money that fund different things, and the highways are largely (but not completely) funded by the gas tax, which is a "user fee". It's an OK system, not a perfect one but OK.

I'm also very aware that USH 41 is a vital transportation link to this city upon which a lot of our economy is based. I do understand that improvements are necessary (improvements are ALWAYS necessary for ANY Transportation system).

However, what frustrates me is that most people have no problem blowing a huge percentage of our resources on cars, pavement and concrete. No problem whatsoever spending a billion here and a billion there on transportation, but when it comes to building something of a destination, there is opposition.

Let me give you a couple examples:

1) The CityDeck: Here we have something built for people, which is almost entirely funded by "user fees" (TIF) and yet there was a lot of controversy surrounding that.

2) The Green Bay Children's Museum: Not only is this a destination for people, it's for kids for crying out loud. And yet, we're having a hell of a time finding enough money to git 'er done. We have to scratch and claw and do silly online polls to scrap for every dollar. The cost of the children's museum is a miniscule fraction of the cost of the USH 41 project...Heck, the cost of one single new noise barrier panel on the proposed Hwy 41 project would probably be enough to get that museum going.

****************
Why did simply questioning this USH 41 project cause such an uproar here? We're so infatuated with driving that spending a billion in tax dollars is something that cannot be questioned? Last I checked, I am still a citizen and I pay taxes too, so I'm entitled to an opinion and a voice. And in my opinion, I just think a disproportionate amount of our private and public money is frittered away on cars and everything they need to run.

I think many of us Americans have a driving addiction and we are ignoring the high costs of what has become a dependence on cars.

Like anything in life, moderation is key. Yet so often humans take things waay too far, and most of the time we don't recognize our affliction until it's too late. I have only recently begun to become more aware of these things and since they related to life in Green Bay I tend to write about my own thoughts here and on my blog.

Maybe this is a little 'over-the-top' but I will make this analogy anyway:

I love my kids and I want to see them succeed. In doing so, I try my hardest to focus on their strengths while gently working to correct their shortcomings. Maybe sometimes I slip up and get overly critical, but I try to do my best. Other parents may have different ideas of what qualities ought to be highlighted in their children, which is a good way to have a well-rounded diverse society.

I also like living in Green Bay and I've focused much of my spare time highlighting what I feel are its strengths on this forum, on my blog and in other ways. Heck, I am a patriot: I love my city and country. That said, I also see some weaknesses and sometimes perhaps I am critical of them. Perhaps I don't always provide constructive criticism, but I usually try. Maybe your ideas of what are strengths and weaknesses are different than mine, but again, that's all part of having a diverse society.

I'll step off my little soapbox now.

I'm with Puant on this. Here in Green Bay, my wife and I have two cars. Unfortunately, I can't conceive of a different way of us operating here. However, in the seventeen years since I had my 18th birthday, I have only owned and maintained a car for seven years (and six of those are the past six, here in Green Bay). So, for the majority of my adult life, I was happily car free. I was able to do this because of the places I chose to live. In the days that I was car free, I was generally in much better physical shape, better informed (more time to read newspapers/magazines in transit), and knew my environment and neighbors much better. There are many advantages to being carless. Downsides? Major shopping hauls, day trips, etc. Back in the day, I used to just rent cars for these whenever I felt like it. $35 about once a month is FAR cheaper then owning a car. Sure, it took a little longer to get from a to b. But, it's not clear to me that is all downside. Now, I have to take additional time to exercise, stay informed, etc.

Here in Green Bay right now, it's not a very good option though. What Puant seems to favor and what I know I do is policy that moves Green Bay closer to being a place where being car free is a viable option. What these other cities have is an infrastructure that makes it possible, the result of deliberate policy making over the years. Resources are limited, so every time money is directed to a project there is opportunity cost. I'm not anti-car either, what I am is pro-transit balance.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20091010/GPG0211/91010060/1978

Although this could theoretically be very good, it makes me nervous. The terms, "eggs" and "one basket" come to mind. From all accounts, Bob Landsee was doing a pretty good job with the team & was a good owner. If he couldn't make a go of it, Jeff Royle is definitely going to have his work cut out for him. My fear is that if things don't go as planned, or even if they do, but it significant investments to do it, will that stall the Bullfrogs' plans? Let's be honest, there's only so much money to go around, and one person with his hands in both is a little scary.

FYI. The Fox River Mall is 25 years old this year, having opened in 1984. As everyone knows, the mall was one of the nails in the coffin for major and big-store retail in downtown Green Bay — as well as downtown Appleton and downtown Oshkosh. The mall now has some 180 stores, including six anchors, and is considered the No. 1 tourist attraction in the Fox Cities.

www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009910100535

Although this could theoretically be very good, it makes me nervous. The terms, "eggs" and "one basket" come to mind. From all accounts, Bob Landsee was doing a pretty good job with the team & was a good owner. If he couldn't make a go of it, Jeff Royle is definitely going to have his work cut out for him. My fear is that if things don't go as planned, or even if they do, but it significant investments to do it, will that stall the Bullfrogs' plans? Let's be honest, there's only so much money to go around, and one person with his hands in both is a little scary.

When you look at the alternatives I think this is a great option. You have a guy who is dedicated to the city, already has experience running minor league teams, and can save on costs by combining staff, resources, etc. Let's put it this way. If he doesn't step in the Blizzard go under anyway. This could also have a positive reciprocal effect on each of the leagues. With the Blizzard pulling about 6k per night, that is a lot of eyes and ears to hear some 'free' advertising for the Bullfrogs.

It would be too bad to see the Blizzard go away and you've got to applaud the guy for trying to save it.

When you look at the alternatives I think this is a great option. You have a guy who is dedicated to the city, already has experience running minor league teams, and can save on costs by combining staff, resources, etc. Let's put it this way. If he doesn't step in the Blizzard go under anyway. This could also have a positive reciprocal effect on each of the leagues. With the Blizzard pulling about 6k per night, that is a lot of eyes and ears to hear some 'free' advertising for the Bullfrogs.

Very good points. I hadn't thought about it that way.

How about a retractable roof on the new riverfront stadium? Then they can play "arena" football there when there aren't baseball games. :nuts:

Here's some more info about the new league. Organizers hope to fix the problems of the business model that the AFL had. I can't help but think that the rising transportation costs associated with moving teams around the country doesn't have a big impact on the venture. If the new league can manage those costs and still provide affordable entertainment more power to them.

As OliverDP pointed out, the cross marketing that can be done between the two teams would be beneficial to both.

Updated: September 28, 2009, 8:41 PM ET
Arena Football 1 to launch in 2010

Associated Press

TULSA, Okla. -- Arena football isn't dead yet.

Officials from what will be known as Arena Football 1 said Monday that they will have at least 16 teams ready to play in 2010, including four in former Arena Football League markets: Salt Lake City, Chicago, Phoenix and Orlando, Fla. The Arizona Rattlers and Orlando Predators played in the old AFL, but the new league's Chicago and Salt Lake City teams did not.

The league will also have teams from the AFL offshoot arenafootball2, as well as at least one team from another indoor league. It will be based in Tulsa. Commissioner Jerry Kurz said it would be a "brand-new league" not connected with the AFL or af2.

"There has been arena football before," said Kurz, a former af2 commissioner. "It's been done well but not as good as it's going to be done this time."

Kurz said more details of the league's business structure -- including what the players might be paid -- will be announced during the coming weeks. He said the league would use a schedule similar to that used by the AFL and af2, with games starting in late March or early April and running through the summer.

Dan Newman, the owner of the Bossier-Shreveport (La.) BattleWings -- who are moving from the af2 to the new league- said Arena Football 1 will use a rule book identical to those used by the AFL and af2.

"This is arena football," Newman said.

Arena Football 1 said its markets also will include Little Rock, Ark.; Fresno, Calif.; Des Moines, Iowa; Jacksonville, Fla.; Lexington, Ky.; Milwaukee; Oklahoma City; Spokane, Wash.; Huntsville, Ala.; Kennewick, Wash.; and Tulsa.

The new league said eight more teams have submitted membership applications. Newman said the league is negotiating with seven other former AFL franchises, including those in Tampa and San Jose.

Hank Stern, vice president of the San Jose SaberCats, said Monday that while that team was "looking to bring arena football back to San Jose," he wouldn't comment about the new league "until things become clearer."

Kurz said other franchises will be considered for inclusion in the league through Oct. 9.

"We'll grow as it fits us in a smooth economic model," he said. "Other leagues in many different sports have just grown to grow and we don't want to do that. We want to make sure we go into markets that want us."

The old AFL canceled its 2009 season and folded in August, ending a 22-year run for the high-scoring indoor brand of football that helped launch the career of Super Bowl winner Kurt Warner. Play in af2 was never disrupted, but teams ended the season unsure of what would happen next. The AFL owned 50.1 percent of af2.

Kurz said that while previous arena football leagues were "well-intended," their business model resulted in overspending.

"The sports business has to be like every other business," he said. "You can't spend more than you generate in revenue."

Kurz and Newman dismissed the possibility of a new version of the AFL forming. Newman noted the AFL canceled its 2009 season "because of a collective bargaining agreement that they agreed to that spiraled out of control. The financial model was broken and finally it broke the machine. It didn't work. The AFL is not in existence, it's in bankruptcy.

"They will not play in 2010. That precipitated the necessity to go to the drawing board and come up with a financially viable model that works to play arena football."

If the new league's owners are patient and market the league correctly, there's no reason it can't succeed, even during the current recession, said Mark Nagel, a professor who teaches sports management at the University of South Carolina.

"If they can keep those expenses in control and have a good plan to attract the consumer who's looking to do something that's affordable, it might work in this economy," Nagel said.

Shy Anderson, the chief operating officer for the AFL's Dallas Desperados -- who won't play in the new league -- agreed with Nagel's assessment, saying the business model for the AFL "wasn't solid." He said the new league "will be great for the fans and the players who want to continue playing football."

"It is an entertainment sport," Anderson said. "It's not a pure sport. It's football played indoors with a lesser number of players. But there is a niche for it."


Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press

No word on Blizzard ownership yet. Deadline looms Thursday. As expected, Blizzard head coach takes Milwaukee job.

www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20091013/GPG0211/910130445/1225/GPG02/Indoor-football--Potential-owner-waiting-for-Blizzard-s-response

Very good points. I hadn't thought about it that way.

How about a retractable roof on the new riverfront stadium? Then they can play "arena" football there when there aren't baseball games. :nuts:

I think all of those points are valid. I think that it could be a symbiotic relationship, and both could thrive - but I think this situation (Royle owning both) definitely increases the possibility of both teams failing as well. I'm not trying to be pessimistic, but I don't like the idea of putting one franchise in jeopardy for the sake of trying to save another one.

FYI. The Fox River Mall is 25 years old this year, having opened in 1984. As everyone knows, the mall was one of the nails in the coffin for major and big-store retail in downtown Green Bay — as well as downtown Appleton and downtown Oshkosh. The mall now has some 180 stores, including six anchors, and is considered the No. 1 tourist attraction in the Fox Cities.

www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009910100535
OTOH, the commercial area surrounding Fox River Mall is extremely threadbare with a steadily and distressingly increasing number of vacancies, along with a growing number of 'lesser' type commercial tenants such as payday lenders, thrift and second-hand stores, etc, and the unincorporated township that it is in seems to be completely clueless on the dynamics that are going on in that whole area. A bunch of new car dealerships on the nearby College Ave 'strip' (mostly in that same township, a few in the City of Appleton) went vacant over the past year, too. An idea of how that is affecting that township - their board chairguy is very anxious to disband his township's police department and merge it with the adjacent City of Appleton's police department and has, in recent years, sent feelers to the city regarding doing the same with fire protection. (IMHO, the two should just merge completely into one city.)

Within the past few years, the commercial focus within the Appleton metro area has shifted strongly towards the city's southeast side and the adjacent unincorporated Darboy area (WI 441/College Ave and WI 441/Calumet St).

Mike

I read this article this morning. It's a sign that the renaissance/reformation of Broadway is underway as another piece of the puzzle is put into place.

Story, photos: Three Billy Goats Pub finds home below Mason Street bridge
Establishment features bar, pool hall and party room (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20091013/GPG03/910130520/1247/Three-Billy-Goats-Pub--diamond-in-rough-)

Royle sets midnight deadline for purchase of Blizzard.

www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20091013/GPG02/91013129/1978

Royle sets midnight deadline for purchase of Blizzard.

www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20091013/GPG02/91013129/1978

http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/mobile/local_wluk_greenbay_historic_properties_closer_to_changing_200910131638_rev1

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/PPTowers.jpg

http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/mobile/local_wluk_greenbay_historic_properties_closer_to_changing_200910131638_rev1

Good news on Port Plaza Towers!! Hope the residents are supportive of the move!

As for the former Fort Howard Jailer's Quarters on Bond St. moving to Heritage Hill from the Broadway District area, as I understand it, either the building had to be repaired/renovated/restored/brought up to code or it would be or was being condemned by the city. As I understand it, those watching out for the building were unable to raise sufficient moneys for its rehab, if that's a correct way to put it. There had been talk of moving the building to Leicht Park and using it as a visitors center of sorts. Ald. Jeffreys has been involved in this project. I'm sure there's more to this story. I just know bits and pieces.

http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/mobile/local_wluk_greenbay_historic_properties_closer_to_changing_200910131638_rev1

related story from press gazette this morning. Maybe this is the way these things are usually done, but does anyone else think it's backwards to get the rights to the building AND THEN try to see if any developers are interested?

Green Bay panel OKs Port Plaza transition
Guardhouse move from Fort Howard also approved
By Richard Ryman • rryman@greenbaypressgazette.com • October 14, 2009

Post a CommentRecommendPrint this page E-mail this article Share Del.icio.us
Facebook
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Buzz up!Twitter
The Green Bay Redevelopment Authority on Tuesday approved a development agreement with Wisconsin Housing Preservation Corp. to move ahead with redevelopment of Port Plaza Towers.



Milwaukee Refinance at 4.37% FIXED!
$160 mortgage for $633/mo. Free. No Obligation. Get 4 Quotes!
Explore now... $49 Milwaukee Car Insurance?
6/17: Obama backs new insurance regulation. Do you pay too much?
See the results... How you can make $1000's on penny stocks
Find out how our subscribers are making 100% gains with penny…
Get details... Refinance at 4.37% FIXED!
$160 mortgage for $633/mo. Free. No Obligation. Get 4 Quotes!
See the results... The agreement stipulates that the towers, formerly the Northland Hotel, be restored to a high-end historic hotel with some retail and residential condominium elements allowed.

"I think there is a market for first-floor retail, or condominiums, but I want to limit that. I don't want it to be all condominiums," Green Bay Mayor Jim Schmitt said.

About 140 elderly and disabled occupants of the 304 N. Adams apartments will be moved to new residences on University Avenue and Morrow Street.

Wisconsin Housing Preservation Corp. of Madison, which owns the Port Plaza Towers, received $2,566,895 in tax credits for the project from the Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority.

If a hotel developer is not found, the authority will consider other development options.

Also Tuesday, the authority approved allowing Heritage Hill State Historical Park to move part of a building at 410 Bond St. to the park. The building, a former guardhouse, is one of the last original structures from historic Fort Howard. Additions have been made, but the building was recently condemned for use as a residence. Plans are to raze the building.

"As far as historians know, this is the only building extant that was in the fort," Alderwoman Celestine Jeffreys said. "I don't want this to go into a landfill for obvious reasons."

Charles Pelky, executive director of Heritage Hill, said the guardhouse would complement two other Fort Howard structures — a hospital building and orderly room — at the park.

Park supporters would be responsible for providing the $300,000 needed to restore the guardhouse.

The authority approved the use of up to $20,000 in Neighborhood Enhancement funds to relocate the building.

In other business, the authority approved plans to spend $1 million in Community Development Block Grants and $624,844 in HOME program allocations. The spending plans must be approved by the City Council.

related story from press gazette this morning. Maybe this is the way these things are usually done, but does anyone else think it's backwards to get the rights to the building AND THEN try to see if any developers are interested?

It is backwards, but I think it fits the situation. I think the residents needed to be moved first to vacate the building so it's ready for a developer to act quickly to renovate. If the mayor does have a developer interested it would be more appealing to them to have the building vacant. It helps to eliminate the possibility of a developer backing out after waiting too long for the moving process. I think it's going to be some time before the residents are moved and we actually get some news about interested parties.

I was in PPT last week and noticed that one of the pictures of the new developments that were posted in the lobby was taken down. I wonder if it is full and that's why it is no longer displayed. I drive past the Berger/Morrow site quite frequently, (the last time was early Tuesday morning,) and there still is not any construction at the site but it appears to be ready to bring in equipment and start.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20091014/GPG0211/91014062/1978

Update: Jeff Royle says he has verbal agreement to buy Green Bay Blizzard indoor football team
BY WESTON HODKIEWICZ • WHODKIEW@GREENBAYPRESSGAZETTE.COM • OCTOBER 14, 2009
Read Comments(6) Recommend(2)Print this pageE-mail this articleShare

Green Bay Bullfrogs owner Jeff Royle confirmed this morning he has verbal agreement in place to buy the Green Bay Blizzard indoor football team.



♦ Sign up for news, weather, Green Bay Packers and high school sports text alerts.

After setting a deadline on his offer to buy the team at midnight Tuesday, Royle received a phone call at 10:45 p.m. from one of the partners of the Blizzard ownership group informing him his offer was accepted.

While there are still some details that need to be worked out between the two sides, including a written, contractual agreement, Royle said he was still pleased to have a foundation laid to purchase the nearly seven-year-old franchise.

“It’s pretty awesome,” Royle said. “The Green Bay Bullfrogs is and always will be my baby, but if things work out here, the Blizzard will be my adopted son, so-to-speak.

“It’s not just myself. I have a great ownership group behind me that is excited about this opportunity. There’s a group of us that really wanted to make sure we have a chance to keep an arena football franchise and this sports franchise alive in town.”

Royle said he has been in contact with officials from the newly formed Arena Football 1 league and the Indoor Football League regarding the Blizzard’s future league. The current deadline to join AF1 is set for Thursday.

Royle said he was not able to go into specifics on his offer to buy the team until all the proper paperwork has been filed, but said the purchase price could go up or down pending an assessment of the organization.

from press gazette this morning..

Update: Jeff Royle says he has verbal agreement to buy Green Bay Blizzard indoor football team
BY WESTON HODKIEWICZ • whodkiew@greenbaypressgazette.com • October 14, 2009

Print this page E-mail this article Share Del.icio.us
Facebook
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Buzz up!Twitter
Green Bay Bullfrogs owner Jeff Royle confirmed this morning he has verbal agreement in place to buy the Green Bay Blizzard indoor football team.



♦ Sign up for news, weather, Green Bay Packers and high school sports text alerts.

After setting a deadline on his offer to buy the team at midnight Tuesday, Royle received a phone call at 10:45 p.m. from one of the partners of the Blizzard ownership group informing him his offer was accepted.


While there are still some details that need to be worked out between the two sides, including a written, contractual agreement, Royle said he was still pleased to have a foundation laid to purchase the nearly seven-year-old franchise.


“It’s pretty awesome,” Royle said. “The Green Bay Bullfrogs is and always will be my baby, but if things work out here, the Blizzard will be my adopted son, so-to-speak.


“It’s not just myself. I have a great ownership group behind me that is excited about this opportunity. There’s a group of us that really wanted to make sure we have a chance to keep an arena football franchise and this sports franchise alive in town.”


Royle said he has been in contact with officials from the newly formed Arena Football 1 league and the Indoor Football League regarding the Blizzard’s future league. The current deadline to join AF1 is set for Thursday.


Royle said he was not able to go into specifics on his offer to buy the team until all the proper paperwork has been filed, but said the purchase price could go up or down pending an assessment of the organization.

Sounds like the new Arena Football 1 league could be divided into a major division and a developmental division (or something like that), as I read it. It's been mentioned Green Bay could be a developmental team for the Milwaukee franchise, the Milwaukee Iron. Just a thought: drawing some 6,000 fans a game, does Green Bay have to be a developmental team? Wonder if there's any chance it could be considered one of the major franchises and play teams like Chicago and Phoenix? Or would that be cost-prohibitive? . . . Anyway, sounds like Royle will still keep the Bullfrogs near and dear to his heart.

Sounds like the new Arena Football 1 league could be divided into a major division and a developmental division (or something like that), as I read it. It's been mentioned Green Bay could be a developmental team for the Milwaukee franchise, the Milwaukee Iron. Just a thought: drawing some 6,000 fans a game, does Green Bay have to be a developmental team? Wonder if there's any chance it could be considered one of the major franchises and play teams like Chicago and Phoenix? Or would that be cost-prohibitive? . . . Anyway, sounds like Royle will still keep the Bullfrogs near and dear to his heart.

Given that the Blizzard was pulling 6000 fans per game (I assume a good turnout for any teams in this or AF1 league) and were also regularly in the running for the league title, I would think this team could be competitive enough to be the "Packers" of the Arena Football league. Small town, yes, but still competitive and able to match up against the big cities.

Perhaps IfYouBuildIt could answer this question. Or, perhaps, he is now known as "IfYouBuyIt"?

*Rocky Rococo is relocating from the Howard Mall on Velp Avenue in Howard (across from McDonald's) to the food court at Bay Park Square in Ashwaubenon.

*The ShopKo at East Town Mall is being given a big makeover, in response to the East Town Mall makeover. Once finished, the store may look similar to the store prototype (located in Suamico) on the inside.

*A Shell gasoline station will anchor a newly rebuilt Pioneer Plaza on Velp Avenue, behind Pioneer Credit Union at the intersection of Gray Street and Velp Avenue.

*Sonic Drive-in is set to open in a few days on the city's east side.

Sounds like the new Arena Football 1 league could be divided into a major division and a developmental division (or something like that), as I read it. It's been mentioned Green Bay could be a developmental team for the Milwaukee franchise, the Milwaukee Iron. Just a thought: drawing some 6,000 fans a game, does Green Bay have to be a developmental team? Wonder if there's any chance it could be considered one of the major franchises and play teams like Chicago and Phoenix? Or would that be cost-prohibitive? . . . Anyway, sounds like Royle will still keep the Bullfrogs near and dear to his heart.

I really doubt that would be possible. A partnership with Milwaukee would seem to make sense. My guess is that the costs to run a higher level team are higher, and that would have to be passed onto the fans (although, of course, in theory the product would be better). And remember, while drawing 6,000 in AF2, they weren't making money. Hopefully the structure of the new league will make things more profitable. But really, the great thing and the Blizzard is that it's good entertainment, an exciting product, and something people can afford. Those features are more important than what league they're in. Plus, it seems (if Wikipedia is to be believed) that Arena League teams averaged over 12,000 league wide, with many teams averaging over 13,000 per game. And that level evidently wasn't enough in the old model. Those levels of attendance simply aren't possible here.

By the way, did you know that for a time the Arena League had a team named The Miami Hooters?!?!?!?!?! Very nice! I mean, I get that it was a sponsorship deal, but still.

I'd have loved to be a headline writer for stories relating to that: "Fans Thrilled by Hooters" "Hooters Continue to Sag" "Miami GM Looks to Augment Hooters In the Offseason" I could go on all day, but I won't.

*Sonic Drive-in is set to open in a few days on the city's east side.

Sonic, Yes :)

Sponge, or anybody in the know, What's going on with the two buildings on the corner of Shawano Ave and Yale St across from West High School? Picture below. Two weeks ago I saw workers installing roofing. The buildings were gutted and the front of one was replaced with windows and the other one looks like it will get the same treatment.

http://i735.photobucket.com/albums/ww359/GB-Pix/953-957Shawano.jpg

*Rocky Rococo is relocating from the Howard Mall on Velp Avenue in Howard (across from McDonald's) to the food court at Bay Park Square in Ashwaubenon.

*The ShopKo at East Town Mall is being given a big makeover, in response to the East Town Mall makeover. Once finished, the store may look similar to the store prototype (located in Suamico) on the inside.

*A Shell gasoline station will anchor a newly rebuilt Pioneer Plaza on Velp Avenue, behind Pioneer Credit Union at the intersection of Gray Street and Velp Avenue.

*Sonic Drive-in is set to open in a few days on the city's east side.

one more - I was told that Cici's Pizza will be opening in Ashwaubenon this fall. It is going to be in the old Second Wind exercise equipment place, by Red Robin. Second Wind is in the process of moving to the strip mall on Oneida, by Noodles & Co.

I am wondering what is going on with this building. It has been vacant for a long time.

I always thought it would be a good spot for some type of retail with the school across from it.

Sonic, Yes :)

Sponge, or anybody in the know, What's going on with the two buildings on the corner of Shawano Ave and Yale St

I am wondering what is going on with this building. It has been vacant for a long time.

I always thought it would be a good spot for some type of retail with the school across from it.

I would be curious as well about this development. I really think the near downtown neighborhoods lack this type of dense, corner business that is prevalent through most other urban neighborhoods. I guess I would also be disappointed if it turned out to be another dive bar though.

By the way, did you know that for a time the Arena League had a team named The Miami Hooters?!?!?!?!?! Very nice! I mean, I get that it was a sponsorship deal, but still.

I'd have loved to be a headline writer for stories relating to that: "Fans Thrilled by Hooters" "Hooters Continue to Sag" "Miami GM Looks to Augment Hooters In the Offseason" I could go on all day, but I won't.

"Hooters Swell with Pride After Victory"?

I'm trying, but I don't think I can top your post..

We have women on this board. Perhaps it's even a majority of women who read it. Please forgive my male brethren. They know not what they do. We can think with our butts sometimes.

I really think the near downtown neighborhoods lack this type of dense, corner business that is prevalent through most other urban neighborhoods. I guess I would also be disappointed if it turned out to be another dive bar though.

I agree, a small deli/packaged goods store would make a nice fit at the location. There's not much parking but a business like that serves the immediate neighborhood so I'd think there would be more walk/bicycle traffic. If you look at the photo where it says "Shawano Ave" there's bumped in lanes for school bus loading. They're only used at two times of the day during the school year and can be used at all other times. Fisk Park Aquatic Center is there so that could be more potential customers.

Sonic, Yes :)

Sponge, or anybody in the know, What's going on with the two buildings on the corner of Shawano Ave and Yale St across from West High School? Picture below. Two weeks ago I saw workers installing roofing. The buildings were gutted and the front of one was replaced with windows and the other one looks like it will get the same treatment.

http://i735.photobucket.com/albums/ww359/GB-Pix/953-957Shawano.jpg

My guess, is that they are renovating it, so that it is ready for a new business to move in. I would like to see a restaurant, or a store move in.

On a related note, how many times has West been added on to? It looks like a bunch of additions and seems like noting 'fits' well.


http://i735.photobucket.com/albums/ww359/GB-Pix/953-957Shawano.jpg

The design process is starting. I don't think the June 2010 is too realistic for a start date though. http://www.bidclerk.com/project.1084041.html

On a related note, how many times has West been added on to? It looks like a bunch of additions and seems like noting 'fits' well.

A hundred years of additions can do that. I have been inside on the West side of the building but not in the East side. From the photo it looks like the East side might have a maze of hallways with the way the additions were put on.

From the streetside view I think that the place doesn't look so bad, even with the difference in brick color. At least it still has a front yard unlike East High getting parking put in front.

A hundred years of additions can do that. I have been inside on the West side of the building but not in the East side. From the photo it looks like the East side might have a maze of hallways with the way the additions were put on.

From the streetside view I think that the place doesn't look so bad, even with the difference in brick color. At least it still has a front yard unlike East High getting parking put in front.

I know what it was like in there, since I graduated from West High in the Class of 2006. It is a big three-story structure that was expanded multiple times. It has two gymnasiums, two libraries, an auditorium, and a cafeteria. Walking from the gym on the east side of the building to the third floor on the west side of the building was quite a task for me. The recent west wing additions to the school managed to pull of the same tile work as the older structure, unlike the addition from the 1980s which used different tiles. This high school was a big transition from the middle school I attended, Lombardi Middle School, which was built in 1963 as the original Southwest High School, and had a school cafeteria, consisting of boomerang-style ceilings and walls of glass, a prime example of Googie architecture, next to the main entrance, as well as an expansion known as the "Dale Breitlow Addition," built in 1994.

A hundred years of additions can do that. I have been inside on the West side of the building but not in the East side. From the photo it looks like the East side might have a maze of hallways with the way the additions were put on.

From the streetside view I think that the place doesn't look so bad, even with the difference in brick color. At least it still has a front yard unlike East High getting parking put in front.

Couple things... I also graduated from West (prior to the last 2 additions - they were building the new Marchetti activity center (aka gym) during my senior year)

The halls are for 90% straight shots parallel to Shawano or perpendicular. The major exceptions were the areas around the auditorium and now behind the new cafeteria (art/music wings) they are a bit more "off the grid" but not much of a maze... :)

Also if you note the "3rd floor" in the center of the school. The area on either side of the original Library. If you were to go inside, the murals at the East and West ends are actually classrooms that were designed to be used when a 3rd floor was added - which for whatever reason was only done on the far West side (science area) - they "found them" again when I was in HS there and it made the Press Gazette including photos of the inside... (basically large concrete block rooms) with stuff stored over the years. It is only accessible from the roof.

My guess, is that they are renovating it, so that it is ready for a new business to move in. I would like to see a restaurant, or a store move in.

I heard from a neighbor who was told by a worker that it was being turned into condos or apartments??? I found that to be very odd as I agree with other posts that a C-store would be good or restaurant/shop - maybe a Subway/C-store combo?

I could see the 2nd floor being apartments ... :)

saw on wbay.com this morning..

Blizzard Could Have Answer on Football League This Weekend
Updated: Oct 16, 2009 11:50 PM CDT
Green Bay PackersDetroit Suffers a Blowout in Green Bay: Packers 26, Lions 0Green Bay Seeks Suggestions to Welcome Back Brett FavreRodgers Rested, Don't Plans to Change Playing StyleAtari Bigby Rejoins Packers at PracticeTauscher Could Return to Face Minnesota VikingsTime Change for Kickoff of Packers/Vikings November 1st GamePackers Say Will Blackmon's Out for the YearCampbell's Chunky Soup Click for Cans competition NFL Releases Packers ScheduleThe verbal agreement to purchase the Green Bay Blizzard is now a written agreement.

Green Bay Bullfrogs baseball team owner Jeff Royle and his group of investors will take over the indoor football franchise.

Royle says they should know what league they'll play in as soon as tomorrow -- either the second tier of the new Arena Football 1 behind the Milwaukee Iron or in the Indoor Football League.

Here is an interesting find. It looks like the Five 6 (West) building is up for auction. There are some wonderful pictures of the building in the link. I have never been inside this building but it does look nice. I wonder what kind of use can be done with it now.

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/photos/2136042633_zpid/

Hi all,

I won't be able to make it to this Thursday's get-together after all (I have a funeral out-of-town and may not make it back in time).

For those of you who want to still hang out, feel free to. I
was thinking just an informal shoot-the-bull-type thing this time.

I hadn't officially called a location but I was planning for Kavarna. I'd say those of you who can make it should meet up there and solve all of Green Bay's problems from 7 PM until finished. Let me know the results!

Hi all,

I won't be able to make it to this Thursday's get-together after all (I have a funeral out-of-town and may not make it back in time).

For those of you who want to still hang out, feel free to. I
was thinking just an informal shoot-the-bull-type thing this time.

I hadn't officially called a location but I was planning for Kavarna. I'd say those of you who can make it should meet up there and solve all of Green Bay's problems from 7 PM until finished. Let me know the results!

I still need to make it up from La Crosse to meet with you guys and shoot the breeze. I will be in Green Bay on Friday, Oct. 30 and Nov. 19-20 (Fri. & Sat.) if there is any possibility to have a meeting then?

Puant-I just saw your blog and the voting on which DTGB building is the ugliest and saw city hall is listed. This got me to thinking. Has there been any plans, new or renovation to improve that building? And has there been any progress made for the new federal courthouse building? Could something be combined with the two?

I found out that the building across from West has its own history behind it. It housed a dairy bar in its early years. In the 1970s, it housed an arcade full of pinball machines called Bernie's Game Room, and has, until recently, been home to an Oriental food store and Summer Snow ice cream shop.

I still need to make it up from La Crosse to meet with you guys and shoot the breeze. I will be in Green Bay on Friday, Oct. 30 and Nov. 19-20 (Fri. & Sat.) if there is any possibility to have a meeting then?

Puant-I just saw your blog and the voting on which DTGB building is the ugliest and saw city hall is listed. This got me to thinking. Has there been any plans, new or renovation to improve that building?

No plans to upgrade the exterior that I know of. To me, I'd say the exterior is next-to-hopeless. They've been doing some things to the interior to make City Hall better (like the "welcome desk").

I mentioned this before, but I'm still reeling from the city knocking down the beautiful old City Hall (http://packerland.blogspot.com/2007/10/city-hall.html) in 1959. And I wasn't even born then.

I hate to bemoan this, but clearly what the city should have done is kept that old building (which was located where the parking lot is just north of the current city hall) and then added the expansion offices off to the north with connection to the old city hall. I think da administration and perhaps the council chamber and some other offices could have stayed in the old building while many of the other departments could have been in the newer south addition.

Piss and moan, what's the use, right? Well, it's hopeless now. THere just isn't anything they can do now. Like so many other things, little old Green Bay "had it" but threw it all away and replaced good stuff with junk.....this is a theme here.

Well, now. Didn't I say I'd try to be more positive in a recent post? Sorry.

I found out that the building across from West has its own history behind it. It housed a dairy bar in its early years. In the 1970s, it housed an arcade full of pinball machines called Bernie's Game Room, and has, until recently, been home to an Oriental food store and Summer Snow ice cream shop.

When I was in HS there was a family style diner in the larger half and the first "Summer Snow" location... it was the only shaved ice place in the city and was a business started from someone who used to do the festivals (Artstreet I remember) then opened a small shop. The latest incarnation of Summer Snow was using normal snow cone type machines from what I remember.

Also in the late 80's early 90's the family place had been replaced by an Italian place. I used to have them deliver my lunch when I worked weekends at Fisk Wading pool (before it was replaced by a splash pad)

Here is an interesting find. It looks like the Five 6 (West) building is up for auction. There are some wonderful pictures of the building in the link. I have never been inside this building but it does look nice. I wonder what kind of use can be done with it now.

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/photos/2136042633_zpid/

As a former neighbor I was disappointed in how the building was being used at the end... we had been promised a nice restaurant and jazz club and got instead a noisy hip-hop club and 2am wake-ups from cars/horns/loud music blaring from cars leaving the area or sitting at the gas station...

It is interesting to see the final asking price..."Min accept bid of $140k if no offer recd prior to auction." And on the site an asking price of $290k.

Nick Barnett supposedly wanted $1.2 million for it at one point. Guess it does prove even a Packer doesn't always get his way in Titletown.

I could still see a nice jazz club walking in and opening it's doors in 1-2 months at most from purchase. Or if the projectors were not stripped out...an upscale second run theater much like the DePere pitcher show have opened in recent years. I think they are up to 4 now in mostly smaller towns. (Seems the only theater NOT to be upgraded or renovated is their original location in DePere)

Take the poll and comment! packerlandblogspot.com

I have no idea what this article is about but it mentions CityDeck. Link expires in day or two.
www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009910150656

Ashwaubenon Village Board votes to keep Oneida Street four lanes near Bay Park Square as it completes renovation of Oneida Street, from Cormier southward, starting in 2011. Link expires in day or two.

www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20091014/GPG0101/91014051/-1/archive

Take the poll and comment! packerlandblogspot.com

I have no idea what this article is about but it mentions CityDeck. Link expires in day or two.
www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009910150656


From the article;
The Mayor's Neighborhood Leadership Council has issued an open challenge to the city to create a concept for the underside of Nitschke Bridge at the north end of the future CityDeck boardwalk.

"We've got a blank canvas that's going to serve as the welcome mat for the future CityDeck so the potential is there to do some pretty neat things," said Andy Rosendahl, city neighborhood development specialist.
I hope the winning proposal deals with the pigeon problem under the bridge. Like maybe putting a ceiling on the underside of the bridge so the pigeons can't sit on the overhead I-beams and crap on people.

New Packer stadium constructed in 1957 on the site of a dairy farm. Was built a year after the new Brown County Arena. The stadium's now in the city, but much if not most of Ashwaubenon to the south back then was farmland. All photos from the Press-Gazette.

www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20091018/GPG0101/910180715/-1/archive With photo gallery.

P.S. I have a dvd of the actual NBC television broadcast of the NFL championship game at then City Stadium in 1961. The Packers defeated the New York Giants 37-0. Chris Schenkel and Lindsey Nelson did the broadcast. The attendance was 39,029, a record, I think, at the time for a Green Bay home game. The pregame entertainment included a baton twirler.


http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/bilde-2-1.jpg


http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/bilde-4-2.jpg


http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/bilde-9-1.jpg


http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/bilde-3-1.jpg


http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/bilde-1-2.jpg

This establishment has to go, boooo !


http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=11348924

This establishment has to go, boooo !


http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=11348924

I agree the place has to go and hopefully it will not be replaced with another business that can't control its patrons. The place is big, a super sports bar with a lot of big screen TVs to watch sports would be nice. It has a dance floor, just needs a DJ that isn't going to play the music that attracts all the riffraff.

I hate to say this, but I kind of agree with one of the comments - if they want people to attend, why charge $25?

Passenger rail is topic of Green Bay meeting
October 21, 2009

Read Comments(4)Recommend(1)Print this page E-mail this article Share Del.icio.us
Facebook
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Buzz up!Twitter
The Wisconsin Association of Rail Passengers will hold its fall meeting starting at 9 a.m. Saturday at the Harmony Café, 1660 W. Mason St.



Speakers include Ron Adams of the Department of Transportation and local business and planning leaders. Adams will give an update on status of the Midwest Regional Rail System, funding status of the Milwaukee-Madison route, and the potential for a Milwaukee-Green Bay route.


A panel discussion at 1 p.m. will deal with the issue of brining passenger rail to Northeastern Wisconsin.


Registration of $25, payable at the door, covers entry, refreshments and lunch.


For information, contact Frank Ingram (920) 445 3758 or Keith Plasterer (608) 274-0275.

Passenger Rail meeting

I agree, I could see like $5 cover or so, but $25 seems a little steep. For "entry" and "refreshments"? Did they also have to pay the speaker for travel cost?

I wonder how many people will show up. I won't be there. If anyone else goes, please report on the meeting by leaving a post here on this forum or else shoot me a message at puant1@gmail.com

Tower Park,
Thanks for the pics of Lambeau being built. Crazy to see farm fields and cows right there. Reminds me of a map (http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o52/Puant/growth2.jpg)showing Green Bay's suburban growth. Some of you might also recall an article I wrote (http://packerland.blogspot.com/2007/08/sprawling-pains.html) some time ago now called "sprawling pains".

As for the "Packerland.blogspot.com (http://www.packerland.blogspot.com)" poll, looks like the voters are choosing the remnants of the Port Plaza Mall as the "ugliest" (not to mention, the most dysfunctional--check out the comments!). Somebody, please, do something about that mall!!!

http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o52/Puant/uglypoll.jpg

Still a few days left to vote.

^^
I agree with the majority. What's left of the Port Plaza Mall has to go. It has sat vacant for far too long. And besides that, we already have Bay Park Square and East Town Mall, as well as countless strip malls, power centers, and big box stores like ShopKo, Toys "R" Us, Target and Walmart. Port Plaza had its thunder stolen by Bay Park Square and Fox River Mall earlier in this decade. If that mall stays there way too long, it might end up looking like Dixie Square Mall in Harvey, Illinois or River Roads Mall in Jennings, Missouri, two shopping malls that failed, and were left abandoned for long periods of time, having caused a bad ripple effect on the businesses surrounding them. The reputation of our downtown is at stake.

Tower Park, those are some of the coolest Packers-related pictures I have ever seen in my life. What a testament to their organization....one of the most popular teams in the world, and it all started in a corn field outside a small town. Badass. I wish I could blow a few of those up and put them on my wall.

$6.4 million Younkers ruling against Green Bay is upheld. Wisconsin Supreme Court declines to take up the case. Ald. Zima blasts former Mayor Jadin & City Atty. Swanson.

www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009910210630

Edited

I think I will be able to drop on by Kavarna's tonight.....anyone else gonna make her?

Very cool old pics.

Did anybody get together last night? Sorry I missed it, I had some last-minute things that came up. Was really looking forward to meeting some of you.

Did you solve all of GB's problems? Maybe you are still there working on them since I haven't seen a post in quite a while :-)

Very cool old pics.

Did anybody get together last night? Sorry I missed it, I had some last-minute things that came up. Was really looking forward to meeting some of you.

Did you solve all of GB's problems? Maybe you are still there working on them since I haven't seen a post in quite a while :-)

I was there from about 7;15 until 7:45.....had a cup of hot chocolate and read the paper...........I didn't see any suspicious looking charactors around so I left........???? We will try again next time....

I found out that the building across from West has its own history behind it. It housed a dairy bar in its early years. In the 1970s, it housed an arcade full of pinball machines called Bernie's Game Room, and has, until recently, been home to an Oriental food store and Summer Snow ice cream shop.

Summer Snow was a great place took many walks with the kids on hot summer nights.

Very cool old pics.

Did anybody get together last night? Sorry I missed it, I had some last-minute things that came up. Was really looking forward to meeting some of you.

Did you solve all of GB's problems? Maybe you are still there working on them since I haven't seen a post in quite a while :-)

Maybe I'm overreacting. But posts here seem to have dropped off since I insulted the good ol' boy network here. This is not my board. I just joined a year ago. Others have been here for years and can claim ownership. I'll drop off if it keeps this board - usually a terrific board - going.

Maybe I'm overreacting. But posts here seem to have dropped off since I insulted the good ol' boy network here. This is not my board. I just joined a year ago. Others have been here for years and can claim ownership. I'll drop off if it keeps this board - usually a terrific board - going.

not 100% sure what you're referring to. I don't remember seeing anything particularly insulting. I've only been "here" a year or two, but even in that time I've noticed that the activity level varies quite a bit. I look every day, & sometimes there are 10 posts, sometimes there are none for 3 or 4 days.

Maybe I'm overreacting. But posts here seem to have dropped off since I insulted the good ol' boy network here. This is not my board. I just joined a year ago. Others have been here for years and can claim ownership. I'll drop off if it keeps this board - usually a terrific board - going.

I don't think it's your fault Tower Park.........the alignment of the stars may have something to do with it tho'.....my personal interest is in the WaterMark project (dead?) and ANY Rail Service (not until 2030) from Green Bay connecting to Chicago.............I'm not much of a Baseball Fan so Bullfrogs don't get me going.

I just want to live by the City Deck and access the Fox River Trail and roll my wheelchair (if it comes to that) up and over the Main & Walnut bridges around and around and around.........

Just a temporary lull in the action on this page.....kinda like the Downtown Progress in Green Bay.........KEEP THE FAITH!

Maybe I'm overreacting. But posts here seem to have dropped off since I insulted the good ol' boy network here. This is not my board. I just joined a year ago. Others have been here for years and can claim ownership. I'll drop off if it keeps this board - usually a terrific board - going.
The number of posts is cyclical and reflects the level of development activity going on around here. Right now there isn't much going on in the area, hence it's quiet here on the board. I don't recall you insulting anyone, but at 177 posts in a year, this board is yours as much as anybody's.

By the way, thanks for posting the old construction photos of City Stadium.

Schwabe invests in future in Green Bay (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20091023/GPG03/910230527/1247/Schwabe-invests-in-future-in-Green-Bay)
Enzymatic Therapy's parent company will create 100 jobs

I saw this article bringing good news yesterday, I thought I'd post the link.

Ok, got it. The board can be cyclical, depending on what's happening. Guess I should know that by now. If I remember correctly, look for some action on WaterMark and the Washington/Walnut building around November. I know promises have been made before, but it does look like both those projects are finally heading toward construction. If you can believe what you read (and I do). Then there's Kavarna/Parisi's around December. Thanks for the comments.

Ok, got it. The board can be cyclical, depending on what's happening. Guess I should know that by now. If I remember correctly, look for some action on WaterMark and the Washington/Walnut building around November. I know promises have been made before, but it does look like both those projects are finally heading toward construction. If you can believe what you read (and I do). Then there's Kavarna/Parisi's around December. Thanks for the comments.


I can't believe you just said that. I'm offended! haha!!

I wish there was more going on to talk about right now, that's for sure. I was sitting at the stoplight on Broadway & Walnut, looking into the current Kavarna building. The space next to it is vacant, & the building is for sale. For as many times as I've gone there or driven by, I never paid that much attention to the building. It's got real potential. It will be interesting to see what happens when (if?) Kavarna does move out.

Maybe I'm overreacting. But posts here seem to have dropped off since I insulted the good ol' boy network here. This is not my board. I just joined a year ago. Others have been here for years and can claim ownership. I'll drop off if it keeps this board - usually a terrific board - going.

I don't know what you're referring to. And if anyone's easily offended, it's the Geico Cavemen! (ever see the commercials?) :lol: I'll have to go back and re-read your posts, maybe I missed some good offensive material!! I really do enjoy your posts, keep it up.

This thread gets busy at times, other times there is a lull. It's not necessarily tied to how much actual development there is, but rather what topics end up touching a nerve.

Sorry I missed the meeting last night. Let's try again.

Later edit:
Going back and re-reading some old posts, I think I see what you mean... there was the one about how you said I should take my cat for a walk on USH 41 to get to the farmer's market held in the 8-lane roundabout. Well, I wasn't offended but my cat hasn't been acting himself lately and now I know why. I mean, sheesh. He hates leashes AND farmer's markets (not to mention roundabouts...)

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/CityHallGreenBayWisconsin2007-1.jpg

From Sunday's Press-Gazette.


City Hall to Add Six Stories

by Warren Bluhm
Green Bay Press-Gazette
October 25, 2009

The Press-Gazette has learned the City of Green Bay plans to add another six stories to City Hall, bringing the downtown structure to 12 stories.

"We need the space," a source told the Press-Gazette. "The mayor's office alone needs an entire floor. Plus we plan to expand the City Council Chambers to accommodate 500 visitors."

The Press-Gazette learned of the plans through a Freedom of Information lawsuit filed against the city and the Mayor's Beautification Committee. The committee has been discussing the expansion in closed sessions for the past year.

"We're also filing for $250,000 in damages from the city," said Press-Gazette Publisher Kevin Corrado. "We had to make a lot of photocopies in pursing this story."

The expansion plans have not been discussed by the City Council. The city used an obscure 1909 city ordinance that allows it to bypass the council and use the Beautification Committee to approve construction projects on city property "in the event of an emergency declared by the Mayor."

The Press-Gazette has learned Mayor Jim Schmitt issued that declaration in secret on April 1, 2008.

"I have no comment," the mayor said when contacted Saturday by the Press-Gazette. "We're very busy at the moment working on our upcoming holiday decorations for the front entrances of City Hall. I think we're going with the reindeer again."

When asked why the mayor's declaration was made secretly, City Atty. Allison Swanson said by state statute mayors in Wisconsin cities over 50,000 in population "have riparian rights in matters of this nature." She declined further comment.

Lynn Austin, a spokesperson for the Beautification Committee, deferred all comment to Swanson.

According to minutes of Beautification Committee executive sessions obtained by the Press-Gazette, the additional six floors will contain expanded space for the mayor's office, City Council Chambers and the Planning Department, among other departments and functions. Green Bay Area Public Schools, now located in its own administrative building on Broadway, plans to occupy three floors leased by the city. Its Broadway building will be razed.

The minutes also state the architecture of the additional six floors will replicate the original City Hall, built in 1956. Green Bay's City Hall was constructed in the Post-Modern Neo-Contemporary Revival Style, according to records on file with the Wisconsin Historical Society.

The minutes also state the architecture of the additional six floors will replicate the original City Hall, built in 1956. Green Bay's City Hall was constructed in the Post-Modern Neo-Contemporary Revival Style, according to records on file with the Wisconsin Historical Society.

Interesting...so the additional six floors will be different then the rest? Is this just the interior? Are they going to remodel the old portion? Where is the money coming from? Why would the mayor try to keep it secret? What's the cost? So many questions.....

Update...
I guess I have to read posts thinking they maybe a hoax instead of trusting them for face value. Nice. Maybe in due time I'll find the humor in it. Good effort, I wish I had the time to come up with stuff like that.

^^
Little late in the year for an April fools day story, isn't it? Pretty fun though, I had a good laugh! :lol:

^^

That story looked so bizarre, that I thought I was reading The Onion. Then I remembered this is Green Bay politics they were talking about. :clown:

Shopko closing downtown Green Bay express store. http://bit.ly/3L3hUA

Downtown Green Bay Shopko Express to close
PRESS-GAZETTE • OCTOBER 26, 2009
Read Comments(1) RecommendPrint this pageE-mail this articleShare

Shopko announced this morning it is closing its downtown Green Bay Shopko Express store on Dousman and Broadway Streets Nov. 1.



All prescription records from the downtown Shopko Express will be transferred to the Shopko West Pharmacy at 216 S. Military Ave. Customers are able to refill prescriptions at any Shopko pharmacy, the company said in a press release this morning.

Shopko cited difficulties with visibility, accessibility, parking and overall customer traffic at the downtown location. The delayed development along the Broadway corridor and the sustained overall economic downturn were also contributing factors in the decision to close the Shopko Express location.

According to Shopko, no employees will be displaced; all employees will be placed in other Green Bay area stores.

Shopko was able to release the space back to its landlord to redevelop for another use.

Look more in Tuesday’s Green Bay Press-Gazette and at www.greenbaypressgazette.com.

^^

That story looked so bizarre, that I thought I was reading The Onion. Then I remembered this is Green Bay politics they were talking about. :clown:

LMAO

What the shit is this? "We're also filing for $250,000 in damages from the city," said Press-Gazette Publisher Kevin Corrado. "We had to make a lot of photocopies in pursing this story."

LMAO

What the shit is this? "We're also filing for $250,000 in damages from the city," said Press-Gazette Publisher Kevin Corrado. "We had to make a lot of photocopies in pursing this story."

Funny Tower :lol: But there we go getting our hopes again only for this to not be true....

haha LMFAO Tower... very nice and professional looking faux publication! Ive been tempted to make a fake article myself bout somethin...but very nice, yea at first you had me.

http://www.myneighborhoodupdate.net/

New site, has maps showing crime stats. You may have to fill in the city & state info.

Funny Tower :lol: But there we go getting our hopes again only for this to not be true....

Ha. A gaming forum I browse occasionally would call that a WHOOSSHH! Well played sir. :lol:

http://www.myneighborhoodupdate.net/

New site, has maps showing crime stats. You may have to fill in the city & state info.

That's a cool site. It doesn't seem to be pulling data from anything other than the Green Bay police department though. Say if you try De Pere, it still says it's pulling data from the Green Bay police department. I'm curious how that works since it seems to give information about crime in the area.

That's a cool site. It doesn't seem to be pulling data from anything other than the Green Bay police department though. Say if you try De Pere, it still says it's pulling data from the Green Bay police department. I'm curious how that works since it seems to give information about crime in the area.

Apparently it's only available in two cities in Wisconsin so far.

From Channel 2:
Green Bay Police Web Site Maps Crime Reports

By Sarah Thomsen

The Green Bay Police Department's newest crime-fighting tool doesn't fit in a utility belt.

Green Bay is one of only two cities in Wisconsin to use My Neighborhood Update, a web site that tracks where police are responding to all types of calls.

"What you're looking at is basically a map of the city of Green Bay, and on that you see a number of icons, the icons represent calls for police service," Lieutenant Bill Bongle said.

Lieutenant Bongle navigates us through the department's new call-mapping web site.

"Each one of these has more information on them once you click on them."

It works simply. When officers respond to a call, they type information into their squad car computers that's sent directly to this system.

"It's updated almost eveyr 15 minutes, so it's rather real-time information," Bongle said.

You can zoom in and out to see calls for the last month in the whole city, one side of the river, or a particular neighborhood.

There are categories such as disorder -- noise or traffic calls -- and you can turn on and off the ones you want or don't want to see in certain areas.

"You can identify trends, patterns," Bongle noted. "This neighborhood here clearly has a problem with disorder complaints."

Bongle said it could be used for residents to better know what's going on in their neighborhoods, but it's also helpful for police.

The first night he trained officers on it, they flagged an area with several burglaries, started working the neighborhood for leads, and found several.

"We're moving from a period of being response units to being more proactive, identifying problems in the community, and then putting ourselves in those areas so that we can get the best bang for our buck."

"I have no comment," the mayor said when contacted Saturday by the Press-Gazette. "We're very busy at the moment working on our upcoming holiday decorations for the front entrances of City Hall. I think we're going with the reindeer again."

At this point, I figured it out..

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/goetscha/bilde-38.jpg

From what I hear the Shopko Express Store isn't performing up to standards & will more then likely shut down. That would be a blow to the Broadway district, so I hope things turn around soon. With the larsen project at a standstill, not sure if they got what they were promised from the city. I hope I'm wrong.

You were right with your above post a month ago, Night Rider.

www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20091026/GPG0101/91026037/1978

Press-Gazette photo.

Honestly, it was a bad idea from the start... I felt certain it would fail the moment that it was announced. The way Broadway has developed at the moment, it's a destination for escapism, not for filling prescriptions and buying diapers. The architecture of the building was completely wrong for it too. It's possible to drive past it and not know that it's there... Obviously they blamed the economy, but I don't think a stronger one would have made a difference. People really should run their business plans past this forum, don't you think?

Honestly, it was a bad idea from the start... I felt certain it would fail the moment that it was announced. The way Broadway has developed at the moment, it's a destination for escapism, not for filling prescriptions and buying diapers. The architecture of the building was completely wrong for it too. It's possible to drive past it and not know that it's there... Obviously they blamed the economy, but I don't think a stronger one would have made a difference. People really should run their business plans past this forum, don't you think?

I think there were a number of factors, in my uneducated opinion.

If I rememer correctly, the Shopko Express announcement coincided with the announcement of the whole Larsen Green project. Since then, ZERO has been done on the Larsen project.

I've been to more cities than I care to count that have successful Walgreen's/CVS stores in urban areas. The biggest difference to my eye is that those stores have lots of foot traffic. Whether it's people who work nearby & walk to the store, live near by & walk to the store..the common denominator is walking. There has been so much made of the decision to put the entrance on the "back side" of the store. I don't see that they had much choice. In that area, there just isn't enough foot traffic, & they had to factor in parking. Sadly, in this city nothing seems to happen without a car. We've discussed it here at length that maybe a 2nd entrance at the front would have helped, but I doubt it would have.

To my second point, where are most of the office jobs downtown? East side of river.. If I worked at Associated, Nicolet, etc., I don't know that I'd be willing to walk all the way over to Shopko Express. If I have to get in my car & drive over there, it takes away some of that convenience. It seems to me that a much better location would have been on Washington or Cherry, closer to the people that would actually use the store. Ideally, the retail floor of the Cherry St. ramp would have been really cool..

Last point. As much as I like to support local businesses, Shopko & Shopko Express seem somewhat less competitive than they need to be. I think their prices are too high compared to similar stores, and the selection isn't quite as good.

It wouldn't surprise me if at some point, a Walgreen's or CVS goes into that building, but they will probably let the area grow up around that location & then make the move.

one last thought.. I live on the near west side, off Gray St. Well.....for another 4 days at least... Anyway, I was involved in a lot of the conversations about the pro's of having Shopko Express downtown but in my mind it wasn't going to affect me all that much. My office moved this year & my drive home now takes me past Shopko Express. I can't tell you how many times I've stopped in on the way home to pick something up (not that I would forget to buy my wife a birthday card & need to pick one up on the way home - that would NEVER happen!). I ended up relying on that store being there more than I thought. I'm sure people that live in that area will really miss the store - it's too bad that wasn't enough to keep it afloat.

I don't know if the location was the main issue. I think there are two big issues.

1) The layout, we have all talked about this over and over. When I first noticed how they were doing the entrance and the store layout I was certain it would fail.

2) Pricing was considerable higher then other choices in the area. I think many in the area go to Family Dollar and Save-a-Lot for the day-to-day things instead. I know most of the things I would buy at Shopko Express were always much higher in cost then other stores in the area.

I will however miss Shopko Express as it was nice having a pharmacy in the area.

Honestly, it was a bad idea from the start... I felt certain it would fail the moment that it was announced. The way Broadway has developed at the moment, it's a destination for escapism, not for filling prescriptions and buying diapers. The architecture of the building was completely wrong for it too. It's possible to drive past it and not know that it's there... Obviously they blamed the economy, but I don't think a stronger one would have made a difference. People really should run their business plans past this forum, don't you think?

We have our perscriptions there and were always picking up a frozen pizza or a forgotten item from the main shopping trip to walmart,copps,etc.
This sucks. 1 step forward 3 steps back.

I disagree their prices were too high. You don't do your primary shopping there. It's for when you need 2 things and I think it's worth .20 more per item to not have to get in the car and flippin DRIVE!!
.

It worked when they opened, but the lack of development on that end of Broadway, poor location and poor building design led to the closing of that location. Good thing they pulled the plug when they did, otherwise it would've been the 'kiss of death' for ShopKo. ShopKo just earned themselves their equivalent of NEW Coke, Crystal Pepsi, and the Nintendo Virtual Boy. ShopKo Express Rx's Downtown Green Bay location is now deemed a flop.

R.I.P.
ShopKo Express Rx DTGB
2008-2009

You will sorely be missed!

A funeral will be held at ShopKo store #1, 216 S. Military Ave.
(Just kidding!):lol:

I actually liked New Coke and Crystal Pepsi...

It will be interesting to see if anyone moves into this location once Shopko moves out.

It worked when they opened, but the lack of development on that end of Broadway, poor location and poor building design led to the closing of that location. Good thing they pulled the plug when they did, otherwise it would've been the 'kiss of death' for ShopKo. ShopKo just earned themselves their equivalent of NEW Coke, Crystal Pepsi, and the Nintendo Virtual Boy. ShopKo Express Rx's Downtown Green Bay location is now deemed a flop.

R.I.P.
ShopKo Express Rx DTGB
2008-2009

You will sorely be missed!

A funeral will be held at ShopKo store #1, 216 S. Military Ave.
(Just kidding!):lol:

The point I was making is that you have two other stores in waking distance that carried many of the same items at a much lower price. I do believe in this area that makes a difference. Save-A-Lot is only 1 block away.



I disagree their prices were too high. You don't do your primary shopping there. It's for when you need 2 things and I think it's worth .20 more per item to not have to get in the car and flippin DRIVE!!
.

I don't know if the location was the main issue. I think there are two big issues.

1) The layout, we have all talked about this over and over. When I first noticed how they were doing the entrance and the store layout I was certain it would fail.

2) Pricing was considerable higher then other choices in the area. I think many in the area go to Family Dollar and Save-a-Lot for the day-to-day things instead. I know most of the things I would buy at Shopko Express were always much higher in cost then other stores in the area.

I will however miss Shopko Express as it was nice having a pharmacy in the area.


Sorry, but I just can't agree with the statements about the entrance location being the "kiss of death". This has been debated numerous times, but I don't buy it. Even in that setting, I'd be willing to bet that 75% of customers got there in a car. There has to be somewhere to park. Street parking on Broadway? If the entrance was on the corner/front, all of those people who did drive, would need to walk around to the front of the building from the parking lot. I think it would be LESS convenient for most people who shop there. A front AND back entrance would be ideal, but that was also discussed - it would have required additional staffing which Shopko wasn't willing to do.

I do believe the layout was a factor. I have had several people who drive by the building often tell me they did not even realize Shopko Express was there. I just don't think it had a good retail feel to it.

Sorry, but I just can't agree with the statements about the entrance location being the "kiss of death". This has been debated numerous times, but I don't buy it. Even in that setting, I'd be willing to bet that 75% of customers got there in a car. There has to be somewhere to park. Street parking on Broadway? If the entrance was on the corner/front, all of those people who did drive, would need to walk around to the front of the building from the parking lot. I think it would be LESS convenient for most people who shop there. A front AND back entrance would be ideal, but that was also discussed - it would have required additional staffing which Shopko wasn't willing to do.