So when is this get together at Titletown?

Do you guys prefer THursday nights or Friday nights? I say we pick a Thursday because people are busier/leaving town/etc on Fridays during the summer.

The "Green Bikes" will soon be eliminated, thanks to the losers that only care about themselves. :bash: Apparently another two bikes were turned into scrap metal last night. This program might work on the UWGB campus, but will never survive in downtown Green Bay as the program is set up. This program wasn't well thought out.

The "Green Bikes" will soon be eliminated, thanks to the losers that only care about themselves.

Please note that is just Night Rider's opinion :) One way to solve this problem (which would cost a little more, but also generate a tiny amount of revenue for the city) would be to use key cards or something like that. Yes, you would have to install keycard readers on all the bike racks, but then you would always know who checked out a bike and how long it has been gone for. Key cards could be purchased for a one-time price of $5-10. My company's HQ are in Louisville and they offer a similar program. Downtown companies could even purchase the keycards for associates who choose this alternate transportation. One additional idea would be to allow companies to sponsor bike racks in front of their business. This would generate a small amount of revenue and also provide more racks around town.

Please note that is just Night Rider's opinion :) One way to solve this problem (which would cost a little more, but also generate a tiny amount of revenue for the city) would be to use key cards or something like that. Yes, you would have to install keycard readers on all the bike racks, but then you would always know who checked out a bike and how long it has been gone for. Key cards could be purchased for a one-time price of $5-10. My company's HQ are in Louisville and they offer a similar program. Downtown companies could even purchase the keycards for associates who choose this alternate transportation. One additional idea would be to allow companies to sponsor bike racks in front of their business. This would generate a small amount of revenue and also provide more racks around town.

Any idea how much this system would cost? I get the impression that the mayor saw that we had all these extra bikes so he could try something cool for very little coin and very little debate. But what would Guy Zima say if we asked him for money to buy all this key card stuff?

My prediction: "$200,000? That's a lot of bratwurst!"

I agree--from the beginning I saw this as a "if it works, great, if not we didn't put much into it" project. I really was baffled at the negative pub it got. I remember one comment in the Press-Gazette complaining about taxpayers having to pay for some city worker to paint the bikes green. Good grief..

As for the key card system, I remember someone mentioning that Madison has something similar, but not as high-tech. If I remember correctly, it was basically a locking bike rack where you put in a quarter/dollar/etc., to unlock the bike, & when you put one back in the lock, you get your money back. Something like that couldn't be TOO expensive, I wouldn't think...

p.s. Geography Teacher--maybe we should produce some Lance Armstrong-esque rubber bracelets printed with WWGZD? (What would Guy Zima Do?). We'd make make millions!

Hey Guys,
So what's the status of the dt developments? You'll have to forgive my ignorance, it's been a while since I chimed in.

Please note that is just Night Rider's opinion :)

Yes, it was just an opinion. That is why I put the word "Prediction" in my title area.

I'm wrong often, so by predicting the programs demise, I'm actually helping out the program.

As for the key card system, I remember someone mentioning that Madison has something similar, but not as high-tech. If I remember correctly, it was basically a locking bike rack where you put in a quarter/dollar/etc., to unlock the bike, & when you put one back in the lock, you get your money back. Something like that couldn't be TOO expensive, I wouldn't think...

I think that's a great idea (no wonder Madison is usually mentioned as one of the best places to live in the United States).

Jerkylips, you were close on the bracelet idea. It should really be WWIDTGZ -- What Would I Do To Guy Zima?

Does the suffering economy--which is largely suffering because of the direct & indirect consequences of high fuel costs--hurt or help the downtown?

In the short term, it hurts downtown because economic conditions prevent developers from making big investments.

In the long term, it helps downtown because many people will change their lifestyles when faced with fuel costs and other higher expenses.

I sense that people -- myself included -- are preparing for less conspicuous consumption, less driving, and more local community focus in light of high fuel costs and increasing environmental and climate concerns. I think this is a hinge point in our history and economy, and this will help our downtown and downtowns across the country.

I'm reading Brueggman's Sprawl book, which states that people since ancient times have sought to escape "undesirable" parts of town for the good life in the suburbs or exurbs. Many people will continue to prefer this, especially in economically prosperous times. However, gentrification is really happening in mature cities; Green Bay just happens to be a few years behind those cities. Today's economy, I predict, will speed it up a little.

As of today, none of this matters. With Favre's announcement today, downtown, along with the rest of GB will begin to crumble.. ;)

p.s. Early rumors are that he has already talked to Tampa Bay...

OK, I posted at 4:14 & nothing new since. Dudes, come on!! I have no so social life, help a brotha out!!

I have a question, & it is actually relevant too.. I've never lived in a condo, so this may be dumb, but I don't know. As a condo (like the proposed Astor tower) tenant, would I pay my own heating costs, like in a house, or is it more like an apartment, where certain utiliites are included?

Here's the reason I ask.. There have been several posts recently about "efficient lifestyles", slumping economies, etc. I am, sorry to break it to everyone, one of those horrible sprawlers, who is building a house in Howard (probably next year). I've been very interested in "green building" for some time, & when we do build, plan to build in as many efficiencies as I can muster. Right now I'm looking at SIP wall construction, a hybrid heat pump furnace system, tankless water heater, (& many other "smaller" things) and possibly solar panels for electricity generation (that part is in question because current technology is not quite to the point where it make financial sense). Building this house will certainly create a more efficient lifestyle for the wife & I, even if we live in the 'burbs (Howard/Suamico area). I rent cars frequently for work, & recently have been getting a Prius every week from Avis. I like the car MUCH more than I would have ever expected, & average about 45 mpg.


Here's my point. Even without living downtown, if efficiency (however you want to define it) is important to me, which it is, building a house gives me a lot more control over the process. Living downtown & not driving as much is great, but if I'm living in a building that was built by a lowball builder who cut corners to save money, I'm probably spending more on utilities every month, not to mention environmental impact, than if I was in a very efficient single family home in the 'burbs.

I think I said, "here's my point" a while ago & never made it... I wonder what kind of market there would be for a super-efficient, "green" condo building downtown. I can imagine some people would be drawn to it for that reason alone. Let's face it.... you can always use a gimmick to draw people in. Environmental impact/efficiecy is one that's on everyone's mind right now. With the right plan, I think that's one that could certainly draw people in..

I sense that people -- myself included -- are preparing for less conspicuous consumption, less driving, and more local community focus in light of high fuel costs and increasing environmental and climate concerns. I think this is a hinge point in our history and economy, and this will help our downtown and downtowns across the country.

Aftre 25 years of living near the "downtown" area the wife and I are packing it up and moving to the burbs. The area continues to slwoly go downhill, we have had swat in the area 3 times in the last few months, family home sbeing turned into rentals, just declining. The nice thing about Green Bay you are only 15 mins away from any point, the 41/43/172 system makes it fast and convienent to get around. I figure the cost of fuel I am better off using the highways because at 70mph I use less gas than sitting at stop light after stop light as I try to go across town using city streets.

I had high hopes for the downtown 16 months ago and we had thoughts of moving into the new developments, but as they fell to the wayside one project after another it has become clear Green Bay is 5 to 10 years away from have a liveable downtown area.

Even without living downtown, if efficiency (however you want to define it) is important to me, which it is, building a house gives me a lot more control over the process. Living downtown & not driving as much is great, but if I'm living in a building that was built by a lowball builder who cut corners to save money, I'm probably spending more on utilities every month, not to mention environmental impact, than if I was in a very efficient single family home in the 'burbs.

Well, I guess you have to compare apples to apples. Sure, you could build a super efficient home, and that would be more efficient than a really inefficient multi-unit building. However, my guess is that a good condo outperforms a good house, and average condo outperforms an average house, an so on. In the same way that a two-story house, for a given square footage, should outperform a ranch (less external surface area for a given sq.footage) in a multi-unit building you are sharing a lot of walls, and as such have much less external surface area from which heat can escape (or in summer, in which heat can enter) per unit. So, even setting gas-use issues relating to a more compact neighborhood aside, and multi-unit residence should be more efficient, apples to apples.

. The nice thing about Green Bay you are only 15 mins away from any point, the 41/43/172 system makes it fast and convienent to get around. I figure the cost of fuel I am better off using the highways because at 70mph I use less gas than sitting at stop light after stop light as I try to go across town using city streets.

This statement is exactally what is wrong with Green Bay. It all stems to the need to drive places. Some people just dont seem to understand. Oil may last for another 50 years but it will not get cheaper, so we can live our overconsuming ways and watch the county funnel all of our money to someplace else, just so we can get by or we can look to a better system.

As far as the housing goes, sure efficency is much better then pure out waste, and will help reduce the carbon emmisions, but that is far different then being sustainable. If we all became more efficient it would decrease our foreign dependance but not eliminate it. If we could all work from home and travel in carpools or transit that would also help greatly. Being able to not need the car though is by far the best alternative, and we all know that this area really doesn't support the concept, yet. So becoming more efficent is a good stepping stone.

After 25 years of living near the "downtown" area the wife and I are packing it up and moving to the burbs. The area continues to slowly go downhill, we have had swat in the area 3 times in the last few months, family home being turned into rentals, just declining..

Congrats gbmphillips for lasting that long in "downtown". These older neighborhoods were once full of respectable families. One by one people move out or die off and the houses are being turned into slumlord rentals. Sure, some older neighborhoods are still respectable, but there are far more neighborhoods that are scattered with future SWAT call potential. A neighborhood my wife use to live in about 15 years ago, I now wouldn't feel safe having my dog walk there. I know it's not politically correct, but the open arms of Green Bay to all sorts, through housing benefits and other programs, are taking its tole on the community. The "downtown" district by Washington street, is a little shielded by commercial & businesses, so that may offer a potential for a great living environment. I just hope the new "Flats on the Fox" does a good screening of their future tenants & make it clear that any problems will result in their eviction. If it becomes another social experiment, it could be get ugly.

I wish people like you wouldn't move away from downtown, but instead stick it out. But I can't expect you to do something I am not. I live in the city also, but am looking for the right place in the country to move to. First I have to buy a PRIUS ... or a horse.

:horse:

about the bike system - it works in madison because i think madtown is filled with MORE people that care about stuff, whereas GB has kinda a (not being stereotypical here but...) redneck mentality.

As far as gas prices are concerned, sometimes i think they arent high enough cause i get to deal with first hand these D-D-D's on the roads...traffic hasnt gone down!

jerkylips - im thinkin of buyin a condo, but i dont know how everything works...right now i prefer condo cause i wouldnt have to worry about lawncare since i wouldnt be around. But i would like a house cause i have ahem, surround sound, im sorry - a home theater system - and would like to use it...:) however if i would get a house and property it would be in the city for convenience, i want to walk and bike everywhere...

lol - nightrider i was thinking, the amish way of life is looking quite financially feasible right now...yay horse power (literally)

about a meeting time/place - thursday july 24th is my suggestion.

Do you guys use AIM, MSN, ICQ, IRC, etc... ??? I see a bunch of you online all the time and it would be great if we could get a bunch of us into a common chat session to set up a meeting....

If I didn't live so darn far away, I would definitely join you fellas for drinks:bash: Though I know that news has been slow (well except for all things that pertain to #4) and we are eagerly waiting for the City Deck and Children's Museum/River Center (I do like the Hagermeister Park name!) what are everyone's thoughts on the direction of the city in general? Do you feel things are getting better and are moving in the right direction? I was a little bummed about the redneck comment (no offense, Jschmuck:)) and was hoping to here some positives (I here ya Jerky on wanting some news)! As always, great potential is there (and I am sick of hearing my fiance say "Appleton has this or that") and I am wanting Green Bay to fulfill that potential. Thanks fellas!

Do you guys use AIM, MSN, ICQ, IRC, etc... ??? I see a bunch of you on line all the time and it would be great if we could get a bunch of us into a common chat session to set up a meeting....

I'm trying to figure out how you can tell if we are on line or in the forum, I don't see that in my browser. I don't have any of the mentioned chat programs, but would download one & join in if it was at a time I was available.
Good idea.

the little button on the left side of the screen, below your picture, join date, etc., shows if you're online. If it's green, you're currently online.

The fence around the parking ramp was finally put up today. Even though it was suppose to start last week good to see another project besides River Center starting. I was on Sara Investments website and they will be leasing the space for $18/SF. Does that seem a little high? I'm no expert on what typical rents are in the downtown area, but I would have thought $12-15 would have been what they started out at considering it isn't high end office space and that was in the $16-20/SF range in the Grand Union.

Also, are we going to finalize a date for getting drinks?

On a separate note, I was thinking about residential space downtown. Assuming Astor and the River Center condo's get built. There is already the units next to the Bellin Building and Site 4 still sits empty, which could eventually contain some residential units. The mall as of right now looks like it will be all office/retail space so if you were a developer looking to build residential and the river is fully developed, were is the next spot you put up a tower? Just thought this would drum up some conversation in this down time we are currently in.

Well, I guess you have to compare apples to apples. Sure, you could build a super efficient home, and that would be more efficient than a really inefficient multi-unit building. However, my guess is that a good condo outperforms a good house, and average condo outperforms an average house, an so on. In the same way that a two-story house, for a given square footage, should outperform a ranch (less external surface area for a given sq.footage) in a multi-unit building you are sharing a lot of walls, and as such have much less external surface area from which heat can escape (or in summer, in which heat can enter) per unit. So, even setting gas-use issues relating to a more compact neighborhood aside, and multi-unit residence should be more efficient, apples to apples.

I guess to my ultimate point in that long rambling post (btw, what's the web-equivalent of drunk-dialing?)

If a developer was to build a tower/mid-rise condo that was built using many "green initiatives", I wonder if there would be a market? It's crazy how many hybrids I see on the roads these days. People are clearly open to some of the new technology. My gut tells me that it has less to do with the environment & more to do with the paycheck. If someone could build a condo that featured energy bills 30% lower than other condos, some newer technologies, etc... I wonder what kind of draw there would be?

Of course, it's a huge gamble so it would never happen, but it's fun to what-if sometimes...

I am no construcion expert, well actually I really dont know shit, but I would have to imagine that a condo with multi-stories are going to be somewhat more efficient due to the exposure to the outside conditions is minimized. I am not sure what would have to happen to get a 30% gain over a similar building, or the cost-benefit relationship. I think that there may be that niche, although it probabally doesn't exist in Green Bay.
I have never lived anywhere other then a ranch home so I am unsure of the energy saving that a condo may offer. Referring to prices that used to reside at the Astor Place site (which has seem to went away) where a 2BR condo runs well over the cost of a 3BR ranch in Howard-Bellevue-Lawrence, many in this area will not consider a condo in that form. I wonder if the energy cost saving would offset the higher condo prices or should energy prices be considered a non-issue with condo living?

I do not know... all I know is that I need to start stock piling firewood for the woodstove based on the cost of natural gas.

So are we meeting at Titletown on the 24th?:cheers:

I can't make it the 24th, but Thursdays tend to work ok for me... just not that one... Don't plan on rescheduling if some of you have a date set, I'll just catch up at the next one. I general, Tuesdays and Thursdays work best. We should look at a monthly meeting (ex: 3rd Thursday of each month)...

On a separate note, I was thinking about residential space downtown. Assuming Astor and the River Center condo's get built. There is already the units next to the Bellin Building and Site 4 still sits empty, which could eventually contain some residential units. The mall as of right now looks like it will be all office/retail space so if you were a developer looking to build residential and the river is fully developed, were is the next spot you put up a tower? Just thought this would drum up some conversation in this down time we are currently in.

I imagine things would spread south along the river first. Maybe some infill in the St Brendans block of Washington along the river. Otherwise that group of 3 suburban looking buildings just north of Mason could likely be raised to make way for mid to high rise condos.

Another section of downtown that I would like to see some redevelopment is the eastern edge along Monroe, and I'm thinking there could be some residential involved in that as well. I know it was talked about recently in this thread, but that sleazy motel, north a few blocks is the terrible looking strip club, and north of that is that old radiator repair place all on prominent corners. Some nice mixed use mid rise development would be nice for any of those spots, and on the north side, maybe even high rise.

I imagine things would spread south along the river first. Maybe some infill in the St Brendans block of Washington along the river. Otherwise that group of 3 suburban looking buildings just north of Mason could likely be raised to make way for mid to high rise condos.

Another section of downtown that I would like to see some redevelopment is the eastern edge along Monroe, and I'm thinking there could be some residential involved in that as well. I know it was talked about recently in this thread, but that sleazy motel, north a few blocks is the terrible looking strip club, and north of that is that old radiator repair place all on prominent corners. Some nice mixed use mid rise development would be nice for any of those spots, and on the north side, maybe even high rise.

I think residential would be the last thing to go near Monroe, in the current state. East of Monroe until you get to East high school is straight-up ghetto. No one is going to pay a premium to live in that area. Low-cost housing in that area has the potential to continue what's already there, but in new buildings. I know that there is a plan to redevelop Walnut street in that stretch, including more mixed-use. Over time that area may get better, but I thinkt that's probably a very long-term project.

East of Monroe until you get to East high school is straight-up ghetto.

Shall we all take a tour someday to Milwaukee or Chicago to learn what a ghetto really looks like? I'm not saying there aren't worse areas of town, nor that there aren't some growing pains that the city probably needs to be doing a better job of addressing, but "straight-up ghetto?" Nope. There are areas in some cities that I would never go under any circumstance, but there are no places in GB that I wouldn't go if I had a reason to go there. There are problems, but let's not overstate the point here.

Shall we all take a tour someday to Milwaukee or Chicago to learn what a ghetto really looks like? I'm not saying there aren't worse areas of town, nor that there aren't some growing pains that the city probably needs to be doing a better job of addressing, but "straight-up ghetto?" Nope. There are areas in some cities that I would never go under any circumstance, but there are no places in GB that I wouldn't go if I had a reason to go there. There are problems, but let's not overstate the point here.

A friend of mine lives on Clay St, in the middle of it. It may not be Chicago-ghetto, but it is bad--probably the worst area in the entire city, in my opinion. I'm just saying, if you're trying to get people to invest money in downtown, don't make it a scary proposition-

Shall we all take a tour someday to Milwaukee or Chicago to learn what a ghetto really looks like? I'm not saying there aren't worse areas of town, nor that there aren't some growing pains that the city probably needs to be doing a better job of addressing, but "straight-up ghetto?" Nope. There are areas in some cities that I would never go under any circumstance, but there are no places in GB that I wouldn't go if I had a reason to go there. There are problems, but let's not overstate the point here.

Jerky, I have to take your side. Green Bay has a lot of transplants from Chicago & Milwaukee and many are bringing a lot of ghetto elements. Of course it's not close to Chicago or Milwaukee yet, but it's slowly drifting that way. Danillo, if you can tell me you would walk around Green Bay problem areas at 2:30 in the morning with no cell phone to call the police & be comfortable, congrats cause "you da man". I don't recommend you do it.

I don't fear getting shot in GB like Milwaukee but there are parts of GB that are plenty scary.

The Bay Beach/Day St. area always freaked me out as a kid.

I don't fear getting shot in GB like Milwaukee but there are parts of GB that are plenty scary.

The Bay Beach/Day St. area always freaked me out as a kid.

Bay Beach scares you? Holy crap.

By the way, Bay Beach and Day St aren't exactly the same area of town. :lol:

You are right about areas of Milwaukee. I love Milwaukee, don't get me wrong, but a lot of the city is fairly dangerous. It is easy to avoid actually. But there are areas where I wouldn't step foot in for the life of me (no pun intended). In no way is there any area of Green Bay that I would say the same about. Hell, half of the crime I have been hearing about has been out in the suburbs, notably the large drug ring broken up recently and the rash of robberies that cumulated in Noah Herring beating the piss out of one of the alleged perpetrators.

I live in De Pere and don't feel safe leaving my windows open at night.

I can't believe all the negativity suddenly coming out in this thread aimed for Milwaukee. One can absolutely be in any neighborhood in Milwaukee without having to worry about “being shot”. What is often forgotten is that most of the shootings in Milwaukee (or anywhere else) are a result of drug deals gone bad or other personal disputes. I used to drive through Milwaukee's worst neighborhoods on a weekly basis without ever being worried about my own safety.

Compared to Green Bay, crime is higher in Milwaukee. But to say that one would not be caught dead in some neighborhoods in Milwaukee is a bit off base. Baghdad maybe, but certainly not Milwaukee.

I can't believe all the negativity suddenly coming out in this thread aimed for Milwaukee. One can absolutely be in any neighborhood in Milwaukee without having to worry about “being shot”. What is often forgotten is that most of the shootings in Milwaukee (or anywhere else) are a result of drug deals gone bad or other personal disputes. I used to drive through Milwaukee's worst neighborhoods on a weekly basis without ever being worried about my own safety.

Compared to Green Bay, crime is higher in Milwaukee. But to sy that one would not be caught dead in some neighborhoods in Milwaukee is a bit off base. Baghdad maybe, but certainly not Milwaukee.


Um....I lived in Brew City for a year at UWM and 6 people died the first week of school down there only blocks away. It is ghetto fabulous not too far from the Eastside. Green Bay has its areas but no comparison to some much bigger cities. You guys want to see some rough areas, I will bring you with me to Colombia. My wife lost her 4th relative to murder this past week....and I don't even sweat it when I am down there.

Anyways in other news have you guys heard anything on the mall site? So the extension is another 6 months and that will last til November. I really wish things would move faster downtown. I have been a member almost 3 years and still waiting for Astor Place.... :bash:

Green Bay can be a great cosmopolitan city, but it has to put a stop to the "housing benefits and other programs" that keep attracting people from Milwaukee and Chicago. Don't these people know they can't just move any old place they want? They have been securely segregated in their neighborhoods for a reason and they should remain there so not to tarnish the greatness of Green Bay.

This one time, I was driving down the street and there were black people outside in their yards and using the sidewalks. It must have been the ghetto! And this other time, when I was in the city, there was crime. That's it, I'm moving out of this urban wasteland!

:weird:

This one time, I was driving down the street and there were black people outside in their yards and using the sidewalks. It must have been the ghetto! And this other time, when I was in the city, there was crime. That's it, I'm moving out of this urban wasteland!

:weird:

I have seen that too. I am sure glad that where I live where there are no sidewalks, oh and the other day I while I was in the Day St area I saw a large gathering of hispanics in the park, that too was scary.

I have seen that too. I am sure glad that where I live where there are no sidewalks, oh and the other day I while I was in the Day St area I saw a large gathering of hispanics in the park, that too was scary.

wow, who knew my post would stir all this up..

I grew up on the east side, between Eastman & Day St. It wasn't like it is now, but even then it wasn't the greatest area & there was a fair amount of crime. Right now I live on the near west side, a few blocks off Broadway. I know what the city is like, I live in it. I never intended to make comparisons to Milwaukee, Chicago, etc. I never made any comments about race or ethnicity of people who live there.

My point was--if we are going to develop downtown & get people to invest in it, right now there are areas that are barriers to that.

Along the east & west sides of the river, it has improved tremendously over the past 10 years, & now there is a good chance to keep that momentum going. Shifting the focus from the river to the Monroe St. area would be a mistake because that area still needs lots of work.

I'm sorry. I didn't mean to discredit or overstate the situation or insinuate racial issues at all. I know there are places that would make me a little uncomfortable in Green Bay. There are shady characters all over the place, including the suburbs. I just had to take the oppourtunity to play into the stereotype that most locals share, including co-workers, friends and even my parents. No harm meant. I agree that there will be a natural progression of long term development around downtown. A developer will only take on a project that they can make money on so to speculate where that would be is premature at this point. Organic growth and overall individual investment in the neighborhood is what is needed to stabilize and grow the near downtown area. Just my 2c

Well,first of all,I said that area gave me problems AS A KID!
I'm not a kid anymore and I haven't lived in that area in 20+ years so I can't speak as to how it stands today.
I was speaking of from Day St through to Bay Beach area..that entire zone.
I lived on Smith St. and had a pal who lived on Reber.

I've never had any problems with a black or hispanic person in GB. Everytime I've encountered a sketchy individual it's been a white hick or punk druggie.

I've seen plenty of creeps from all walks of life,a jerk is a jerk regardless of race...but some of the coolest folks I've ever met on the street were minorities. 99% of them are cool as hell if you just mind your own business.

ah the truth is there are weirdos everywhere, be it city or country...I sometimes feel insecure in rural areas of the south and more secure in a city... we've all seen "Deliverance," right? again - BS is everywhere nowadays.


sorry bout a previous comment morse:bash: but im not politically correct (big carlin fan).

If we get together on a tuesday for oliver, then tuesday 22nd will work for me too...i said thursday 24th cause puant suggested thurs or fri.

God I wish Washington St gets back to the glory days. Courtesy: PressGazette:

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

Idiots for making surface parking lots out out of all those mid-rises makes me sick ! :bash:

Well,first of all,I said that area gave me problems AS A KID!
I'm not a kid anymore and I haven't lived in that area in 20+ years so I can't speak as to how it stands today.
I was speaking of from Day St through to Bay Beach area..that entire zone.
I lived on Smith St. and had a pal who lived on Reber.

I lived on Harold St my whole life--on the dead end by Farlin Park. Small world!

Titletown- What is that building that appears to be on Site 4?

Titletown- What is that building that appears to be on Site 4?

Good question, I am not sure on that building. I saw this pic from the GBPG the other day and it was to first time I saw Washington Street looking north for that angle.

Did anyone notice the building that looks to be where Cherry Street Parking Ramp is right now. I have no clue why they would want to destroy that as well. I remember hearing that the owners added 2 floors to the Bellin Building to become the tallest again, kinda like when Appleton had a rivalry for the tallest.

Did anyone notice the building that looks to be where Cherry Street Parking Ramp is right now. I have no clue why they would want to destroy that as well. I remember hearing that the owners added 2 floors to the Bellin Building to become the tallest again, kinda like when Appleton had a rivalry for the tallest.

IIRC, that's the Minnehan Building, and it is true that the top two floors were added to the Bellin Building to be taller than this. Now brace yourself (seriously, you aren't going to like this), it was torn down when the current Walnut Street bridge was built so that Walnut Street could be moved like ten feet north to be in better alignment, or so I've been told.

It's kind of funny because I (barely) remember the old Walnut St. bridge, but I do not remember this building at all. Then again, I'd have been like 3 or 4 when it came down.

I'll bet that Puant knows more about this building, GBM as well.

Boy, you are a young group! I left Green Bay in 1977 at the age of 20 and I remember both of those buildings well. They were still standing when I left town. The building with the Queen Anne type tower is where Camera Corner was located on the ground floor.

From the GBPG

The Alexander Co., owner of Riverside Place condominiums, plans to install a 31-boat dock on the Fox River immediately south of the Walnut Street bridge.
Advertisement

The state Department of Natural Resources issued a permit for the project, which is scheduled for completion in spring 2009.

Daniel Peterson, spokesman for The Alexander Co., said the Madison-based development company often works in urban areas and is supporting the city's efforts to revitalize downtown.

"We are doing what we can to aid those efforts. We are hoping this pier will attract people to downtown Green Bay," he said.

"It's a great amenity, obviously, for our residents, but it's also a great amenity for the city of Green Bay."

Mayor Jim Schmitt said the pier will be a complement to The CityDeck boardwalk over the river, which is to be built between Walnut and Main streets.

"The city was pleased to partner in obtaining this permit as a way to support and encourage investment in our downtown and provide recreational opportunities and public amenities for area residents," Schmitt said.

Riverside Place, the former Washington Square Apartments, is a 131-unit mixed apartment and condominium complex. The Alexander Co. is in the process of converting it to an all-condominium development.

The pier will be 320 feet long and extend 34 feet across the river.

It will accommodate about 31 boats.

The company said slips will be available to the public, though it is expected many will be used by condominium owners.

It will accommodate boats from 16 feet to 45 feet long and will include by 12-foot by 30-foot platform.

Peterson said it will be removed from the water for winter.

ShoreMaster of Fergus Falls, Minn., will construct the pier, which will be assembled and installed in Green Bay.

And it all is being done without taxpayer money!? That's great to see.

Titletown- What is that building that appears to be on Site 4?

I believe that is the Brusky Building.

Looking at some of those old photos whats sad about all of this is how badly GB has regressed. GB at one time had a pretty kickbutt DT. No,it's wasn't Chicago of any sorts but it had charm and character and life...and while most of those buildings didn't top 7 or 8 floors there was still that feel that you were in a downtown. It would be one thing if DT were always like it is today but it wasn't...GB had the right idea and then somewhere we lost our way and nobody can find a way to get back on the right path.

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/FIP/WI-00276-C~Washington-Street-Green-Bay-Wisconsin-Posters.jpg

here is a drawing of that same area....its amazing how much culture the downtown area had at one time

Looking at some of those old photos whats sad about all of this is how badly GB has regressed. GB at one time had a pretty kickbutt DT. No,it's wasn't Chicago of any sorts but it had charm and character and life...and while most of those buildings didn't top 7 or 8 floors there was still that feel that you were in a downtown. It would be one thing if DT were always like it is today but it wasn't...GB had the right idea and then somewhere we lost our way and nobody can find a way to get back on the right path.

Well one thing that is missing in all of the old photos are the parking lots. Back in the day the city had a fabulous transit system, and not everyone owned 2 or more cars. For whatever reason, our past leaders must have thought by turning the DT into something more suburban and auto oriented was the way to go. Clearly looking back that didn't happen and wasn't the best path. Its too bad we basically had to decimate all of those buildings and are only left with a handfull of the past. I am sure we all noticed that it doesnt take 5-18 floor buildings to make an area intersting or active, it takes continuous activity. We need infil buildings of 2-4 stories set at the right scale. Parking lots wreck that feeling. Some of the most active and plesant areas of Chicago are not in the CBD with all of the highrises, but in the near-downtown areas with a more pleasing scale, there are no parking lots. When we visit we are lucky to find a spot within 10 blocks. Many of the smaller towns (even larger ones) are discovering that downtowns do work, you actully can function w/o a car and walking won't kill you. I know when I am putting $100 worth of gas in my truck, I could think of many other things to do with that money, but again we are stuck in a metro that is so sprawled out it seems impossible. I think that there is some hope, like it has been mentioned before we can basically start over. I really don't think that DT can get any worst. It is going to take some risk and we need to see some progress, but things are going to come around.

I'm not going to disagree that it sucks that all of those buildings were torn down. However, it is fair to remember that the reason the mall was built and all the related mess was that the downtown wasn't doing well. In fact, for 15 years or so the mall worked well and improved the downtown. Then things changed again and it became a dinosaur. The lessons from that is that it isn't wise to cut a downtown in half for a large building for which there is only one possible use, and that you can't finished a project then declare the downtown done and not do anything for 30 years.

So the execution of the mall was a mistake, and we need to learn from that, but I think it's unfair to pretend that all of those buildings would still be here or that the downtown was somehow a urban paradise that was cut down with no good reason. Auto-centric development was already hurting the downtown, and the mall was a failed (in the long term) attempt to save it.

I really don't think that DT can get any worst. It is going to take some risk and we need to see some progress, but things are going to come around.

Of course the downtown can get worse. It was much worse five to ten years ago. There has been significant progress since then, and we need to continue building upon that. And yes, things are going to come around.

It is great to see some shovels in the ground for this project. Hopefully, soon there will be some more at the River Center. Hagermeister's Park liquor license was approved so does anyone know when the restaurants, shops and Children's Museum will begin?

http://http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=8715945

http://http://www.ci.green-bay.wi.us/

...However, it is fair to remember that the reason the mall was built and all the related mess was that the downtown wasn't doing well. In fact, for 15 years or so the mall worked well and improved the downtown. Then things changed again and it became a dinosaur. The lessons from that is that it isn't wise to cut a downtown in half for a large building for which there is only one possible use, and that you can't finished a project then declare the downtown done and not do anything for 30 years.

So the execution of the mall was a mistake, and we need to learn from that, but I think it's unfair to pretend that all of those buildings would still be here or that the downtown was somehow a urban paradise that was cut down with no good reason. Auto-centric development was already hurting the downtown, and the mall was a failed (in the long term) attempt to save it.


To add to what Danillo said, it's just too bad they didn't insert that mall more carefully instead of cramming this sprawling thing plus many more acres of parking in here with reckless abandon. Many other cities put malls downtown but managed to do it without totally destroying everything.

GB downtown may not have been an urban paradise but I have little doubt that if more of the historic downtown had been preserved, the downtown would be right up there with the area's most popular tourist destinations--who knows, maybe even the setting for Johnny Depp movies...or maybe it would have helped GB made the list of the Chicago Tribune's "midwest destinations (http://www.chicagotribune.com/travel/chi-mwt-doorcounty-storygallery,0,4274215.storygallery)" list by now...so many other possibilities.....and we HAD it, until it was foolishly destroyed.

Well we belabor this, time to move forward. Too bad the economy is headed down the toilet. Well at least we have a lot of toilet paper to go around. People gotta wipe no matter how bad the economy is.

Well we belabor this, time to move forward. Too bad the economy is headed down the toilet. Well at least we have a lot of toilet paper to go around. People gotta wipe no matter how bad the economy is.
Actually there are a lot places that dont use TP as we know it. If anyone has been to China/Tiawan/Japan region they can vouch.

http://www.talesofasia.com/toilets.htm

or with pictures

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squat_toilet

We dont have it that bad after all...

GB downtown may not have been an urban paradise but I have little doubt that if more of the historic downtown had been preserved...who knows, maybe even the setting for Johnny Depp movies...

So there is reason to be thankful that the mall was built!

Larsen Green project begins first phases
Crews begin extending streets; marketing to follow soon
By Nathan Phelps • nphelps@greenbaypressgazette.com • July 23, 2008

The project took a step forward this week as construction crews began extending Pearl and Kellogg streets in the first phases of a project expected to transform the former cannery site into a place where people live and work.

The site has been inaccessible for the last 13 months since On Broadway Inc. bought the property for $3.5 million and began the process of demolishing some of the vacated buildings on the site.

But accessibility is changing with the work that kicked off this week.

Officials with On Broadway say the initial phase of work will allow them to begin marketing the area in earnest.

"People would ask, 'When are you going to do your marketing?'" said Greg Larsen, president of On Broadway Inc. "With the grid working going in, now we can bring people in."

Plans call for Pearl Street (including storm sewer and water mains) to be extended about 400 yards north of Dousman in this phase of work.

Other site changes are forthcoming.

Kellogg Street, which provides temporary access now on a crushed-stone road, will eventually be extended east from Broadway and intersect with Pearl — which is expected to extended farther north in later phases of the development.

Larsen said it could take eight to 10 years — or sooner — for Larsen Green to come to fruition and has the potential to be an $80 million to $100 million development.

"This really meets that urban requirement: live, work, play in an area where you may not even need an automobile," Larsen said, about the vision of the completed development.

"You have bus roads, bike paths and parks."

He says there is interest in that kind of development in the city.

"I have enough people asking … 'When are you going to start putting in the living quarters,'" Larsen said.

The 400-yard extension of Pearl Street is expected to be completed by Sept. 1, said Carl Weber, Green Bay Public Works director.

Brent Weycker, president of Titletown Brewing Co., has a front-row seat to the work being done on Pearl Street — it's right in front of his business.

While it may cause some short-term inconveniences, he's looking at the bigger picture when it comes to the redevelopment of downtown.

"We'll get through it," he said.

"A lot of locals are excited to see what happens next door because we've seen all the metal buildings come down, with the brick ones remaining, so there's an excitement … something neat is happening here and they can see it and be part of it."

Weycker is also keeping a sense of humor about the work, naming one of Titletown's beers "Construction Ale."


I am struck by how the Broadway district truly will be an urban part of downtown when these projects come to fruition. Growing up in Green Bay, this area was a bunch of bars and run-down buildings. We'd go there for music stores and a couple of other specialty shops, but it definitely was not seen as "downtown" -- that was reserved only for the east side of the river. Maybe others already have included this area as part of downtown in their mental maps, especially newer or younger residents, but I've resisted a bit until recently.

Growing up in Green Bay, this area was a bunch of bars and run-down buildings.

Unfortunately there still is this stereotype present for a lot of suburbanites in the Green Bay area. I recently had to write a rebuttal on the PG website on a post who basically called the broadway area just that, bars and homeless people living in run down buildings.

It's amazing how wrong that is, and between the Shopko building and whatever else is amassed from the Bird's Eye project will just enhance the already somewhat dense and urban district.

I agree,in my minds eye DT was always a box w/ Monroe/Washington/Mason Bridge and Main making up the borders..more or less...

But Broadway feels more like a Shawano/De Pere sort of DT. Pretty much the east side has all of the 'big' buildings but the life and energy is on the west side.

Just got home from the Broadway farmers market and the street was packed solid of people...almost impossible to move around. Nice to see...some life!

Doing my part as well...now being a resident of DT I went to Maloneys Pub for dinner. Very good. It was a pleasent experience and we will for sure return.

So there is reason to be thankful that the mall was built!

Touché !

Well OK maybe not Johny Depp....HOw about Sean Penn...Fast Times at Port Plaza Mall.

Puant- Good to see you back posting again. I got worried that you bailed on downtown Green Bay.

Does anyone know the answer to any of the following.
1. When is the city deck going to start. I remember hearing it was going to right after the 4th and that was almost a month ago.
2. If the Children's Museum was all constructed off site, when are they bringing it in and starting to assemble it on site?
3. The fence is put up and that is great, but when is ACTUAL construction going to begin on Cherry St. Ramp retail?

If anyone had any information about that I would really appreciate it.

Puant- Good to see you back posting again. I got worried that you bailed on downtown Green Bay.

Does anyone know the answer to any of the following.
1. When is the city deck going to start. I remember hearing it was going to right after the 4th and that was almost a month ago.
2. If the Children's Museum was all constructed off site, when are they bringing it in and starting to assemble it on site?
3. The fence is put up and that is great, but when is ACTUAL construction going to begin on Cherry St. Ramp retail?

If anyone had any information about that I would really appreciate it.

With our luck the answers would be...

1. Never.
2. August 33rd.
3. They are finished, that is all they were going to do...

:nuts:

Comic releif. I don't know. Hpefully soon on all of them.

Puant- Good to see you back posting again. I got worried that you bailed on downtown Green Bay.


Thanks but I'm still hanging around. Here's my deal:

not much is happening
the kids stay up late during the summer. Most of my "internet blathering time" is limited to evenings when everyone is in bed...but they go to bed late in the summer...and I'm tired then too
I have begun a new blog to yak about my other lifelong interest--Geology!! I'm pretty excited about this one.
also changing my login to just plain "puant' caused some malfunction on SSC and I couldn't post for a while
I guess those are my excuses. I'd get more e..xcieted if some stuff started actually getting built, though...Cripes my kids will be parents themselves before the children's museum is finished...

August 33rd?
I think that's the same day Astor Place starts getting built. :lol:
Had to comment on it. You made me laugh.

That new building at the corner of Broadway & Dousman is pretty sweet. I would LOVE it if we had a whole bunch of buildings of this scale and urban quality going into GB downtown. We don't need no stinkin' high rises if there are more of these!! Great job with this!!!

Anything going on in the 'suburbs'? What's new with the Prestige Place towers? I assume nothing?

I saw the plans for the sort of "olympic village" sports area / boulevard near the Stadium. It's an awesome plan. If they can pull that off, I have to admit, in many people's mind, the stadium area will be the new "downtown" of the area without much debate Hate to admit that, but the plan is that cool. I'll still always think of downtown as in Green Bay, but it's going to be hard to convince people otherwise.

Not sure if it means the project is on ice or getting ready to break ground, but the sign advertising the upcoming Grand Union has been taken down.

The Stein Lounge and Supper Club closed a little more than a week ago, the second time in 15 months.



Earlier this week, doors on the business at 126 S. Adams St. were locked over the lunch hour. A call to the business Friday was not answered.

"The doors are currently closed," said Jeff Mirkes, executive director of Downtown Green Bay Inc. "It does appear he's closed."

The restaurant closed in April 2007 before re-opening later in the year. The establishment closed its doors again July 17, Mirkes said.

He anticipates additional information in the near future on the fate of the business.

— Nathan Phelps/Press-Gazette

Night Rider, beargb, Puant-Would anyone mind posting some new/recent pics of the Shopko Express Flats on the Fox? Living in La Crosse, I am keeping a pulse on developments through you fellas!

Puant-If you don't mind me asking, did you happen to see a new, more detailed plan for the Ashwaubenon Blvd. Project or was the one that you saw one of the renders that have been floating around? Just based off of the latter, that development by Vandewalle & Associates rocks! Regardless, any development of that magnitude is great for the area. Maybe the Packers get somewhat involved with it?

Thanks

A little off-topic here.... Two years ago when I first found this wonderful website, the first subject I breached was the large empty parcels at the southeast corner of US 41 and Lombardi Avenue. I thought it was odd that such a key piece of real estate has remained undeveloped for so long.

Since then, the Packers have purchased much of the land between the empty parcel and Lambeau Field, but have not specified what they plan on doing with it.

When the Packers renovated Lambeau Field, I recall hearing the team saying that this would help keep them in the top half of the league in terms of revenue for many years. However, at some point, something else would have to be done to remain competitive. And the existing stadium may not be able to handle additional renovations due to structural and architectural reasons.

So my question is this -- is it possible that the Packers and the landowners have a gentleman's agreement that the Packers get first crack at buying that land for a new stadium if and when they opt for that choice, with the expectation that they would pay a premium price in return for the landowners' waiting on them? And then the land that they've already bought up will be used for the stadium, parking lot, or other related uses?

I don't know if the footprint is big enough, and why they wouldn't just buy the land now and say they want it for "future opportunities," but I drove past the parcels yesterday and again wondered about it. Why has this land, which is located at the freeway interchange Packers fans from around the state and country use the most, never been developed?

You look at the new Cowboys stadium, and others that have come online in the past couple of years, and wonder how long Lambeau will be able to compete with those new monstrosities.

Hi All:

As always, I enjoy all of the posts and particularly appreciate some of the old postcard pics of downtown Washington Street that include the Bellin Building.

On a couple of fronts:

1) On comments about the Minahan Building and the old Camera Corner Building on Site #4; both buildings were demo'ed in the early 1980's to make way for the Walnut Street Bridge. The Bellin Building was also to be demo'ed but Bob Safford fought the city on it. Eventually, the city came up with a compromise to leave the Bellin Building stand if they could run the sidewalk through the INSIDE of the building and create a first floor courtyard in the building. Bob also rebelled against that and eventually they tore down the Minahan and Camera Corner buildings and left the Bellin Building standing. I have much correspondence on the issue as well as some framed editorial cartoons from 1983-1985.

2) On the Grand Union, from what I know it is dead. I believe there were a couple of ill-conceived factors including too high of a construction cost estimated and therefore too high of rental and purchase costs that were not competitive for downtown Green Bay. On top of that, soil conditions at that site as in most of downtown Green Bay are poor. Therefore pilings would have to be driven between 60 and 100 feet down. Driving pilings to that depth would have destroyed all of the intricate plaster work in the Meyer Theatre. There was a plan for drilled pilings which may or may not have worked - I have my doubts. With the Bellin Building near capacity and with new life breathed into the corner, I would frankly like to propose a four story building on that corner that would retain the facade of the Daily Planet and actually extend it around the corner with a zero-lot line to the sidewalk. On top of the existing two story facade, we would put two stories of reflective green glass similar to the Guardian Insurance Building in Appleton to retain the old but also provide a new modern look that compliments the Meyer Theatre. I would propose first floor niche retail; second floor Dinner Theatre and concession/banquet venue and corporate offices on third and fourth floors. Given that the city (with the notable exception of DGBI) has done little to attract sizeable new corporate tenants to downtown, we would only be able to proceed with our own organic growth in our Hilbert Communications operation. We are now at 28 high end engineering and communications positions and plan on hiring 22 by year end. We have now taken over most of the 5th floor of the Bellin Building and parts of the 3rd floor. My plan would be that when we get to 100 in the Bellin Building, we prepare to move forward across the street - city and Meyer Theatre hopefully being cooperative. We would also want to connect the Daily Planet Building to the Bellin Building at the second floor via a skywalk that would run to the second floor external entrance to Quincy's.

3) On the Vetter/Denk and TWall developments, while everyone is anxious; those developments are large and there aren't exactly any large anchor tenants that the community or city have brought to the table. So, these developers take a large risk that if they build it, they will come. These are not economic times where large real estate risks are advisable and these are smart and successful people - the type of developer we need in Green Bay. I believe both have a record of sustainability that some of the developers of the past who have looked at DT Green Bay have not had. If you have any question, take a ride along the Middleton beltline and look at Terrence Wall's new and older developments that are well-done, filled, vibrant developments that have drawn many other local and national construction projects around them. I took a tour last week of several and am extremely impressed. I have total confidence that if the community/city work with TWall and Vetter/Denk; in ten years we will have a vibrant downtown.

4) Now, the downside from the paragraph above -- "IF THE COMMUNITY/CITY WORK WITH TWALL AND VETTER/DENK." That's a big "IF" because Green Bay has not traditionally been very progressive on providing incentives, bonding and other tools (even a "Welcome Packet" for developers would be a nice start). I think these guys will do a great job with an initial project, but the real profit and real benefit to the city is in follow on projects once momentum starts building. To get momentum going, Green Bay is going to have to come to terms with some public financing mechanisms to get things going. If my experience with the Bellin Building is any indication of the type of help available from the city (again excepting DGBI who has bent over backwards with limited resources); then we will continue to have long waits on continued and contiguous development.

5) What's going wrong -- this is my very "opinionated" opinion:) We need several things in DT Green Bay to make development sustainable and to create momentum:
A) A plan for what we want in every vacant location and parking lot and a target list of the types of buildings similar to what Glendale did to revitalize the old Bayshore Mall on the North side of Milwaukee, which has been very successful. Also, similar to what the City of Middleton and City of Wausau did for their core areas (in the case of Wausau, thanks to self-motivated developers versus the city itself).
B) A focus area - we cannot develop Washington Street, Broadway and Main simultaneously and be successful in all areas. If focus moves to North Broadway, then Washington and Main will flounder. If focus is on Washington, then it is unlikely that we will get sold development on North Broadway and Main. While I'd like to see all move forward, I just simply do not believe it is practical or prudent or scalable to do all 3 at once. So let's get real and pick one and go with it. Obviously, my self-interest would be to make that be Washington where we have the most already going on.
C) We need a gimic and we need to market it. Green Bay is going to have to spend some money promoting downtown and with the City cutting funding to DGBI and DGBI working on a very small budget, the City has to address its commitment to marketing. Personally, I would like to see an every weekend "Biggest Tailgate Party in Titletown" on Washington Street every Friday and Saturday night and close off Washington Street to traffic. Install, tailgates up and down the street and attract tens of thousands of people downtown - both locals and tourists. Now that would be fun and that would be great marketing for downtown. City Deck is also a great start on some level of marketing downtown.

6) What I believe downtown development priorities ought to be:
A) Vetter/Denk projects
B) Retail under Cherry Street Parking Ramp
C) Mall project
D) Daily Plant
E) Schauer and Schumacher Building
F) Site #4
G) Northland Motel/YMCA area
H) 200 South Washington Block
I) 100-200 North Monroe blocks and 100 South Monroe block

Notably missing are Broadway and Main. However, they must be maintained but I believe that the focus should be where the momentum already is.

7) People ask me "how is the Bellin Building and its new businesses doing?" I would say we are holding our own. Every month there is more activity, more interest and more sales. However, we're not being overrun and I can't make the statement that we could use another 10 restaurants and 5 coffee shops downtown. I would say that one closes and another opens and there's a very limited customer base to draw from. Our strength is the permanent residents downtown and the people working there. Key draws are Nicolet Bank Building employees, Bellin Building employees, Riverwalk Plaza, Associated Bank, Wells Fargo, lawyers and governmental employees. The apartments and condos behind the Bellin Building and North of Nicolet Bank are consistent draws and really keep us going. We do tours, we do promotions, we give things away and people come downtown and try us and say good things....but there's not enough there to make them come back again. So, the stable business remains what's already down there. Hence, my comments about marketing downtown to get people to come there not just for Artstreet or the Fourth of July, but a stable of activity all year round.

8) I am personally very grateful to DGBI - Jeff, Molly and Crystal do SO much with so little of a budget. Beyond them, I just don't see a lot of promotion. I'd like to see DGBI expand because they have been effective. While I think the Mayor has gotten more done than previous mayors, I still don't see a visible development initiative from the city. Rob Strong is a great guy and very helpful, the city staff is nice and friendly, but the City Council has to fund a real initiative with money behind it to really get things rolling. Yes, developers need to follow through on commitments, but ultimately the city and the community at large has to support those developers because they are simply financing instruments - its the community and its involvement that brings things to life. We got the Bellin Building back on the map with $2.6 million of our own money and a $9,000 liquor license grant from the city -- and of the $2.6 million, about $600,000 was overruns caused by city policy. If we're going to stick $4-$6 million into the Daily Planet, the city needs to do better than on our last development. If we're going to stick $1-$2 million into the News Chronicle Building, the city needs to work with us. If we come forward to develop the Schauer & Schuhmacher Building, the city needs to come forward. ... those are small projects. If TWall and Vetter/Denk are going to be successful, the city needs to not only come forward; they need to have a plan to promote Green Bay and sustain these developments because TWall and Vetter are not going to get a return on a $50-$100 million investment unless the City does one hell of a job promoting itself. And if they fail to do so, I believe it is likely TWall and Vetter will never get off the ground.

So, those are my thoughts this Saturday night.

Go Green Bay!!!

Steve

Thanks Steve for the information! I'm looking forward to taking another meal at Quincy's in the near future, probably when I hit a Franks show next week. I'm just curious if you plan to put up a sign for Quincy's on the outside of the building. I heard it was in the works a long time ago. Best of luck.

Signage is up to our tenant. They are approved by us to put a 14' sign on the corner of Walnut and Washington as well as at the South end of the building. Last I heard it was pending city approval with the sign company.

Steve-Wow, thank you for the post! Things have been kind of slow lately, so your post was great:banana:

1.) Thank goodness for Bob Safford!

2.) Interesting information with the pilings and their correlation with the plaster work in the Meyer. Your plans for that site sound fantastic. Like Puant mentioned the other day, we don't need high rises (though a couple would be nice:)) if the trade off is smaller scale, quality urban buildings that help create density and vibrancy. This proposal sounds wonderful as it helps keep intact the history of the building with a modern flavor.

A.) If you don't mind me asking, do you have target date for this proposal?

whoops, I got a little trigger happy and posted to quickly:bash:

B.) Do you plan on making any more changes to the existing daily planet building? ie, added brickwork, lighting, etc.

3.) On your T Wall tours, was anything mentioned about the mall property or have you seen plans? Have you heard any more news with the Vetter Denk developments?

4.) Thank you for your persistance and we are lucky to have you and your work!

5.) Has your thoughts on plans been relayed to the city council? DGBI seem that they would be in agreement with you, and since Mayor Schmitt seems to be very pro-development, what are his thoughts on this?

6.) Good list, do you feel that Downtown is on the right track and will be vibrant and on track with Appleton (I apologize if I offend anyone with that comment)

7.) Again, thank you for being a leader and a starting point, though it is understandable that your customer base is limited as of now.

8.) You have other ideas for investing in these properties? Wow

On a side note, Puant had mentioned the Ashwaubenon Blvd. Project. It sounds as if the Packers are going to get things started off in February


http://http://greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080727/GPG0101/307270011/1978

On a date for the proposal, I have already made a high level proposal but there are many nuances to be considered. I would expect another meeting in the next couple months. Furthermore, everything will be contingent upon the city's cooperation and support and a favorable deal with the Meyer. In terms of what to do with the Daily Planet, it is really currently a "shell." The only part that would remain is the facade.

On my thoughts, I've relayed them to the city via the Mayor and staff. The City Council is a pretty closed legislative entity that you really don't propose to unless they ask you to present to them. On my "to do" list is a meeting with Celestine Jeffreys, our Bellin Building Councilperson.

On TWall and Vetter; nothing mentioned but I know both groups are working diligently. The big thing is commitments are needed from businesses willing to come downtown. To proceed with a building without commitment is extremely risky... especially in this economic environment. That's where I believe the City has to come to the table with businesses, not just with willing developers.

Just a couple quick points on the comments made by Steve (Bellin Building). First off I want to again thank Steve for investing in downtown Green Bay with the renovations to the Bellin Building. I have been in that building more since it was renovated than ever before. I believe that is an important key to any building is having that interaction with more than just people going in or out that are working there or have business to do there. One question I do have is there was some discussion regarding lighting the rear fire escape at some point in time in the future. Is that still in the plans? I would also like to applaud Steve at potentially looking at the Daily Planet site. Obviously anything at that site is better then what it currently is, except a surface parking lot. My only concern would be the skywalk connection. To me it would be pretty difficult to blend a skywalk between the buildings without taking away from the historic nature of both buildings and appearing to be tacked on. Especially when both facades more than likely will be different. I guess I would just urge caution on that as a fan of the keeping the downtown vibrant and the few historical buildings we have left functional yet significant in detail.

A couple of other points and concerns I have with some of the comments. Let me first say that I am all for the downtown becoming a vibrant place that we as a community can all be proud of and have a reason to visit often. I guess what other tools (with money involved) can the City utilize? They have used TIF to no end, façade improvement loans, sought out private donations to do significant improvements to the waterfront to create more of a destination, added parking structures – I mean the one thing I always seem to hear is developers ask for more and more money to do projects. That doesn’t happen everywhere but seems to be really prevalent in Wisconsin communities. Why is that? The City can’t afford to fund development totally. Especially when it sets that bar with one, everyone will expect the same contribution. I agree with the promotion, but the City staff is pretty tied with what they have to the ability to offer. In addition, companies in this area need to show a commitment to downtown. Many have not and have fled. They have used leverage in offers from the City to get better deals in the suburbs when all along that is where they were going and then blame to the City for not offering enough to have them stay. I think a lot of negative that is cast upon the City is unfair. There has to be community pride from corporations in the community as well. There is some but not a lot. I am not calling you out, as an obvious individual who has invested, worked the process and then can assist key players at the City on your thoughts, likes, and dislikes of working through the process. That I think would help tremendously. But everyone here in the area as well as across the country are fighting for the same few companies that are looking to relocate or expand.

I agree with the focus of different areas to develop, but the areas of Washington, Broadway and Main are very different. All have unique niches that not all development fits in. Some smaller businesses want to be located on Broadway rather than Main or Washington because of the foot traffic and events that bring people to the area at different times. I agree that there needs to be more coordination between entertainment/hospitality/retail owners to suggest events and try and coordinate their own. Every time a business closes it is not always the City’s fault. The negative image associated with the City is very hard to change and it doesn’t go away when people whose business fails then blame the City for not doing all it can. Would these businesses have failed even with the ramp retail, Site 4, City Deck, Astor, and the mall completely redeveloped? It is tough to say, but until those are all realities not a for sure answer can be made.

I am not taking shots at you. As I have said before, you are one of the few who we need more of in downtown. Even smaller redevelopment/rehabilitation/enhancement projects go a along way in making the dream of a vibrant strong downtown a reality. By no means do I consider the Bellin Building a small project. That was huge. But overall it will take time. Downtown wasn’t created in a day, it has evolved over time, went through upswings and downswings but still it remains. There is no starting point and no finish line. There is no magic bullet that will solve any perceived or real issues that face the development of downtown. Tools will help, but even with the tools being utilized now factors outside have made development everywhere sketchy at best. I can’t go to the City and say I am proposing a 15 story building, find me tenants to make it work or I have a corporation looking to move 100 jobs downtown – give me the discussion fee of x amount of money just to get in the running with no guarantees. We are already in serious financial times with the City of Green Bay. The outlook is not good as every new budget year appears on the horizon. I have a feeling when T-Wall proposes what they need in terms of assistance; most of the Council will be pretty blown away. This isn’t the best time for development proposals seeking money. So more isn’t always the answer.

Again, I don’t want this to be sounding negative towards you. I guess the debate is there. That is the reason for this board, to discuss. Differing views leads to enlightening conversation.:)

A few thoughts:

First, I don't have any idea what or how much the city does to attract businesses to various developments. They worked with APAC, but overall I don't know how much they do compared to like communities. I can't believe it helps when developers come before the city council and are berated as though they have no place daring to make money in Green Bay.

They have used TIF to no end

This comment, however, does strike me as odd. I don't think Green Bay has been nearly aggressive enough in the use of TIF. Building in an urban environment is profoundly more difficult than building in a greenfield in the suburbs. Take for example what Steve said about the challenges with pilings on the Daily Planet site. So a development group comes along with a good plan, but can't make it cost competitive due to challenges with the site. This is exactly why TIF exists, and in the long run it's better off to use that tool to mitigate the excess costs the developer has to deal with than let the site go vacant, or be underdeveloped.

In Green Bay, when this is done, people cry from every corner that we're giving the developers money and that it shouldn't be done. But the city of Green Bay can never be competitive this way, and the premise that it's just giving money away is false. There are rules as to what costs TIF can be directed towards (though as Ashwaubenon as proven, municipalities can get creative with this...). Even using TIF for the boardwalk, while I'm not arguing with it or saying it's a bad idea at all, there are cities that would just build that because they know what good it will do for their city, and then use tools like TIF to improve development conditions on surrounding sites. Here, the loud minority on the council cries about how we shouldn't even be building the boardwalk the way we are. It's as though they think the city is going to grow magically on it's own. I think the city needs to be much more aggressive in its use of tools like TIF.

:gaah: :gaah: :gaah: :gaah: :gaah:

Okay, that's enough from me for now. And it is good to see that even in the current environment, there is still progress being made and the downtown is getting better all the time.

A few thoughts:

First, I don't have any idea what or how much the city does to attract businesses to various developments. They worked with APAC, but overall I don't know how much they do compared to like communities. I can't believe it helps when developers come before the city council and are berated as though they have no place daring to make money in Green Bay.



This comment, however, does strike me as odd. I don't think Green Bay has been nearly aggressive enough in the use of TIF. Building in an urban environment is profoundly more difficult than building in a greenfield in the suburbs. Take for example what Steve said about the challenges with pilings on the Daily Planet site. So a development group comes along with a good plan, but can't make it cost competitive due to challenges with the site. This is exactly why TIF exists, and in the long run it's better off to use that tool to mitigate the excess costs the developer has to deal with than let the site go vacant, or be underdeveloped.

In Green Bay, when this is done, people cry from every corner that we're giving the developers money and that it shouldn't be done. But the city of Green Bay can never be competitive this way, and the premise that it's just giving money away is false. There are rules as to what costs TIF can be directed towards (though as Ashwaubenon as proven, municipalities can get creative with this...). Even using TIF for the boardwalk, while I'm not arguing with it or saying it's a bad idea at all, there are cities that would just build that because they know what good it will do for their city, and then use tools like TIF to improve development conditions on surrounding sites. Here, the loud minority on the council cries about how we shouldn't even be building the boardwalk the way we are. It's as though they think the city is going to grow magically on it's own. I think the city needs to be much more aggressive in its use of tools like TIF.

:gaah: :gaah: :gaah: :gaah: :gaah:

Okay, that's enough from me for now. And it is good to see that even in the current environment, there is still progress being made and the downtown is getting better all the time.

What I meant by that is that the City of Green Bay has what, like 14 or 15 TIF Districts. Most except the I-43 BP is actually generating money. A TIF was created to tear down that old warehouse on Broadway be the City can't find 100,000 to tear it down. That use of TIF I am saying they are using it to no end. Is it the right way, possibly not.

I'd like to throw a few things on the fire. I've been looking at this whole downtown Green Bay thing for a while now. I wonder if the problems are even more basic than what we have been discussing, or want to believe.

I don't necessarily believe in 'destiny' but is Green Bay's downtown sort of 'predestined' to be mediocre at best? I mean, perhaps the problems are more about just plain geography than most of us really think deeply about. To run through a few ( I think a lot of this is obvious but bear with me here, it builds to a point:)

It's got a little bit of waterfront along the Fox River, sure, but the waterfront isn't exactly spectacular. The Bay is pretty nice but it's miles away from the downtown, separated by the east river plus a whole lot of mega industry, truck yards, fuel tanks, the largest & smelliest sewer plant in the state, and so on. The waterfront is still an active port, so those industries use it as such. As interesting as the big ships maneuvering can be to watch, the bulk piles of coal and other stuff they leave behind are nasty. The warehouses and other port uses aren't sexy, yet this whole area slices right through the core of the city for miles. A few marinas and recreational facilities exist but they're overshadowed by the industry; therefore most boaters pass through the downtown as quickly as they can between the fabulous part of the Fox south of DePere to the gorgeous Bay to the north--it's really tough to enforce the "no wake zone" along the downown corridor 'cuz boaters are in such a hurry to get through.

The Fox RIver is, of course, is perceived to be a 'major divide' and perhaps it's more of one than we care to admit. I was thinking more about this with Steve & other's recent posts, about how the downtown can't seem to 'focus' on any one area. This is largely becaue the Fox is such an inhibitor to foot traffic, transit traffic, and car traffic, especially considering my point #1 above--the heavy industry and rail lines along the water adds to the barrier. And the auto-focus of the bridges has led to super-wide, fast, pedestrian-UNfriendliness, they're not quaint architecturally-interesting bridges that draw people to them and across them. THey move cars, that's about all. And they move cars so fast--especially Mason st--all the bridges do is try to facilitate a super-fast traverse through downtown. All they do is encourage people to get the hell through the downtown as fast as possible, and in their wake there is a lot of blight along these fast car corridors becasue nobody wants to be walking along the narrow banality of bleak concrete narrowly dividing most buidings and the scary street.

Then there's the terrain downtown. THe terrain is just flat, nothing too interesting in the topography. People sort of look to a little bit of hilliness for interest, at least. There is almost no natural green space to speak of in the immediate vicinity of downtown; it's pretty much entirely paved over, flat, and bleak.

The climate--can be harsh 5 months out of the year. Now of course a lot of other northern cities have fine downtowns despite the climate, but for us this is Strike 4, at least.

To top it off, the area surrounding the immediate city of Green Bay is quite spectacular, really. I don't blame people for wanting to be in the suburban/rural areas of the city. YOu all know this--most of you are out here just like me.... Just outside of the city we have some really great natural features, by contrast. The Bayshore north of the city is gorgeous, it naturally draws people there to live. So does the 'quasi-northwoods' that is known as Suamico and Oconto COunty. To the east we have the fabulous hills and creek (Baird Creek), and to the south the really sweet stretch of river--with a really nice small city (DePere). And going farther south of course people are digging Appleton, Wrightstown and that whole Fox corridor. I can't say I blame them for wanting to be more central to the whole "center of Gravity" of the Fox CIties.

So there's more, I could go on, but all in all I'm starting to think maybe Green Bay is just plain predestined by geography to be what it is--. It had a nice run between say 1850 - 1950 or so, but maybe that run is over. High fuel prices might bring about some new interest in the "central city", but how much remains to be seen. The waterfront might be more heavily used because of high energy costs (ships move crap most fuel-efficiently) but this will lead to even more industrial use, nothing sexy.

So in summary, I think there are more general, intrinsic and overbearing issues to overcome besides the city council and other issues that were touched on in earlier posts. Can TIFs and other incentives like it really overcome all of the overbearing issues? The city can try, developers can try, but is it all in vain? . How can we overcome these more basic issues of geography? Believe me, I WANT to see a better downtown. But I'm just throwing this out there--tell me I'm wrong!

I believe it is all about proportions. Downtown Green Bay is seeing growth in its urban fabric, but it is growth that is proportionately consistent with what it has to start with. Every year or so there seems to be a major building constructed or renovated in the “core”, with numerous other smaller improvements being made along the way.

The same can be said of Milwaukee. Every year, they see 1 or 2 new towers with numerous smaller improvements such as loft conversions, mid-rises, etc. Again, in proportion to what downtown Milwaukee already had, their new inventory is accurate. Same with Madison. We see a couple 13 story buildings completed per year, which is in proportion to the 30+ high-rises we already have.

In some way I agree with you about destiny. Green Bay may be destined to grow in a smaller fashion, but that’s because of the relatively small inventory its urban core carried to begin with. However, looking at yearly improvements made in downtown Green Bay relative to what it had to begin with, Green Bay is doing fairly well. I don’t have any hard numbers, but I’d imagine downtown’s residential population has still grown by 30% since the start of the decade. Its job base has probably seen similar, if not better growth. This is an amazing story for a city of any size, and is something to be excited about. I wish Appleton could see this kind of growth in its downtown. And with so many downtown projects in the queue right now despite the tough economy, Green Bay's future looks bright. As more and more people begin living, working, and playing in downtown, you’ll undoubtedly see the storefronts fill up again, fueling the life and growth that we all crave for downtown Green Bay.

Ive said it before...I think A big problem with downtown and even GB as a whole is the lack of big names...Sure we got Packers, but that TYPE of name is big in a different right - more legendary right and not a people or business attraction to get people or businesses to move to the area from elsewhere. There is Shopko, but that is more regional and quiet so to speak. Then there is Schneider National, a world wide company but its practically silent in terms of knowing who or what they do. Take Wal-Mart now, it is Headquartered in northwest Arkansas as well as Tyson Foods, a metropolis of around half a million and rapidly growing, with a great amount of development. I think its those names that helped/are helping that northwestern part of Arkansas to be "known."

I still say DT's biggest flaw is that it does not have a mass drawing card.

Most downtowns have some sort of stadium,arena,IMAX,etc.

You have people working DT,living DT,you have folks using the shops and eateries but what is DT that would prompt a person living in the burbs to go DT besides court or county clerks office?

The Meyer? I don't think the number or scale of shows is nearly enough. Daughtry is a great get for the Meyer but you need to have those types of shows often..not one or two a year.

Leicht memorial park? What a wasted rescourse. Bay Fest and what? Why isn't this park used every friday night during the months of July and August? Bayfest should be a summerlong event....concerts? Why can't they set up a stage and get a good B-class national rock or country band to play there? Standing room only would hold what,1500? 2000? Trace Adkins is playing the TRats park...Shinedown is playing the Riverside....why not get a couple of these concerts over the summer months? I would kill to be able to see a good up and coming rock act outdoors downtown for $25.

Imax? The Dark Knight is said to be killer on an IMAX and the closest place to see it is Madison. Site4 would be great for a IMAX or any movie theater really.

I was at a Bullfrogs game the other night and couldn't help but think how great it would be to be playing the game at a riverfront ballpark with the buildings out beyond center field. Sure,no 50 story glass scrapers but the urban backdrop would still be cool.


The lack of this 'crown jewel' entity is the number one thing hurting DT IMO.

DT does have geographical limitations and the industry and such doesn't help but that is where creative minds come in...figuring out how to use those limitations to DT's advantage.

"Night Rider, beargb, Puant-Would anyone mind posting some new/recent pics of the Shopko Express Flats on the Fox? Living in La Crosse, I am keeping a pulse on developments through you fellas!"

Snapped these today..not great but they are from today.
http://i35.tinypic.com/j6lm4l.jpg
http://i38.tinypic.com/desa4k.jpg

I still say DT's biggest flaw is that it does not have a mass drawing card.

Most downtowns have some sort of stadium,arena,IMAX,etc.

You have people working DT,living DT,you have folks using the shops and eateries but what is DT that would prompt a person living in the burbs to go DT besides court or county clerks office?


What about the KI convention center downtown? Does that draw a significant amount of people from around the area?

I know UW-Oshkosh has some classroom space downtown as well. Back when I was in Appleton I would take some of these classes in Green Bay.

Puant - I couldn't agree with you more about the Fox River creating a barrier and downtown's inconvenient location to the mass. The Fox is just wide enough to do this as the rivers in Milwaukee and Chicago are small enough to not make a difference. I don't mind driving downtown, but it sure seems like we should just build a downtown along Lombardi along/41 or further east around Lambeau :lol:. You could have the high rise office buildings along Lombardi and have the busseling area around Lambeau. I would really like to see plazas like in Europe and more pedestrian friendly areas where people can live and work in the same area. I know the Packers bought up areas around Lambeau and I believe Kmart Plaza as well now. I am telling you once Ashwaubenon Boulevard gets going, this will be the place to be for entertainment if they get this off the ground after the Great Oil Depression here. Downtown is so void for nightlife and spread out. Come winter that does matter....

^^ Puant, I don't agree at all. If I was landscaping in Sim City to make a site for the perfect city, would I make Green Bay? Nope. However, I could say that about just about every city. I don't see anything about the geography that is necessarily a limiter in the downtown's development. There are challenges, but there are opportunities as well. I mean, yes, the river is a barrier, but it is also the reason we have a very popular Fox River Trail that links into downtown, and it also gives the opportunity to have boat docks downtown, both of which are huge opportunities. I'll also add that the Main St. bridge is about as pedestrian friendly as can be with wide sidewalks, separate bike lanes, and lookout areas were people can stop for a different perspective. I'm not saying there are not challenges, but it doesn't mean that the downtown can't continue to improve.

Araman, thank you for your observations on the progress that has occurred over the past few years and continues to occur downtown. If people can't tell (and I want to see progress as much as anyone), I'm becoming frustrated by the defeatist words expressed on here from supporters of the downtown. We should not become victims of our own raised expectations, there is progress, the downtown continues to become a more vibrant place.

Finally, regarding the Ashwaubenon boulevard. I think this is a potentially tremendous idea, and for that downtown Green Bay has nothing to fear from. I think urban thinking leads to more urban thinking. Sure, I'm sure at some point there may be a project that looks into both downtown GB and Ashwaubenon, and chooses Ashwaubenon (I guess this already happens, just not in any urban way in Ashwaubenon), but in the long run this region is big enough to handle both areas, and I think we'll only be helped by the creation of new, more urban areas.

Puant, that was a thoughtful post, and I've read it four times to consider your points.

As I said recently, I think the Fox River is less of a perceived barrier than before, as the near west side becomes more integrated with downtown. Broadway developments, especially the Larsen property, will continue to tie the east and west sides together.

Sure, the coal piles and smokestacks and other signs of industry are unusual for a downtown, but I think the city is on the right path to eventually move some of the less desirable industrial features (e.g., coal piles) and retain those that are cool (e.g., converting warehouses into loft offices and apartments, large ship traffic, trains going past Titletown).

Has anyone been to the Inner Harbor in Baltimore? I took a water taxi ride around the harbor and it was awesome to see industrial, tourist, and commercial land uses mixed together in an interesting, harmonious environment. Whereas the river does not provide the surface area and nooks and crannies that the Inner Harbor does, I envision something similar happening in Green Bay. (It's too bad the river and its shoreline is so darn straight, but the CityDeck should improve that.)

I think where downtown suffers geographically is that it is perceived to be a long distance from the freeway. Travelers coming through Green Bay are not enticed to jump off the highway to check out downtown. Paging through my road atlas, I notice that almost every middle-sized city's downtown has close access to a freeway: Baton Rouge, Boise, Cedar Rapids, Charleston, Corpus Christi, Dayton, Duluth, Fresno, Mobile; the list goes on and on. I'm not advocating spending the money to build such a thing today, although I would like to see Ashland Avenue converted to a freeway sometime in my lifetime. But at least we should do a better job of signage and landscaping to invite people downtown. I also think Ashland Avenue should be signed as the route to get downtown from northbound US 41, as it is quicker and motorists would be less likely to be sidetracked by the "allure" of Ashwaubenon.

The point that I agree most with Puant is how attractive the suburbs and exurbs are, and how they make those places even more desirable than they otherwise would be. People around here love the woods and the water and we can't blame them for that. However, perhaps we can sell the fact that wealthier people can have the best of both worlds in Green Bay -- a condo in the urban downtown plus a fairly affordable cottage up north?

Finally, I still hope for a new Bullfrogs stadium downtown, perhaps the site on the west side just north of the Tilleman (Mason St.) Bridge. We have to get people downtown so that they are familiar and comfortable there, and get into patterns of consumption at restaurants, pubs, stores, and other businesses. Major employers are even better, but destinations for all are essential. Ice skating at a new rink, hanging out on the boardwalk, going to festivals at Leicht Park, these will be great too.

I definitely lean towards Danillo's views on both issues. The river is most definitely an asset and not a hindrance, both economically and aesthetically. And the proposed Ashwaubenon boulevard is probably a good thing for the area. The only problem is the time frame that is set up for it's implementation and local opposition in my opinion.

Puant, update your blog!

I think you all see my point: there is so much gravity pulling people out & away from downtown and then the downtown isn't helped by the wedges piercing through it (these wedges being the Fox River and even things like Mason St).

Now of course these wedges can be seen as opportunities. Mason St brings people in cars in (the problem is, it's more of a thoroghfare freeway than an attractive urban street). And of course the Fox River is itself an opportunity and somewhat of an attraction. It does support the trail. It might support water taxis. It is unique. The shipping is cool and a vital part of our local economy in that it's fuel efficient. But it's not a waterfront that draws people en masse. It's not a San Diego waterfront--of course not--but it's not even a Sheboygan waterfront. The way it's laid out and with the important heavy industry, it's not not very conducive to the type of growth we might hope for on this board. Will the boardwalk help? Sure, I still believe so.

But I'm in the mode of looking from another perspective. Why isn't there some 'focus' area? It's because of the gravity & the wedges. There's more to blame here than an unsupportive city council, lack of TIF financing, or even the housing market or lagging economy. There's just more to it, plain and simple, and I just wanted to point these things out because we often overlook them.

So yeah those of you who suggest building more "gravity" in the downtown, I'm all for it, I still support the downtown wholeheartedly.

I just want a full understanding of the challenges because things aren't exactly taking off here as rapidly as we'd like. And I'm not a native of the city, either--I knew very little of the downtown until recently--my blog is just kind of my exploration of the city, as a transplant adopting a new home. It doesn't mean I want to move away--I don't. I love it here. I'm just trying to fairly evaluate the situation, that's all.

Is there exciting progress? Hell yeah, I've said it before and I'll say it again, things like the Bellin project are as exciting to me as any of the new stuff. I still believe in the downtown, and I'll continue to support it. And I'll get back on the blogging thing too! It's just tough to blog in summer months...and I like to polish my crude writing up at least a little for the Annals.

"What about the KI convention center downtown? Does that draw a significant amount of people from around the area?"

I see you really badly missed my point.

Hey,it's friday night..lets all go on down to the KI Convention center!

Umm,no. Not the kind of facility I was talking about.

I'm talking about a mass entertainment facility that can bring hundreds/thousands downtown multiple times a week all year long..such as I already pointed out..an IMAX,movie theater,stadium,arena,etc. A nice restuarant or store isn't enough...you need center piece facilities.

Why is the Bradly Center DOWNTOWN?

Why is Soldier Field DOWNTOWN?

Why have many teams chosen to build new parks DOWNTOWN?

Why were some folks mad in MIlwaukee that Selig didn't seriously consider moving the Brewers DOWNTOWN?

Our DT doesn't have any sort of facility like I've mentioned.

If the Bullfrogs played downtown you'd be bring 2000 people into DT 2 or 3 nights a week all summer long....does KI do that?

I'm talking about facilities that are uselful to the average everyday person/family.

I've yet to step inside the KI...I've never had a reason to. The KI is for business..not tourists or locals seeking family entertainment.

Even a really good museum or aquarium...something in that mode..a destination point.

Spin it how you want..and this is NOT a debate about the wonderful progress that has been made and there has no doubt been some great things done..I'm simply pointing out my view as to what DT is really missing to inspire growth.

Some mention the vibrant Lambeau area...why?

Stadium..arena...movie theater???????

A great restuarant might bring 400 people DT on a Thur/Friday/Saturday weekend...a baseball game would bring 6000 people DT during that same time period.

We all talk about it here, but take the DGBI Downtown Survey and make your voice heard in another way.

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=a7Y5WTyITDR5a1Jkvy2d9Q_3d_3d

Thanks Green Bay 4 Life! I just took the survey, please I would strongly encourage others to do so! I spent 15 minutes on there and it isn't just a yes/no, multiple choice survey. There are several areas in which you can write out answers (ie, what are downtown's strengths, what are ways to improve downtown, what business' would you like to see, etc.) Let the pro-development side be heard! I also gave a plug to this website in the section that asks where you here about downtown news.

Green Bay for Life- Thanks for the survey link. I took it as well and also found a link to it on WBAY's website. Hopefully even those against downtown will now give their thoughts and opinions about downtown. Who knows, maybe a lot of the people who are anti downtown will post comments like "I would go down there if (insert attraction) was there. Granted I don't think it will be that simple, but who knows.

Steve- Is 4 stories about the max height you can go on a new building on the Daily Planet site before pilings and other structural reinforcements would be needed? I don't know what you would be able to afford to build, but if you could go 5 or 6 stories, it would be nice to see a larger building on that site. Plus the way it sounds your company is growing you may need that space not too far down the road anyways. Thank you again for what you've already done with the Bellin Building and for your continued interest and possible development in downtown.

Danillo- I know you said that the Ashwaubenon boulevard would actually be a benefit to the area and even downtown. I just fail to see how you can make that statement. While the area continues to grow there still isn't that many people here. I know it may seem like a Minneapolis/St. Paul type scenario with two urban settings close together, but I feel that if that area really takes off, that the potential for downtown to do the same would greatly be hindered. I mean just look at how difficult and slow it has been to develop downtown when that was the only area of urban development and now there would be two. I hope you are right though and that both areas would benefit and I dont want to sound down on downtown, but I just cant see how the boulevard would help the downtown.

Finally, I know there is that survey up now, but is there any other way that we can let our voices be heard or is there any other action we can take to really support downtown and get the ball rolling in the right direction?

Well- there are so many good points here.

I really liked the tailgate party idea, that could really make a unique thing going on here. Any sort of outdoor band setup, very similar to waterfest in Oshkosh, except it would be more intimate if it was actually held in the street.

My opinion on the Daily Planet site would be something similar in height to the Ramp and no way on the skywalk- those things are nothing but activity killers, even though they function as connections without elements- ever visit Duluth?

I think the KI does alright- it fills up hotel rooms and that is what you want a convention center to do. You are right as it is not really a local destination.

As far as destinations, for those of you that remember, the golden days of my early 20's- Jillians was downtown as was Gallagers and Comedy City. There was things to do and there were not enough people to support them, so I question what may work at this point? I am not sure much if anything that we would like to see, such as an IMAX or even a Cinema would even consider. I would imagine if we ever would get an ESPN zone or a simiar chain it would be in the stadium district, which seems to be designed as auto-oriented with the wide road/ pedestrian nightmare like conditions.

I agree that the commerce associated with the rail and the river are more of a negitive then a positive and I think the fact of the popularity of the fox river trail is the pure lack of road crossings and a pleasant pedestrian environment combined with easy access. I think that has more to do with it then the river location, it just happens to be where that exists.

I have not been to a Bullfrogs game but have rode my bike over the foot bridge and noticed what I consider large crowds. A downtown stadium would be cool but also very costly and I am not sure that the pure fact that people show up at the game are going to spend any money downtown so I dont think the benefit is that great at this point, and if it was located north of Mason Street it would be an isolated location (at this point) with huge surface parking required.

One thing that Green Bay is really missing or has missed out of is a huge conneced parkway that has some active uses- very close to DT. Thinking back to the forsight the planners and Local businessmen of Chicago had in reserving the land where Grant Park, Lincoln Park and all the wonderful green spaces that are connected is simply amazing.

I hit the farmers market. Bought a ton of fresh produce & a tried a few crab rangoons/egg rolls. Farmers market seems to be thriving on Broadway. Be nice to see the Downtown area (Washington Street) come up with their own weekly niche to bring in crowds and reward the local businesses. Not just a beer tent & a band.

Puant, that was a thoughtful post, and I've read it four times to consider your points.

As I said recently, I think the Fox River is less of a perceived barrier than before, as the near west side becomes more integrated with downtown. Broadway developments, especially the Larsen property, will continue to tie the east and west sides together.

Sure, the coal piles and smokestacks and other signs of industry are unusual for a downtown, but I think the city is on the right path to eventually move some of the less desirable industrial features (e.g., coal piles) and retain those that are cool (e.g., converting warehouses into loft offices and apartments, large ship traffic, trains going past Titletown).

Has anyone been to the Inner Harbor in Baltimore? I took a water taxi ride around the harbor and it was awesome to see industrial, tourist, and commercial land uses mixed together in an interesting, harmonious environment. Whereas the river does not provide the surface area and nooks and crannies that the Inner Harbor does, I envision something similar happening in Green Bay. (It's too bad the river and its shoreline is so darn straight, but the CityDeck should improve that.)

I think where downtown suffers geographically is that it is perceived to be a long distance from the freeway. Travelers coming through Green Bay are not enticed to jump off the highway to check out downtown. Paging through my road atlas, I notice that almost every middle-sized city's downtown has close access to a freeway: Baton Rouge, Boise, Cedar Rapids, Charleston, Corpus Christi, Dayton, Duluth, Fresno, Mobile; the list goes on and on. I'm not advocating spending the money to build such a thing today, although I would like to see Ashland Avenue converted to a freeway sometime in my lifetime. But at least we should do a better job of signage and landscaping to invite people downtown. I also think Ashland Avenue should be signed as the route to get downtown from northbound US 41, as it is quicker and motorists would be less likely to be sidetracked by the "allure" of Ashwaubenon.

The point that I agree most with Puant is how attractive the suburbs and exurbs are, and how they make those places even more desirable than they otherwise would be. People around here love the woods and the water and we can't blame them for that. However, perhaps we can sell the fact that wealthier people can have the best of both worlds in Green Bay -- a condo in the urban downtown plus a fairly affordable cottage up north?

Finally, I still hope for a new Bullfrogs stadium downtown, perhaps the site on the west side just north of the Tilleman (Mason St.) Bridge. We have to get people downtown so that they are familiar and comfortable there, and get into patterns of consumption at restaurants, pubs, stores, and other businesses. Major employers are even better, but destinations for all are essential. Ice skating at a new rink, hanging out on the boardwalk, going to festivals at Leicht Park, these will be great too.

Ironically, I'm staying in the inner harbor as we speak. Very neat area & well done, but on a much larger scale than our little GB could handle, that's for sure..

I've been wanting to get out here to post something but have been really busy this week. I was in Denver last week & spent a lot of time downtown. Downtown Denver is a great area & something that I think would be a great model for our downtown, but again on a smaller scale.

Grid system is completely intact

16th street (a main area downtown) is completely shut down to traffic except a free trolley

varied mix of commercial, retail, & restaurants, including places to get the basics, (i.e. walgreens, cvs, etc.)

Here's the thing that surprised me--downtown Denver has plenty of tall towers, but the 16th street area is pretty much 3-5 story buildings.

For anyone else that has been there, I'd be curious your opinion...

Wow Jerky you really get around!

I have spent some time in downtown Denver. Loved that ped boulevard you mentioned.... I too liked how that street wasn't overbearing with tall towers; there wasn't too much of a "dark canyon" effect... That's the sort of thing I could see for DTGB...Gridded streets, 3-8 storey buildings well-designed both as individual architecture and also blending into the street context...with some contrast, perhaps some contemporary. Maybe a few taller towers. I actually like contemporary designs applied to towers.

Denver can support that sort of DT because it's just such a magnet for young people...hip trendy and all that. Doesnt' it seem that the young Wiscosnin kids who move to Denver in their 20's & 30's almost always end up coming back to Wisconsin by their late 30's?

Night Rider-
I'd like to check out that Broadway Farmers Market sometime. I don't seem to venture over the Fox River much these days....

Grant Park in Chicago-
I believe much of Grant Park green space wasn't there originally-- I think Michigan Ave was right along the lakefront. Then along came the Great Chicago Fire and they simply pushed the rubble out to the lake and added those parks with the rubble. By this time there was desire for park land by much of the public because people had too strong a taste of what an overbearing overcrowded industrial city was like, and people more or less demanded that this area become park land. Also I think some of it might have been used for the big cattle yards that chicago was famous for. So it had been an ugly nasty even non-existing waterfront that tragedy helped turn into something spectacular. A lot of Green Bay's downtown waterfront is also "Fill" hauled in to raise the land to a higher elevation, the thing is though, that land was not put into park use in GB; rather it was used for more industry & rail yards and such--which of course was vital to the economy here.

Finally, I still hope for a new Bullfrogs stadium downtown, perhaps the site on the west side just north of the Tilleman (Mason St.) Bridge. We have to get people downtown so that they are familiar and comfortable there, and get into patterns of consumption at restaurants, pubs, stores, and other businesses. Major employers are even better, but destinations for all are essential. Ice skating at a new rink, hanging out on the boardwalk, going to festivals at Leicht Park, these will be great too.

I like this idea, I know we discussed it before..I measured and a baseball stadium would just barely fit between the river and the rail lines. I wonder if the train traffic would be problematic for ballgames--people having to walk across tracks before games, etc.

These RR tracks, while good for industry, are not good for people. Now again, how can we turn lemons into lemonade? I'm still pushin' for the passenger rail service. These tracks could be dropping off thousands of regional travellers right into the heart of the downtown. Think about the injection of life that would create around here.

Grant Park in Chicago-
I believe much of Grant Park green space wasn't there originally-- I think Michigan Ave was right along the lakefront. Then along came the Great Chicago Fire and they simply pushed the rubble out to the lake and added those parks with the rubble. By this time there was desire for park land by much of the public because people had too strong a taste of what an overbearing overcrowded industrial city was like, and people more or less demanded that this area become park land. Also I think some of it might have been used for the big cattle yards that chicago was famous for. So it had been an ugly nasty even non-existing waterfront that tragedy helped turn into something spectacular. A lot of Green Bay's downtown waterfront is also "Fill" hauled in to raise the land to a higher elevation, the thing is though, that land was not put into park use in GB; rather it was used for more industry & rail yards and such--which of course was vital to the economy here.

My point was that there is a shit load of urban green space connecting the south loop up to practically wriglyville. I was just there (Grant Park) over the weekend and was reading a plaque mentioning all the business owners and people that demanded that part of the lake front remain undeveloped. Not really sure on the history other then Daniel H. Burnham had some say.

Here (http://www.chicagoparkdistrict.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/parks.results.cfm) is a link to the chicago park website if intersted.

16th Street Mall in Denver is a nice setup, with the overabundance of Starbucks and the free mall bus, not to mention the light rail kicks tail and makes getting around without a car possible.

Another thing that really bothers me is that Green Bay is so pet un-friendly. Maybe instead of punishing the good people who are responsible we need to teach those who cannot understand proper respect. Almost every city I have been to seems to be more progressive and active and doesn't ban pets from parks and public areas. Just one more thing to bich about, I guess.

I like this idea, I know we discussed it before..I measured and a baseball stadium would just barely fit between the river and the rail lines. I wonder if the train traffic would be problematic for ballgames--people having to walk across tracks before games, etc.

These RR tracks, while good for industry, are not good for people. Now again, how can we turn lemons into lemonade? I'm still pushin' for the passenger rail service. These tracks could be dropping off thousands of regional travellers right into the heart of the downtown. Think about the injection of life that would create around here.

If we need a little more room, we could make like Chicago and push the rubble of Port Plaza Mall into the river. Wouldn't that be poetic (and gratifying)?

Yes, safety would have to be addressed, but the railroad could be a unique feature for the stadium, like the warehouse at Oriole Park at Camden Yards.

As discussed here before, passenger rail would be wonderful for the city and for our lifestyle. Especially in light of structural changes in our economy (e.g., fuel prices and the realization that alternative sources of energy are our destiny), I think that someday that line will serve passengers once again. However, by then it'll be a levitating train. Or maybe we'll all be wearing jet packs like the one being introduced at the EAA this week. :lol:

Or maybe we could have the tracks run through the outfield as in Brewster's Millions. Could be the ballpark's own little unique niche.:lol:

Green Bay 4 Life- Nice Brewster's Millions reference. I was thinking the exact same thing when I first read Geography Teachers post. I remember us having the debate on a new stadium off of Mason St. but did we discuss the possibility of having it at Leicht Park and part of the Larson Canning Site. If it would work, I would see this being the better alternative, at least as of today. The Mason area still needs so much work and the majority of people going to and from the game would just take Mason and completely bypass downtown. If it were at the Leicht Park/Canning site everyone would have no choice, but to go right through the heart of downtown to get there. Plus if a parking ramp was built to accommodate parking for the Bullfrog games it could be used all of the other times for people to park while doing business at whatever is going to end up in the Larson property.

I know we keep mentioning a stadium downtown, but has the owner of the Bullfrogs ever hinted at leaving Johannes at some point down the road? Their current set up isn't bad at all, but based on the 5 minute conversation I had with him at a game this summer it seems like he like the kind of guy who would want something even bigger and better. He kind of struck me as the Mark Cuban of the Northwoods league.

One last note before I head upnorth for a long weekend. Do you think it will be possible to see the results of that survey downtown Green Bay is currently conducting? I would like to think they will either announce there results or make them public record if anyone is interested? Have a good weekend everyone.

... did we discuss the possibility of having it at Leicht Park and part of the Larson Canning Site. If it would work, I would see this being the better alternative, at least as of today.. ..Plus if a parking ramp was built to accommodate parking for the Bullfrog games it could be used all of the other times for people to park while doing business at whatever is going to end up in the Larson property.


THese are exciting possibilities! I love the idea of a baseball stadium on the Larsen site. THis is a perfect spot, near a lot of residences to the west and all of the places on Broadway to walk to before & after games. Also would activate leicht park--people pulling up in boats, bands before & after games...I can so totally see this.

Let me go nuts here---Since this is the exact site of the old military Fort Howard, they could design the outfield walls to look kind of like the old fort stockade walls or something. I think that'd be kinda cool. Put some turrents up on the corners, build the concessoin stands, ticket booth, etc to reflect the buildings that used to be there. That is our history. What better way to honor that?

Also I've always liked the idea of stadiums downtown because of your second point--that being that parking is used more often---business during the day, then people clear out and the parking can be used again in the evenings & weekends for games.

Who started this idea again? Wasn't it GBM phillips? I like to revisit good ideas like this.

Too bad we don't rule the city and have all kinds of money to burn, huh?

Maybe they can relocate the awful Milwaukee Brewers to Green Bay. Just as long as they keep Ned Yost in Milwaukee. Maybe trade Favre for Soriano. Anyways back to the "skyscraper" forum sorry....today I spoke to Kris Schuller about 41 and 172. He said that when they will redo the 172 bridge they will put up freeway lighting. Also, hwy 41 will be lit up at the major interchanges such as 29, 172, and 43 along with the roundabouts. I see they are finally working on the hotel again near the Fox in Ashwaubenon (Aloft).

The Flats on the Fox site has the floor plans up, along with a link for "Commercial Space" although the link is currently disabled... I would love to see a ballpark on the Leicht Park site, and I hope we see work on the Cherry St. Ramp retail starting soon.

btw... your "awful Milwaukee Brewers" are currently 2nd in the NL, so I might rethink that statement

THese are exciting possibilities! I love the idea of a baseball stadium on the Larsen site. THis is a perfect spot, near a lot of residences to the west and all of the places on Broadway to walk to before & after games. Also would activate leicht park--people pulling up in boats, bands before & after games...I can so totally see this.

I agree that the Larsen site is better for the reasons given above. I had discussed the site further south because (1) it's vacant, and (2) it seems like the Larsen site is on the fast track for urban buildings on a grid pattern.

I found this site reviewing the current Bullfrogs experience at Joannes Stadium: http://www.ballparkwatch.com/visits/joannes_stadium.htm

Did you know that Joannes is the 5th-oldest ballpark in the country of those still in use today? (1929)

I also get the impression that owner Jeff Royle is thinking big with this franchise, and would love to design a new park instead of using an old stadium that has been pieced together little by little over the decades. But considering the investments he's made at Joannes the past couple of years, I would imagine that a new ballpark -- if in fact he is interested in one -- would be several years away.

Yet, the time to strike would be soon if a preferred site (Larsen?) is to be had. Should we give Guy Zima a call and see if he's willing to spend some money to get this project off the ground? We'll tell him the Bullfrogs serve delicious sausages.

A couple thoughts:

First, I'm still completely unconvinced that the river is an inhibitor to the downtown. I do not agree that the river's presence is coincidental the Fox River trails success. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the river is the single biggest geographic asset to the downtown. Not fair to compare GB to lake/ocean cities, we're a river city, and the Fox offers so many unrealized opportunities that with good planning and more points of access, it will become an increasingly vital component of the downtown.

As for the idea of more attractions for people from within the community in general, I don't think it's quite fair to dismiss the KI Center, as that does bring people from the area downtown. The Meyer Theater, especially now with Frank's there, is bringing hundreds of people downtown something like 100 or 150 nights a year. When the Children's Museum opens that will be another draw, and there's also the Neville Museum. Now, one could argue that the Neville isn't the greatest draw in the world, but I think it succeeds to the level that the community is willing to support it (as do the Meyer and KI, and as will the Children's Museum). The same would be true of any new venue/attraction, they can be built, but will only succeed to the level the community would support them in the long run. One could easily argue that instead of a new attraction, we'd be just as well off (or better) by re-invigorating the Neville.

Also, in general terms, such attractions are rarely the saviors they are made out to be. Are they part of a vital downtown? Absolutely, and I could easily support a new attraction if it was being done right. But they are just one piece that has to work in the context of many other pieces.

Regarding a ballpark in particular, GBM must be loving the support! I have mixed feelings. If one were built downtown, I think I'd prefer it in the vacant space north of Mason St. where it could still open up to a good view of the downtown, and also be the southern end of a Broadway axis between it and Larsen/Leight Park.

Still, I kind of like where it is now. While we're dreaming here, I could see a scenario where the downtown gets revitalized over the next 20 to 30 years, the neighborhood just west of it gets turned around (there's some good houses there) as people look for nice older neighborhoods in a central location, and then at the East end of a Walnut St. axis you have the stadium (which could be improved into an excellent facility at it's current location) and the aquatic center. Joannes Park is a really nice location with the East River there, it's adjacent to the Olde Main district, and is a nice neighborhood setting. Imagine a Walnut corridor that is walkable, bikeable, and served by a transit line, downtown at one end, family oriented recreation at the other, and a old residential community between. We're dreaming here anyway, and to me this is at least as good as building a new park downtown.

The Flats on the Fox site has the floor plans up, along with a link for "Commercial Space" although the link is currently disabled... I would love to see a ballpark on the Leicht Park site, and I hope we see work on the Cherry St. Ramp retail starting soon.

btw... your "awful Milwaukee Brewers" are currently 2nd in the NL, so I might rethink that statement

Last time I checked 2nd place doesn't do you any good in basbeball. Come on....you probably didn't follow the last 26 years or so of sh!tty baseball. Hey guys I didn't notice Ned Yost was part of the forum.... :lol:

Anyways...enough with rant. Maybe I should "rethink"....again :nuts: Sorry the Brewers just really piss me off sometimes.


Dan- I would have to agree, downtown will get there. Just not as soon as we would all like, but it is going in the right direction.

A couple thoughts:

First, I'm still completely unconvinced that the river is an inhibitor to the downtown

I didn't mean it that harsh. I love the river, and I do believe it is a great asset.

At the same time, however, the industry along it-- while absolutely vital to our local economy---makes it difficult to develop things like condos and stuff. The coal piles, warehouses, smokestacks, etc mean jobs, but they also mean added difficulty in bringing people down to say, live in luxury condos and say, 'ahh, that's a nice view" particularly when there are much better views farther south along the river in DePere and Lawrence and also up along the Bayshore. Also the industry adds width to the river, which in turns makes the "barrier" (real or perceived) greater. Roads get built on high bridges like Mason St to get over the river and the rail & industry, which in turn led to higher speed (I've observed most people drive at least 50 mph on that bridge).

Now please don't oversimplify my comments--iperhaps I'm not explaining my sefl well enough--f you read my blog you know I'm in favor of a "working waterfront" and shipping and the industries it helps support--I like the fuel-efficiency and all that. Just pointing out there are negatives--infected ballast and dredging, but also views for things.

So anyway I love the river. Bottom line. It is an asset. Definitely. ANd I believe there CAN be balance between the industry and the other recreational uses. We're just not there yet, and I'm not even sure how it can be done. People like the ships but not the stuff they leave behind.

...sorry, I just had to defend myself because I do love the river and I can't let anyone think that I believe it's a hindrance. That's all.

Out.

I agree with many on this board that the river is an asset. Yes, I believe the industry along the river, although essential to our local economy, takes away some of the beauty I believe this is the result of business, city planning, etc. and not the river itself. We can see in other areas along the Fox where it is a true benefit to those communities.

As for the Fox River Trail, I believe it owes its success very much to the Fox River for no other reason than the river provides a location for the trail. If the river were not there I have a hard time believing the local communities and counties would have developed such a successful trail in our area. Where would they have put it? They sure wouldn't tear up neighborhoods, parking lots, etc. just to put in a trail. The river provides a central location that runs through the heart of many communities, resulting in easy access and a beautiful trail.

I think the baseball stadium on the river on Broadway would be a great idea. I'm not a big fan of the Mason street location and think it would actually draw attention away from Downtown. As it has been mentioned before, there are many opportunities for development in GB and developers will have to be selective on where to invest time and money on the major projects. With the momentum that has slowly been built in the Broadway and Washington areas I think this makes more sense.

Wow, 93 pages... nice to see the thread moving along!

Go Green Bay

As for the Fox River Trail, I believe it owes its success very much to the Fox River for no other reason than the river provides a location for the trail. If the river were not there I have a hard time believing the local communities and counties would have developed such a successful trail in our area. Where would they have put it? They sure wouldn't tear up neighborhoods, parking lots, etc. just to put in a trail. The river provides a central location that runs through the heart of many communities, resulting in easy access and a beautiful trail.

No, the river didn't provide the location for the trail. It was an old railroad grade, and that provided the location for the trail. It just happens to be along the river. There are plenty of other old RR grades that don't run along a river. Your scenario of ripping up neighborhoods isn't a realistic alternative.

I think the real question is, if instead of that old RR grade being right along the river, what if the old RR grade was parallel to the river but one half mile inland, right between the Fox River and the East River. It would still basically go through the same neighborhoods, but not have a river view. I think it would still be a very popular trail, as are most rail-trails that go through urban areas. But there's no doubt in my mind that the river location definitely brings more people to it. How many more, now that's a tough question.

I'm not dismissing the KI...as I said it's not the kind of destination point I am refering to.

It's a business draw..not a tourist/entertainment draw.

It has it's place and it does what it was built to do but it's not what I am focusing on.

What I see in this thread is what I imagine a lot of backroom meetings are like.

Idea!

-no,no..that wouldnt work...

Idea!

-nope,tried that in 1956..didn't work..

Idea!

-sorry..we talked about that in 1988 and decided it wouldn't work...


I mean...excuse after excuse as to why something wouldn't work. At some point somebody needs to stand up and TRY something and MAKE it work.

Other cities with similar climate,geography and structure/population are doing exactly the same things some of us are dreaming about.

Why?

Why are they doing it and all we ever do is talk about it?

So anyway I love the river. Bottom line. It is an asset. Definitely. And I believe there CAN be balance between the industry and the other recreational uses. We're just not there yet, and I'm not even sure how it can be done. People like the ships but not the stuff they leave behind.

Hard to disagree with this, and discussion of the pros and cons of the river is useful. Primarily, the sentiment I was disagreeing with was the one with which the discussion began:

I don't necessarily believe in 'destiny' but is Green Bay's downtown sort of 'predestined' to be mediocre at best? I mean, perhaps the problems are more about just plain geography than most of us really think deeply about.

This, that Green Bay's downtown is predestined by geography to be mediocre, is what I don't agree with at all.

I'm not dismissing the KI...as I said it's not the kind of destination point I am refering to.

It's a business draw..not a tourist/entertainment draw.

It has it's place and it does what it was built to do but it's not what I am focusing on.

Fair enough, and an important distinction.

What I see in this thread is what I imagine a lot of backroom meetings are like.

Idea!

-no,no..that wouldnt work...

Idea!

-nope,tried that in 1956..didn't work..

Idea!

-sorry..we talked about that in 1988 and decided it wouldn't work...

I mean...excuse after excuse as to why something wouldn't work. At some point somebody needs to stand up and TRY something and MAKE it work.

Other cities with similar climate,geography and structure/population are doing exactly the same things some of us are dreaming about.

Why?

Why are they doing it and all we ever do is talk about it?

I've skimmed back through the past few pages, and I'm confused as to what your taking about. In general, there seems to be a lot of people who like the idea of a baseball park or some other sort of draw added to the downtown. In addition, here's a list of things the city has done or is trying to do recently:

- Built a $10 - to $12 million riverfront boardwalk
- Construct a new Children's Museum
- Redevelop the mall site
- Redevelop the Larsen Cannery site
- Build a new convention center
- Restore a 1,000 seat, historic theater

Add the that the Neville with is also an attraction. So, it's great to always have new ideas, and it's great to discuss if/where/how those would be created, but I've not seen any and all new ideas being shot down, nor is it true that nothing is being done to attract people into the downtown.

Wow, 93 pages... nice to see the thread moving along!

Go Green Bay

Little did you know when you started this thread! And this is even, I believe, the third thread.

Wow Jerky you really get around!

I have spent some time in downtown Denver. Loved that ped boulevard you mentioned.... I too liked how that street wasn't overbearing with tall towers; there wasn't too much of a "dark canyon" effect... That's the sort of thing I could see for DTGB...Gridded streets, 3-8 storey buildings well-designed both as individual architecture and also blending into the street context...with some contrast, perhaps some contemporary. Maybe a few taller towers. I actually like contemporary designs applied to towers.

Denver can support that sort of DT because it's just such a magnet for young people...hip trendy and all that. Doesnt' it seem that the young Wiscosnin kids who move to Denver in their 20's & 30's almost always end up coming back to Wisconsin by their late 30's?

Night Rider-
I'd like to check out that Broadway Farmers Market sometime. I don't seem to venture over the Fox River much these days....

Grant Park in Chicago-
I believe much of Grant Park green space wasn't there originally-- I think Michigan Ave was right along the lakefront. Then along came the Great Chicago Fire and they simply pushed the rubble out to the lake and added those parks with the rubble. By this time there was desire for park land by much of the public because people had too strong a taste of what an overbearing overcrowded industrial city was like, and people more or less demanded that this area become park land. Also I think some of it might have been used for the big cattle yards that chicago was famous for. So it had been an ugly nasty even non-existing waterfront that tragedy helped turn into something spectacular. A lot of Green Bay's downtown waterfront is also "Fill" hauled in to raise the land to a higher elevation, the thing is though, that land was not put into park use in GB; rather it was used for more industry & rail yards and such--which of course was vital to the economy here.

you pretty much hit what I was thinking about denver--when we were walking around downtown it really hit me that there were very few buildings over 5 stories in that area, yet it was an amazing, walkable downtown.

To your point about the young/hip/trendy demographic. I've said from the beginning that for our downtown to be successful, we need to get some companies down there that will attract that type of employee. Case in point--a very good friend of mine has lived in los angeles for about 10 years & recently moved to a town of about 10,000 in Michigan. Why? That's where the job was. People will follow the jobs.

To your point about the young/hip/trendy demographic. I've said from the beginning that for our downtown to be successful, we need to get some companies down there that will attract that type of employee. Case in point--a very good friend of mine has lived in los angeles for about 10 years & recently moved to a town of about 10,000 in Michigan. Why? That's where the job was. People will follow the jobs.

It's going to be hard to attract such existing companies, but we can grow our own. The obvious example is Frozen Codebase who has brought some young professionals to the area. But yeah, this is the whole creative class idea and leaving the downtown aside for a minute, it's important for the regional economy to be attracting and retaining such people.

Danillo-Have you heard anything lately regarding the Children's Museum or warehouse portion of the RC?

This, that Green Bay's downtown is predestined by geography to be mediocre, is what I don't agree with at all.

Really? Not even just a little bit? Can you at least see this from a devils advocate position? I think it's generally what a lot of people around here believe. Now of course with that, there is a little bit of "Tolstoy Syndrome" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias) going on with this belief.



I mean...excuse after excuse as to why something wouldn't work. At some point somebody needs to stand up and TRY something and MAKE it work.

Other cities with similar climate,geography and structure/population are doing exactly the same things some of us are dreaming about.

Why?

Why are they doing it and all we ever do is talk about it?

Clearly I understand the frustration. Yet we shouldn't dismiss the efforts and capital put forth by developers like Steve Schneider and so many others. These are big deals, even if they don't result in a glitzy 30 story tower.

Let's be real, however: Some cities are lucky to have other things going for it: Better waterfronts, better transportation options; more attractive CENTRAL city perhaps landlocked to prevent outward spread; more conducive business atmosphere; less "pull" from nearby gravity like Ashwaubenon and Appleton; and so on. Maybe it's my own confirmation bias but I believe these are real--not perceived--inhibitors. Can they be overcome? You bet! But it's just going to take more time, hard work, and luck.

Danillo-Have you heard anything lately regarding the Children's Museum or warehouse portion of the RC?

No, not really. In fact, this whole "give Vetter time to find investors" thing should be up. I think there should be an RDA meeting this week or next, so maybe there will be more info at that time.

Really? Not even just a little bit? Can you at least see this from a devils advocate position? I think it's generally what a lot of people around here believe. Now of course with that, there is a little bit of "Tolstoy Syndrome" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias) going on with this belief.

Nope, not really. I mean, any geographic setting is going to have both opportunities and challenges, and Green Bay is no different. However, that doesn't mean that the downtown can't be successful, or even that we have a harder road to being successful.

Looking historically, Green Bay had a thriving downtown up at least until the depression, and evidence for this can be found in our architecture. The courthouse is a fine of a Beaux Arts building as you're going to find, the Bellin Building is an excellent Chicago-school "skyscraper" (and relative to the heights of buildings being built anywhere in it's time, quite tall), and the Northern Building is a nice Art Deco building. What I'm getting at is that at the time, Green Bay's downtown did well and we built fine examples of the major architectural styles at the time.

Now, nothing really happened much anywhere from then until after WWII, but in Green Bay what happened post WWII is that nothing happened. Again using architecture as a marker, where are the modern buildings downtown? It's like Green Bay is the city that modernism forgot. The only thing we did was knock down a bunch of stuff to build a mall, which was neither modern nor urban (though to be fair, it is an example of people trying to fix something).

Now, a further 30 to 50 years later, we're trying again, and have a pretty nice, new, postmodern building (Nicolet Bank) to help represent that. Now, the architecture doesn't necessarily equate to the vibrancy of downtown, but I do think it helps us understand how we got to where we are. Up until the 30's this was a city that invested in itself, and had interest in looking outward at what was the at the forefront of design and bringing examples of that here. Post, WWII, for whatever reason, something changed relative to other cities, and this can be seen in our absence of anything really modern. I think in the last ten years we're seeing that start to change again, and we're starting to see that reflected architecturally.

Now, did the geography change during that time? No, people changed.

I agree with most of your post above, blogging about the architecture and history and all is one of my obsessions.


Now, did the geography change during that time? No, people changed.

Except this.... Cars opened up new outlying geography to people and that enabled people to choose to get the hell out of the center of the city.

It wasn't all cars; trends of the time played a part too. In the 1950s-60s there was general distaste for anything pre-WWII. We as Americans wanted to forge ahead with something new, lead the world into this whole new auto-based type of world. Old buildings were torn down (or the old-style ornate detailing was stripped off and replaced by simple 'modern' facades) simply for the sake of change. Downtowns were out; suburban malls were in, at least amongst the car-owning mobile middle-and upper class.

Maybe that's why DTGB lost so much compared to many other cities--did we have a larger percentage of middle-upper class people mobile enough to choose to buy cars and move out of the center? Our economy has done generally well, good jobs for the most part.

Maybe, but I think the outward spread was largely due to do with the industrial land use and where these important industries are located. The huge chunks of land dedicated to mills on key parts of the downtown, adjacent waterfront areas. Given the choice to get in the car and be mobile, many people decided to live far away from the mills and industry on the low flat land and move out to the hilly & beautiful countryside. Once the people were out, the businesses followed and the whole sprawl thing kind of snowballed. It was all about the outside gravity of "nice" landscapes and the cars which enabled people to move out there. That and the convergence of regional economies (Appleton & Oshkosh). This is a big geographic factor to think about as well.

Then by the 1970's our local economy shifted into other areas--many smaller businesses, health care, insurance, etc. Where did these new growing industries locate? Not many downtown (though a few tried, but found the hurdles I mentioned too great to clear). No, most located out in the beautiful areas along the Fox River, or between the Fox Cities, or up on hills overlooking the city & bay. For example, you can't blame the city council entirely for AMS being where it is. Plus they wanted to be near the highways (remember we're a car-based society by now).

Geography and other factors played a large part, I'd argue an even larger part. Too often on this board we want to blame just one thing (usually a single person) but that's just too simple. I guess that's my whole point on all of this.

But I still give hope. It seems most people are now starting to fully realize that basing pretty much our entire economy & lifestyle on cars & trucks (and in turn relying too heavily on foreign oil) may not have been the best way to forge ahead with our new "American Way" of life. Now we face problems that could be another WWII-type crisis that nobody wants to face. I think the tide is turning; the trend has already changed and people are looking inward again. That's what Green Bay needs to play off of to get the downtown back on track.

Well back to my little vacation day....wondering if I should take my kids down to the circus known as Brett's Training Camp.

Except this.... Cars opened up new outlying geography to people and that enabled people to choose to get the hell out of the center of the city.


This was an issue for every city, regardless of geography.

By the way,

Wisconsin Public Service Foundation has contributed $250,000 toward the city of Green Bay’s The CityDeck riverfront project.
Advertisement

The donation was announced at a press conference on banks of the Fox River in downtown Green Bay this morning.

Construction on the project is expected to begin by the end of September.

This was an issue for every city, regardless of geography.

By the way,

Of course. But why did some cities downtowns fare better than GB's? There's more to it, and a lot of it is geography as I tried to lay out above.

Anyway=--regarding the boardwalk--
That's great news about WPS, though I'm a little disappointed to hear construction to start at the "end of September". Cold weather will be blowing in by then. Remember when they said they'd be starting this spring? Then after the 4th of July (which I could understand). Well anyway, start dates aside, at least there's more financing for this! Thanks for sharing that.

Obviously when we are comparing other cities, its always physical characteristics that other cities are "better," so then the problem possibly lies in mentality...Others are clearly more ambitious/progressive, whereas GB wants to be, but is a little bit in its own right. Thats just what it seems.

off topic--

I heard a rumor that there's something going on with Favre. Something about him not being happy? I can't seem to find any coverage of it, do you guys know what's going on?

;)

Who is this fah-vre person you speak of?

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh103/masagb/favre.jpg

Who is this fah-vre person you speak of?

I've heard he's some sort of quarterback or something. What I don't know is this: has his decision to stay in or leave Green Bay been affected by the area's geography?

:naughty:

I've heard he's some sort of quarterback or something. What I don't know is this: has his decision to stay in or leave Green Bay been affected by the area's geography?

:naughty:

I heard that Brett was a big fan of the gyros down at Fetaz, but he got stuck at the bridge when the Foxy Lady was going through one day, & was late for practice. That's what started all of the bad blood between Brett & the Pack. Damn this geography!!

What I don't know is this: has his decision to stay in or leave Green Bay been affected by the area's geography?

:naughty:

No no--Favre is leaving because the city has so few walkways connecting buildings, and he heard about some guy on the city's urban design committee who constantly opposed them. He saw there was no future for him in Green Bay.

You saw how he froze his ass off in the NFC championship game--he can't tolerate cold anymore.

I heard he bought the entire top two penthouse floors of the Astor Place Project, but couldn't wait any longer for it to break ground. Rodgers isn't interested in the developement because he'll be lucky if he makes it through this season.

I officially apologize for going down this path. Although with not much news downtown at least it keeps people from posting these "our downtown will never be good", "let's focus on oneida street", "we should have listened to guy zima" messages.

On second thought, I'm not sorry..

so did anyone else hear that favre left GB because the best restaurant in town is Applebee's?

so did anyone else hear that favre left GB because the best restaurant in town is Applebee's?

1) Hattiesburg only wishes it had an Applebee's.

2) Maybe this thing has been dragging on so long because Brett thinks the Bucs still play at Houlihan's Stadium and he wants no part of that.


FYI, by the time you read this perhaps something has happened, but Jay Glaser of Fox Sports is reporting that Favre has been traded to the Jets.

...at least it keeps people from posting these "our downtown will never be good"...messages.

C'mon now, don't hate on me just for presenting an alternative viewpoint. I was just asking the tough questions, looking to understand the problems. ...I'll still always be a "downtown guy" and I wholeheartedly support it. I'm not going to just give up here and ask to be traded to New York.

No no--Favre is leaving because the city has so few walkways connecting buildings, and he heard about some guy on the city's urban design committee who constantly opposed them. He saw there was no future for him in Green Bay.

You saw how he froze his ass off in the NFC championship game--he can't tolerate cold anymore.

This may explain why Minnesota was his first choice... all those skywalks!

so did anyone else hear that favre left GB because the best restaurant in town is Applebee's?

I shall never forgive Longwell for that bit of nonsense. If he really thought that, it's his own damn fault for not getting his head out of his ass and looking around a little.

C'mon now, don't hate on me just for presenting an alternative viewpoint. I was just asking the tough questions, looking to understand the problems. ...I'll still always be a "downtown guy" and I wholeheartedly support it. I'm not going to just give up here and ask to be traded to New York.

Newsflash!!! Puant traded to the New York forum for a conditional 5-story building. If Puant replies in at least 50% of the NY threads, that will be upgraded to a 7-story building. Should he reply in 70% of threads, and New York finishes 1 supertall this year, Green Bay gets a 12-story building, and in the event that Puant replies in every thread and New York starts a new world's tallest building, We get a 20-story building. In addition, if the New York Thread turns around and trades Puant to the Minneapolis thread, Green Bay would get both the Chrysler Building and the Empire State Building.

Said Green Bay thread founder JT-MI:

We already suffered through the loss of AVissers without any compensation, and we were not about to lose another thread legend without getting something in return. It is with some sadness that we see Puant leave, but we felt it was in our best interests to allow him to continue posting elsewhere while continuing to persue growth in downtown Green Bay

^^:lol:that's good stuff man, good stuff!:lol:

...we sure do need some new development news, don't we??

This may explain why Minnesota was his first choice... all those skywalks!



I shall never forgive Longwell for that bit of nonsense. If he really thought that, it's his own damn fault for not getting his head out of his ass and looking around a little.



Newsflash!!! Puant traded to the New York forum for a conditional 5-story building. If Puant replies in at least 50% of the NY threads, that will be upgraded to a 7-story building. Should he reply in 70% of threads, and New York finishes 1 supertall this year, Green Bay gets a 12-story building, and in the event that Puant replies in every thread and New York starts a new world's tallest building, We get a 20-story building. In addition, if the New York Thread turns around and trades Puant to the Minneapolis thread, Green Bay would get both the Chrysler Building and the Empire State Building.

Said Green Bay thread founder JT-MI:

:banana::lol: and :cheers: This reply should go into the skyscrapercity forum Hall of fame for one of the greatest replies ever!

Breaking news!

Downtown Green Bay to get new,exciting restaurant!

http://i33.tinypic.com/2aexpmw.jpg

From the RDA Agenda next week. Would be interesting to attend. Alternate proposal for Site 1 and then closed session on Astor Status.

Vetter better come with the thunder and some money or this is it.

2. Communication of August 5, 2008, of the Common Council by Ald. Wery for a presentation of an alternate development for Site 1 (Flatley site) by Robert Sinclair Architecture.

Recommendation: Refer to staff.

5. Discussion and possible action on the Astor Place project.

We shall see...

^^ Well, that should be interesting indeed! If Robert Sinclair Architecture is this: http://rgsarchitecture.com/ Then it will be interesting to see what they are proposing as their portfolio seems to be single-family homes. As for the Astor Place discussion, it may or may not be closed session, that's just an option. I'm sure there will be some open session discussion at the very least.

Danillo-Do you have any plans to make it to this meeting like the last one?

^^ I'm going to try. No guarantees though.

Upon a closer look, that firm who's website I linked to is almost certainly the one that will supposedly be making a presentation. One of the principals listed on their site is Paul De Leeuw. Good guy, I even played on a rec basketball team with him in De Pere a few years ago. He was working for the firm that designed Nicolet Bank at the time that was built, though he wasn't the architect on that. But he's a good urbanist and I'm sure he'd have good ideas for that site. I have no idea how much experience he or his firm have with doing a project like this, nor do I know what resources they have that would help them succeed where Vetter did not (assuming that Astor Place dies, which we do not know one way or another yet).

I just wonder why the Flatley memorial was destroyed with a possible empty promise to dedicate or name a portion of a new Astor Place building to him. Should this be considered another "blunder" in the downtown planning? Or am I missing something? Couldn't they have left the memorial in place until the building on the Astor place was imminent? Obviously, if the Astor Place Condos go forward, and they name a portion after the Flatley, all had gone as planned. Of course it's not as huge as the 5 million + judgment against the city. Go JETS! :)

I just wonder why the Flatley memorial was destroyed with a possible empty promise to dedicate or name a portion of a new Astor Place building to him. Should this be considered another "blunder" in the downtown planning? Or am I missing something? Couldn't they have left the memorial in place until the building on the Astor place was imminent? Obviously, if the Astor Place Condos go forward, and they name a portion after the Flatley, all had gone as planned. Of course it's not as huge as the 5 million + judgment against the city. Go JETS! :)

Even if Astor Place falls apart, something significant will be built there in the near future. After all, it's not called "Site One" for nothing.

I just wonder why the Flatley memorial was destroyed with a possible empty promise to dedicate or name a portion of a new Astor Place building to him. Should this be considered another "blunder" in the downtown planning? Or am I missing something? Couldn't they have left the memorial in place until the building on the Astor place was imminent? Obviously, if the Astor Place Condos go forward, and they name a portion after the Flatley, all had gone as planned. Of course it's not as huge as the 5 million + judgment against the city. Go JETS! :)

I guess this time it wouldn't be considered a "city blunder". Again the road was straightend, utilities moved, site cleared for Vetter to follow through on his end. The only blunder may have been hanging on too long. I think that should be cleared up at the next RDA Meeting. He better show the RDA the money and that he has it or is sooooo close to obtaining it or he's done - at least on Site 1. I hope Vetter has the one million to give to the City for the work being done in anticipation. That could go to the mall or other things to help the downtown. We should not give him a pass on that if that actually happens.

I agree "Site 1" is a very important site and I would certanilly hate to see anything along the lines of the portfolio of Robert Sinclair Architecture. We have no facts here and maybe we will hear the proposal and have a cleared picture. If this new proposal creates 10 units then it appears like it might get built, you have to remember Astor has what close to 100 units? most being 225k+, Astor seems to be several years away in my eyes. Maybe we could settle for something else just so we have a buidling there...does that make any sense?

Lets see what is brought to the table... I dont think I have to remind anyone that there is a lot of real estate downtown that could use some new buildings.

I have been getting antsy for the Warehouse portion/Children's Museum portion to get underway, so I called Jen Kuo to see what the scoop is with things. We ended up talking for about twenty minutes and she gave me a few interesting nuggets. She said that those portions would be started soon (I know, we have heard this before:bash:) and made it sound like everything is finalized (I assume this meant financing, but I didn't get into specifics and felt that it wasn't my place to ask) and approved through the city. She raved about the plans for the boardwalk and mentioned that she had to "pinch herself" for a reminder that this plan will be a reality. It was noted that there is 10 million secured for this project, with groundbreaking in September and what a tremendous transformation it will be for the Riverfront. I then asked her about Astor Place. She mentioned that her and Mr. Vetter had mutually decided to go in different directions. She was very respectful and complimentary of him and said he has been a asset to Green Bay, but after three years she didn't know what to keep telling prospective buyers. She didn't know where he was with financing or any news on Astor, but we will find out on Tuesday's RDA meeting. Jen did say that she is now working with Robert Sinclair Architecture on their proposal. She mentioned that one of the people had ties to Green Bay ( I believe Danillo alluded to this) and that they have been wonderful to work with. She had many nice things to say about them and their plans for the site. When they contacted her about working with them, her first question was "do you have money?", or financing and apparently they do. Jen said that the site would include an organic foods store and health club. I asked her about the size of the building and if it would be a tower. She said that John Vetter was a "visionary" and set the standard for the site and that the city would take nothing less than a tower. She couldn't give me specifics, but it was said that it would most definately be taller than the Belling Building and at least 10 stories. The market is here for that type of living and people are wanting more urban living, especially with fuel and maintanance. She said that there was to be a special RDA meeting in two weeks for the proposal and they are already working on a site trailer for marketing it. She started talking about downtown developments and I asked her if there were any other plans for sites. She said not from there end, but she wanted to see site 4 developed. Jen had heard good news on T Wall and said there plans, namely renders were awesome. Fellas, I hope we are in for good news:banana:!

P.S. What are everyone's thought on the Nicolet National Bank Building? Puant, I saw that someone had a pretty negative post about it on your blog and was curious what others thoughts were. I though it was a nice looking building.

Morse- Thank you for that informative post about your discussion with Jen Kuo. I guess this pretty much means that Astor is dead, but this new proposal seems like it could be a nice addition to the downtown. My question is this though. Everyone would like to see Site 4 developed and I know at one point Vetter had the rights to that site. Now if Vetter still feels he could make Astor a reality, but the city tells him they are going with this new developer for Site 1, would Astor Place, either in its current design, or with some slight modifications fit on Site 4? Hopefully even if Astor is dead, Vetter will bring another proposal to the table in the future.

Thanks Morse for the update. I find it very difficult to even get the slightest encouraged by a project until it has broke ground. If you look back at past threads going back quite a few years, it's a virtual history of downtown possibilities & mostly failures. It's actually a little depressing going back and looking at the past threads, but very interesting. I hope you are right and the near future is heading in the right direction.

"Maybe we could settle for something else just so we have a building there...does that make any sense?"

Why not? That's been SOP for GB for awhile now.

Seriously though...spent some serious time DT Milwaukee this weekend.

While Milwaukee does have a few towers I was trying to get a feel for the 6-12 floor buildings and as someone here said....a mass of medium (6-10 floors) rises can be just as fullfilling as having 3 or 4 25+ towers.

I found that to be true.

Now,when I was out on the lake I was thinking how very underrated the Milwaukee skyline is and from that vantage point the rising condo towers are quite impressive along with the existing commercial towers.

GB is just never going to have these kinds of structures...the people here are just not commited to growing GB at the rate you need to make such buildings needed. You'd think with the Packers,cost of living,schools and cleanliness of the area that GB would be a draw but it hovers at 100k pop and I don't see any effort to grow the city. No reason GB can't or shouldn't be in the 175-225k range by now but the people here are happy being Mayberry and I guess thats fine.

With that said....while I dream of GB actually having a skyline one day I think it's a pipe dream. Instead of trying to build up GB needs to really focus on the ground floor.

Now,that doesn't mean GB should keep plopping down 2 floor buildings all over DT.

But..as I was walking around Milwaukee the thing I came to really realize was..as cool as it was to look up and know you were in an actual city I was more drawn to shops,eateries and such on the ground that I actually wanted to go into.

We ate at a cool mom and pop style diner for breakfast..think Blackstone meets Julies Cafe only cleaner and more inviting (refering to BS,not Julies).

There was a starbucks..a dunkin donuts..lots of cool semi upscale restuarants.Pabst theater,lots of banks..the shops on Grand Avenue reminded me a lot of Port Plaza in the 80's...the mall just had a old school Port Plaza feel to it...and while the downtown mall ship as long left GB I think a nice 2 floor structure with national-scale shops would be very cool with another 4 floors of studio apartments above that. Obviously GB will never draw an Apple Store or a Coach store but the Milwaukee mall had a Radio Shack,Walgreens,a LIDS cap store..shops like that would work I think.

There was a Culvers in the food court....A Culvers or an Arbys would be great DT here...

The first floor eateries lining the river with condos above was cool as all heck...and those condos were like 10 floors...not massive towers at all but all the PEOPLE out on decks eating was such a great atmosphere...wow..what GB has missed with it's gross misuse of the Fox.

People love to eat..people love to eat outdoors..people love water and sunshine.

I guess what I'm saying is...Astor is great an dwould look cool as heck from Mason St. Bridge if there's nothing on the retail level why bother?

So..I think the key is to not give us a pretty tower to look at from afar but give us destinations worth coming to.

Shopko express is sorely needed but don't stop there.

I think I'd rather have two 8 floor buildings go up and have them filled with some really good shops,etc and affordable housing up top than one 17 floor condo.


Another thing that really struck me in Milwaukee was the thought of perhaps GB's biggest blunder maybe ever.....not putting UWGB downtown.

The college kids give Milwaukee such an energy and them being there breeds hip coffee shops and sandwich shops,etc.

Take UWGB and put it DT and I think things are very different for us. Maybe not..but that was my impression.

A Culver's? A Starbuck's? A Dunkin' Donuts? First, None of these will locate in downtown Green Bay until it's already proven itself. Second, let Ashwaubenon be Ashwaubenon and Downtown be Downtown. Downtown will NEVER be conveniently located next to a highway off-ramp, and that's what matters to the national chains. Downtown Green Bay needs to play to its strengths, not its weaknesses. Personally, I'm very tired of the idea that national chains will save downtown. I really don't think that a Chili's would make the difference.

Besides, we have a lot of restaurants downtown already: Angelina's, Cheffetas, Quincy's, Fetaz, Erbert & Gerbert, Caffe Espresso, Al's, St. Brendan's, Titletown, Hinterland, the Brownstone, Kavarna, Urban Frog, Monzu Bistro, Bangkok Garden, Burger Company, Little Tokyo, Black Cat Cafe, Excetera (?), etc. We have plenty of restaurants and several "hip coffee shops," what we need is more retail.

We also need to embrace the river, I'm glad to see that that's being done. I sincerely hope that the City Deck breaks ground next month, I think that alone would bring a lot of interest and faith in the downtown project.

Effort to grow the city? I'm sure Puant has the numbers, but the metro area is far larger than 100k. Since the boundaries of Green Bay cannot grow, the only way the population could grow is if we knocked down neighborhoods with single residences and replaced them with high rises. I don't see much of that happening. I'm not sure it's desirable.

^^

You give a lot of great examples and I do enjoy many of those establishments, but there is one thing that is almost entirely missing from that list; chain restaurants. I'm not saying I'm a huge fan of them, but in a place like Green Bay where people are less apt to change, a little familiarity can't hurt. There's a reason those chain joints are so popular, and its because they provide decent quality at a decent price and people know what to expect. I have hard time believing that with all the businesses downtown that a couple chains could not survive. We may need something exactly like that to draw people DT so they see all the good happening. It won't necessarily attract the type of people that frequent this board, but I'm afraid there are a lot more people in GB that are unlike us.

Since we have been chatting about how UWGB may have helped boost business DT, here is a link to an article in GBPG about how SNC and De Pere work together. Not related directly to DT GB, but thought I would share.
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080811/GPG0101/808110534&referrer=FRONTPAGECAROUSEL

Most importantly... did you guys ever get together back on July 24?? I saw nothing posted about it.

Supposedly Green Bay will host another Tall Ships Festival in 2010. Hopefully then can build this "City Deck" before this festival comes back to the riverfront. :dunno:

Did you guys hear about the traffic cameras going up on 172 & 43. It somewhat makes sense to have traffic alerts when 172 & 41 will be crawling in the next several years, but $1.6 Million for 1980's technology using still shots every 3 mins! Come on DOT :lol: :2cents:

Too bad Panera Bread is not going in downtown and instead going to Ashwaubenon in the old Krispy Kreme. :bash:

Did you guys hear about the traffic cameras going up on 172 & 43. It somewhat makes sense to have traffic alerts when 172 & 41 will be crawling in the next several years, but $1.6 Million for 1980's technology using still shots every 3 mins! Come on DOT :lol: :2cents:

We probabally got Milwaukee's old cameras...

I also tend to think that in this area chains=success. We all know there are many great places downtown, however most people in the metro will never step foot into a place that is not a familar setting. Perception is the key, many people still associate DT with port plaza mall, or the traffic delays caused by boats or trains.

Maybe what we need are more entry or moderate level housing options. Not just a tower but some sweet rowhouses or low rise building to bring in a mass to keep downtown active and drive the demand to get all of the things we seem to keep refering to. Maybe the expected death of Astor will be the catylist to the City Deck. How long can anyone be expected to wait for this building???

A few replies--

Morse-
Thanks for the big scoop!
As for the comment on the Nicolet Bank building--I'm working up another blog article on that. I'm kind of interested in how other developers handled the placement of buildlings along that strip of land between Washington and the River. As someone else posted, it kind of came down to parking but there is more to it than that, I think.

ChicagoEnvy-
I enjoyed your post and agreed with much of it.

Population growth fastest in WI
In this day & age of cars & sprawl and stuff, the best way to gauge the population of an area is with the census' MSA (Metropolitan Statistical Area) population...which for Green Bay for the 2000 census was 226,778. This was a 16.5% rise from the last census in 1990, which is pretty good growth, faster growth than any other metro area in Wisconsin (http://www.census.gov/population/cen2000/phc-t3/tab03.txt) (yes, even Madison). Is it Phoenix-esque growth? No but sometimes too-fast growth can be very problematic. I think we'll see the 2010 census showing that the Green Bay MSA growth has slowed down a little bit, even tho the suburbs boomed for a while there in the early-mid 2000s. I think Madison might beat us next time. However, I expect to see suburban growth is (obviously) slowing even more after 2010...with high fuel costs & more general interest in central downtown areas from the younger generation, I think Green Bay might start to see big gains again 2010-2020. There is room to grow population even while "landlocked" by the suburbs. If only that damn river wasn't there screwing up the possibilities....(kidding:)!!)

Speaking of Madison--There's another city with some very nice 'n dense, but not too-tall, buildings that make up a great downtown urban atmosphere

Chain stores & restaurants
A few here 'n there in the DT are just all right with me. I wouldn't want to go overboard, but as GBSurveyor & others mentioned, not having any at all might not be good either, especially for this town.

UWGB almost was UWA
Another thing we've discussed in the past was the location of UW-GB being out in the fringe rather than downtown....pros & cons each way...Pros for example being that the university sits on a really nice piece of land, which with their programs they can preserve natural areas like the arboretum and the bayshore. I think that's great, nice change-up for Green Bay. Also--and this is big---back when the UW system was looking to add another campus, there was stiff competition between Appleton and GB as the place to land the campus. If it weren't for the unique and beautiful natural setting which was more or less given to the UW system we might be talking about UW-Appleton instead of UWGB. Imagine what a blunder it would have been to screw up landing this university here! The location was key, I think. At least that's how I understand it...Maybe someone like Danillo can shed some more light on how that all went down. I guess I can see it from different perspectives, and I understand the decisions that were made in the past were complex....but in the end, I still wish that the university had been located downtown.

Tall Ships
This is a great festival! I especially liked the one a couple years ago when there were so many ships. I really really really really think it's imperitive to get the boardwalk done by the next one, which I'm happy to hear will be in 2010. However it appears we're behind schedule (http://www.ci.green-bay.wi.us/boardwalk/timeline.html) to actually have it DONE by summer 2010.

Hip Cool efficient Row housing
I believe these would work go over quite well on that southern end of the downtown, especially if they could be phased in well and done well. After our last little conversation about this I started dreaming again. If I had any money maybe I'd even take a gamble myself on this sort of investment.

To end this extremely long post--
Well if Astor's dead, at least it appears soemthing else is on its coattails, if for no other reason to keep us yakking on this forum!!

Speaking of growing room, how much long-term growth potential does the City of Green Bay have in the east/northeast direction (WI 54 and 57 area)?

<sigh...> There has GOT to be a way to de-balkanize Wisconsin's metro areas....

:ohno:

Also, when did the Ashwaubenon K-K call it quits?

Mike

Speaking of growing room, how much long-term growth potential does the City of Green Bay have in the east/northeast direction (WI 54 and 57 area)?

<sigh...> There has GOT to be a way to de-balkanize Wisconsin's metro areas....

:ohno:

Also, when did the Ashwaubenon K-K call it quits?

Mike

The far east side (in the city) really has the only undeveloped land left and there is quite a bit. When that development boom was taking place a few years ago there were development after development on the table, so when the housing mess works its way out the east side will again prosper. I dont think its a central as the west side but it does have both Baird Creek greenway and the close access to UWGB and Door County with really easy well planned access.

Speaking of growing room, how much long-term growth potential does the City of Green Bay have in the east/northeast direction (WI 54 and 57 area)?

<sigh...> There has GOT to be a way to de-balkanize Wisconsin's metro areas....

:ohno:

Also, when did the Ashwaubenon K-K call it quits?

Mike

The east/northeast portion of Green Bay is the only large rural area within the city limits. I believe I once heard that it is expected to support about 30,000 additional residents once fully developed (I'm not sure how many of those 30K are already there -- parts of the area have filled in quickly over the past few years).

In addition, this part of Green Bay is the only part that shares boundaries with unincorporated towns (Scott and Humboldt). An area around the 54/57 interchange has already been annexed. The entire western and southern boundaries are locked in by the suburbs.

Well, here's finally a chance to offer the executive summary of my summer reading book report! In Sprawl: A Compact History by Robert Bruegmann, the author actually feels that the anti-sprawl campaign is misguided and uninformed. He uses data and anecdotal evidence to suggest that sprawl is occurring at a much slower rate than it did during the first half of the 20th century, and that it isn't a bad thing anyway. He believes that debalkanization attempts have been largely unsuccessful (with the Twin Cities as a possible exception), and that they fly in the face of Americans' desire for local control and individual civic participation.

I'm not sure if Bruegmann has convinced me with his contrarian views, but it was interesting to consider an alternative point of view. Still, I agree with mgk920 that there must be more opportunities to consolidate certain services.

I'll have my book back at the library later this month if you're interested. :)

Speaking of growing room, how much long-term growth potential does the City of Green Bay have in the east/northeast direction (WI 54 and 57 area)?

<sigh...> There has GOT to be a way to de-balkanize Wisconsin's metro areas....

:ohno:

Also, when did the Ashwaubenon K-K call it quits?

Mike

I'm curious Mike, what are your reasons for wanting to de-balkanize Wisconsin's Metros? Appleton is probably the most de-balkanized of all Wisconsin's major metros.

Thank you.

Also, when did the Ashwaubenon K-K call it quits?

Mike

It closed a while a go, actually August 2007.

Green Bay Far Eastside

I actually live near Baird Creek and near EA (eastern arterial). I still see homes popping up, but not nearly as much as 2 or 3 years a go. There are empty lots for sale everywhere. As a few friends have told me it is very expensive to build a new house right now compared to just buying the same size home for much less and only a year or 2 years old. Probably because some of the home builders are struggling and are trying to make up the difference. Overall there really isn't much going on over here. You have to drive a ways to Bellevue or Ashwaubenon to do your shopping, but I will take the peace and quiet while still living in the city.

I'm curious Mike, what are your reasons for wanting to de-balkanize Wisconsin's Metros? Appleton is probably the most de-balkanized of all Wisconsin's major metros.

Thank you.

huh? Isn't Appleton in like three different counties, plus part of a metro with Neenah and Menasha, plus bound by a town like Grand Chute that only wants to play nice when they are forced to by the pains of their own growth? I see the Fox Cities area as being profoundly balkanized.

I'd like to see Green Bay become a unigov much like Indianapolis where the city limits are the county limits. I think there'd be tremendous efficiencies from that. I'd be surprised if it ever happens, but it'd be nice.

Woops, I must have gotten my definitions wrong. I thought de-bulkanization meant preventing any particular municipality from having the "bulk" of the power in a region.

Anticipation for the RDA is killing me. Hopefully the news covers or a poster can cover it. Curse my 40 hr a week day job...:hammer:

I'm curious Mike, what are your reasons for wanting to de-balkanize Wisconsin's Metros? Appleton is probably the most de-balkanized of all Wisconsin's major metros.

Thank you.
Well, for one thing, Wisconsin leads all 50 USA states in the ratio of number of units of local government of all kinds (from the county level on down) with taxing authority to population, each of those units has a governing body (elected or appointed), each has a bureaucracy and ALL of those people MUST be paid. The state can no longer afford to support them all - period.

As for what I consider the urbanized Appleton area, there are:

-3 counties (Calumet, Outagamie, Winnebago)
-4 cities (Appleton, Kaukauna, Menasha, Neenah)
-5 villages (Combined Locks, Hortonville, Kimberly, Little Chute, Sherwood)
-11 townships (Harrison (Calumet County); Buchanon, Center, Freedom, Grand Chute, Greenville, Kaukauna Twp, Vandenbroek (Outagamie County) and Clayton, Menasha Twp, Neenah Twp (Winnebago County))
-8 school districts (Appleton, Freedom, Hortonville, Kaukauna, Kimberly, Little Chute, Menasha, Neenah)
-(I don't know how many) township sanitary districts.

MANY of these jurisdictions overlap with very hard to parse boundaries. It is VERY DIFFICULT to tell which ones one is in when in many parts of the metro area.

ALL of this to govern an area with FEWER people than the present-day City of Madison.

Compared with the Green Bay area, metro Appleton is a true, and EXPENSIVE, mess.

:gaah:

Mike

Went to the RDA meeting! If anyone has any questions about what the hall on the 6th floor of city hall is like, fire away, because that's where I sat for an hour and a half before I had to leave. The good news is that I got a parking ticket for my troubles.

A couple TV stations were there (Channel 2 for sure).

Woops, I must have gotten my definitions wrong. I thought de-bulkanization meant preventing any particular municipality from having the "bulk" of the power in a region.
(hehehehehe)

Yea, I hearya. Sometimes words and phrases such as that are not well known by everyone. BTW, the word 'balkanize' harkens to the Balkan region of southeastern Europe, with all of those ultra tiny and sometimes hostile-to-each-other countries. A very apt allegory to some of Wisconsin's metro areas.

Mike

Danillo!!!

How about a overview with the meeting. Was it positive??

1.) Will the Children's Museum/Warehouse portion break ground soon? Specific date, or does that need financing?

2.) What's the status on Astor Place? Did it get financial backing?

3.) What's the news with Robert Sinclair Architecture? Will it be one or the other, or is Vetter willing to work with just Site 4?

Please have some good news:banana:

Doh! I was so anxious for news that I was with stupid and read over "the good news is that I got a parking ticket for my troubles." I am sorry to hear that. If that is the good news....s!$t

My source at the meeting (Molly from DGBI nicely e-mailed me with what happened) says that literally 5 minutes after I left they opened the meeting back up, at which point they tabled everything until next week with no action taken today.

So let's recap, I got to spend one and a half hours sitting in a hallway, then left five minutes before they opened the meeting back up, then after that it turns out nothing happened anyway (at least nothing public).

:bash:

Morse, I'd have reported answers to some or all of your questions if there was anything to report.

I can say the only action with the Sinclair deal was to refer it to staff, so not really anything new there, and actually having read through the agenda again a referral to staff was all that was ever going to happen. There were no people there (so far as I'm aware) that had anything to do with that.

I for about 45 minutes there they did kick John Vetter and Kelly Denk out of the meeting so they could talk amongst themselves, and neither of those two were acting like people who's projects were about to fail, so there's that.

Sounds like we'll have to wait another week at least.

John Vetter Granted Another Extension for Condo Project

Updated: Aug 12, 2008 05:47 PM CDT

City Grants Another Extension to Vetter

by Emily Matesic

The developer of a major Green Bay construction project is given yet another lifeline.

A weak housing market forced John Vetter to ask for an extension on the Astor Park condo project, something the city has granted twice already. Today, the city's redevelopment authority granted Vetter yet another extension.

After meeting behind closed doors for almost two hours, Green Bay's redevelopment authority believes waiting a little bit longer for financing for the 50-million dollar project is the right thing to do.

"To break off this relationship when we're $1.5 million, Vetter Denk put into this project I think we're getting closer," says Mayor Jim Schmitt. "We need to continue to work on this together with the city and Vetter Denk."

Mayor Schmitt says the city and the developer believe this is the best project for the waterfront and that's why neither side is willing to walk away, even if the project is taking longer than anticipated.

"The only thing between construction and getting this completed is the money," says Schmitt. "It's not the design, it's not the concept, it's not the use. It sure isn't the developer or the architect. We've just got to find the right combination to get this financed properly."

Finding the right combination could be on the horizon. The developer told the Redevelopment Authority he wants to bring a local investor in to speak with them next week. That meeting will happen on August 19th.

Once again some great work by our local media. Did anyone happen to watch the video on WBAY's website? They show a rendering of River Center and say that is AP.

On a serious note though, that article makes it sound like if the financing is taken care of that they could almost immediately break ground. Was the sales goal ever met? If it wasn't does the private investment just mean that they can go ahead without having a set amount of units sold? Also, how long is this extension for? Another 3 months? I wonder if Robert Sinclair now could take there proposal and try to go forward with it on Site 4?

So who is this big private investor? Who in this city even has an extra 5-10 million to throw at a project like this? Schneider?

Once again some great work by our local media. Did anyone happen to watch the video on WBAY's website? They show a rendering of River Center and say that is AP.

On a serious note though, that article makes it sound like if the financing is taken care of that they could almost immediately break ground. Was the sales goal ever met? If it wasn't does the private investment just mean that they can go ahead without having a set amount of units sold? Also, how long is this extension for? Another 3 months? I wonder if Robert Sinclair now could take there proposal and try to go forward with it on Site 4?

So who is this big private investor? Who in this city even has an extra 5-10 million to throw at a project like this? Schneider?

Did it ever mention that his investors are local? 5-10 million isn't really that much money to finace as collateral. Even if the building took a few years to construct and occupy the costs wouldn't be that great.

I saw the bit on WBAY and to me it appeared that the stars are so close to aligning on this project.... I guess we will wait again.

Was there mention of the childrens museum? Word on the street is that the walls and floor portions are being constructed at spancrete. I have no facts to back that up just something I heard.

I wonder how long the extension is for, or if that will be decided next week.

"The only thing between construction and getting this completed is the money..." That made me laugh. The only thing between me and quitting my job to travel all the time is money as well, so I guess that's close to happening too, right?

In all seriousness, if Vetter is willing to keep working on this, I'd say the city should continue work with him until such time as a more viable plan comes along. Could this Sinclair "plan" be that? Maybe, but for the time being it seems best to keep working away at this.

I saw the bit on WBAY and to me it appeared that the stars are so close to aligning on this project.... I guess we will wait again.



Wasn't it WBAY that said the Grand Union was all set to break ground?

The alternate proposal being considered can only have a positive effect on site 1. This may light a fire under Vetter that time is of the essence and to lock it up soon. Ideally, whatever the counter proposal is for site 1 might be able to be worked into a site 4 proposal or another area in the city. The more big name developers interested in downtown the better.

I may have to call the Appleton Airport my home airport pretty soon. Austin Straubel Intergalactic Airport is hardly an airport anymore with all these cuts. I remember Allegiant flights moved to Appleton, but I don't recall the other airline. Another reason why we should have 1 main airport between APL and GB. Not good guys...

http://www.myfoxnewisconsin.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail?contentId=7200875&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=1.1.1

I'm kind of amazed at how much GRB has fallen in the past year, too. ATW is likely to lose some flights, too, due to higher fuel costs, but not to anywhere near the extent of GRB.

ISTR that OSH was the dominant commercial airport in the Appleton-Oshkosh area as recently as the late 1970s, too. Now, nothing - it's ALL general aviation with an occasional charter today.

FedEx has also recently replaced the two or three 727s that they were using at ATW with a single A-330 - considered a service upgrade.

Now, how long before the powers-that-be get their act together and bring common-carrier rail passenger service back into northeast Wisconsin.....

Mike

I'm kind of amazed at how much GRB has fallen in the past year, too. ATW is likely to lose some flights, too, due to higher fuel costs, but not to anywhere near the extent of GRB.

Now, how long before the powers-that-be get their act together and bring common-carrier rail passenger service back into northeast Wisconsin.....

Mike

They say rising fuel costs are the reason which I can see. They don't say that good ole' management at Austin Straubel decided to jack up their fees yet again so much that I guess it makes more business sense to fly out of Appleton instead. We continue to fund the highways and Autobahn 41 will be as wide as 10 lanes in some stretches, more if you count the merging onramps of 2-3 lanes. :lol: It will cost an estimated $800+ Million for 41 in Winnebago and Brown Counties, amazing.

I agree, bring back the passenger service please. Maybe on a train I won't have to worry about getting caught up in a high speed chase between the police and the perps or people constantly running red lights! This seems to be a growing trend around here. :rant:

I believe the reason why Delta is leaving GRB may have more to do with the soon to be (maybe) merger between Northwest and Delta.

Since NW already has such a stranglehold on GRB with several flights to MSP and DTW (~50% of all traffic), no reason to offer a couple of RJs to Cincinnati. I was sad to see the flight to Atlanta go...

As for Allegiant, sounds more like they make money by doing things on the cheap. When GRB dropped their bargain rate and started charging Allegiant the same rent as everyone else, they left for Appleton.

Continental, well they just started service to GRB at the wrong time. Hard to justify building a new market when fuel costs are twice what they were last year.

The thing to be most concerned about is the health of Midwest. Since they went to all RJs, their numbers out of GRB have been strong. Too bad the airline as a whole isn't so strong.

Another reason Green Bay's flights may have been cut so drastically is they probably have a higher ratio of leisure travelers as opposed to business travelers. Business travelers have less flexibility in when they fly and pay higher rates which are more profitable for the airlines.

One form of public transportation falters (airlines) while another seems to be reviving (streetcars)...From the NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/14/us/14streetcar.html?_r=1&oref=slogin)

C'mon Green Bay....can we just do the streetcar thing?---just a little bit around downtown, then maybe a couple spurs to the Stadium area and Bay Beach? Too expensive! everyone will say. Meanwhile we spend a billion dollars on USH 41and nobody blinks an eye...

Another reason Green Bay's flights may have been cut so drastically is they probably have a higher ratio of leisure travelers as opposed to business travelers. Business travelers have less flexibility in when they fly and pay higher rates which are more profitable for the airlines.

as a business traveler that flies several times a month, I have to tell you that your perception is definitely wrong. Fly in or out of GB on almost any day & you'll see more than 75% of most flights are business travelers

You're right in one way about business travelers having less flexibility--if I have to be somewhere, I have to be there. On the other hand, if flights out of GB get to be significantly more expensive, it won't be long before it's "recommended" to me to fly out of appleton or (ugh) Milwaukee. So in that sense, there is some flexibility. if my boss tells me I have to drive 2 hours because flights cost twice as much.....well....no comment.


On another note, I read here about delta before I read the article. The article specifically says that delta is cutting direct flights, not all flights. I don't fly delta so I don't know what else there is out of GB, but the article on the PG didn't sound like delta was out of GB completely. I also think that the delta/nw merger is a factor here. It looks bad right now because a lot of things are happening at the same time, but I think it's more of a short term adjustment to the high fuel costs than anything.

as a business traveler that flies several times a month, I have to tell you that your perception is definitely wrong. Fly in or out of GB on almost any day & you'll see more than 75% of most flights are business travelers

My opinion, as are others on this subject are purely speculative. It could well be that Delta has more business travelers flying out of GRB than they do out of ATW. But, it does seem that with the tough economic times that airlines are facing, due chiefly to high fuel costs, it will be hard for them justifying flying routes out of two separate airports in what essentially is a one market area. They will most likely decide to go where they have the best profit margin.

My opinion, as are others on this subject are purely speculative. It could well be that Delta has more business travelers flying out of GRB than they do out of ATW. But, it does seem that with the tough economic times that airlines are facing, due chiefly to high fuel costs, it will be hard for them justifying flying routes out of two separate airports in what essentially is a one market area. They will most likely decide to go where they have the best profit margin.


agree 100% with that. Only a couple years ago there was apparently some consideration to either close down the appleton airport & expand GB or to close both & open a new one somewhere in between (I had heard Kimberly). Since then both have been expanded so it's probably not in the cards, & even then it seemed like it would have been a logical move..

My point was that there seems to be a "this is the beginning of the end for Austin Straubel" feeling to some of these posts & I don't see it that way. yes, it has been one of the fastest growing airports recently so it makes sense that it's one that will receive some cut-backs. It will catch back up. People tend to overreact to news good & bad. I think I posted something similar, but I'm sure that some of those people that just took a $hit-kicking when they traded in their Tahoes to buy Prius's (Priuses?) are going to sell them & re-buy the Tahoes once gas gets back down to a "reasonable" (haha!) $3/gallon. Airlines are no different. Just because they're getting out now doesn't mean they won't be back when it makes sense. It's kind of a perfect storm of economic factors right now that makes it nearly impossible for some industries to make money...

Out of curiosity, did anyone else attend that POS get motivated "seminar" at the Resch yesterday? What a piece of crap disappointment..

Out of curiosity, did anyone else attend that POS get motivated "seminar" at the Resch yesterday? What a piece of crap disappointment..

Didn't go the the seminar you speak so fondly of :) ...but I see the legend Brett Favre was a speaker via satellite. What was the deal with the seminar, did they try to sell more motivational products/services once they got you inside?

Didn't go the the seminar you speak so fondly of :) ...but I see the legend Brett Favre was a speaker via satellite. What was the deal with the seminar, did they try to sell more motivational products/services once they got you inside?

every speaker was trying to pitch a product--totally ruined the credibility of the event because you couldn't take it at face value because they were selling...

There were a couple good speakers but overall it was very cheesy, & not was it was advertised to be.

The Favre thing was weird. He was live via satellite, but seemed like he had not been prepped at all on the questions & spent most of his 15 minute interview saying, "uh.........um...............well.........."

Did anyone link to this from Wednesday's Press Gazette (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080813/GPG03/808130529/-1/archive)? That does sound pretty positive. Hopefully we'll find out more on Tuesday. Hopefully this does mean good things. Like others, I'll wait until I start see construction to get too excited, but boy-oh-boy would I be excited.

C'mon Green Bay....can we just do the streetcar thing?---just a little bit around downtown, then maybe a couple spurs to the Stadium area and Bay Beach? Too expensive! everyone will say. Meanwhile we spend a billion dollars on USH 41and nobody blinks an eye...

Setting aside the US-41 expansion, local governments are really hurting at a fundamental level. As MGK has pointed out, overlapping layers of government aren't making things more efficient. But more than that the thing I worry about is the rising fringe benefit costs. Governments can and will do what business everywhere has done, namely increase co-pays, increase deductibles, start wellness programs, etc. The problem is that these cut rates, but do nothing about the trend in rising costs.

We've seen Green Bay do many things to try to reduce costs. Each time it works for a few years, then rates increase past where they were and the city has to try to find somewhere else to cut benefits. There comes a point where you can no longer cut (not that we're there yet necessarily) and you have to decide to eliminate the benefit altogether or to reduce services.

^^well, believe me, I know this is true!
You know I just like to throw the streetcar idea & rail ideas out there. Probably just a pipe dream. However, if I could encroach even just a bit into the "real" world, I would ponder how much of the cost the city would actually have to bear.. there may be some state funds or more likely (like 1% chance) of some federal funding out there to pay for most of the cost of the streetcar capital costs. And you know, they really aren't that expensive when you compare. They're so light, run on existing R/W, and so on--probably the best "bang for your transporation buck" that there is, besides biking & walking.

Well anyway we're screwed one way or another. Sorry my friends but gas prices will never go down below $3 a gallon again, and it won't be long that $4 per gallon will be considered "cheap". I think we've got to figure out other ways to move around. Airplane travel is the least fuel-efficient. Cars are probably 2nd least fuel efficient. We don't seem to have many other choices but to use rail, ships (along with biking & walking).

P.S.
I just got my digital TV thing hooked up...I went to channel 2-3 and what do I hear & See? da da - da da -da da----da-da----da da (the intro song from NIGHT RIDER the show!!) I just had to laugh 'cuz I haven't seen this show in like 20 years...with our very own Night Rider on this board I just thought it was funny....So go to channel 2-3 at 7:00 PM on weeknights if you want to tune in to some quality TV!!

^^P.S.
I just got my digital TV thing hooked up...I went to channel 2-3 and what do I hear & See? da da - da da -da da----da-da----da da (the intro song from NIGHT RIDER the show!!) I just had to laugh 'cuz I haven't seen this show in like 20 years...with our very own Night Rider on this board I just thought it was funny....So go to channel 2-3 at 7:00 PM on weeknights if you want to tune in to some quality TV!!

AWESOME :banana2:

http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2007/11/28/hoff-knight-rider-mustang.jpg

So am I reading this right that the project may still happen as intended, but they will consider other proposals as well? The quote by Jerry Menne, "people seem to can't get over the misconception that it would be a giant slab of concrete from the Resch to the mall that people would have to walk" bothers me. Undoubtedly that area needs to be redeveloped, but I would be disappointed if the Blvd. didn't come to fruition as planned. That is part of an urban environment-that is, being able to walk and not having to DRIVE, uggghh! As mentioned, this will be developer driven, so hopefully potentially interested parties will keep to the theme of the Blvd. as it will be unique and very cool!

http://greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080817/GPG0101/808170679/1978

^^Just goes to show that it's really really tough to do ANYTHING in this city unless it's for cars.

I said a while back that this boulevard plan is pretty cool, but it looks now like it won't happen...or, it'll happen but in a watered-down half-assed way that won't be interesting or special.

"it'll happen but in a watered-down half-assed way that won't be interesting or special."

Would you expect anything less in great old Green Bay?

It's really a drain to be so cynical and negative but gosh dangit how can anyone not be at this point?

It's downright comical how inept these 'leaders' are at getting anything done.

Like I said earlier...one excuse after another.....nobody can come up with a rock solid plan and see it through...constant 'change'......all of these PG articles say the exact same thing..."well..they had wanted to do this but because of excuse #2331 it will now be this...until 6 months go by and we come up with excuse #2332 as to why that idea won't work."

Am I wrong?

Heh, well i think a lot of the blame can be put on the citizens rather than the leaders. Its the leaders that put the ideas out there, but then we ALWAYS read in news articles that some, citizen, thinks "this is a bad idea, it WASTES our money!" It absolutely comes down the money every &%^#in time and sees it as a cost, and doesnt look at anything as an investment in the eyes of these citizens...That is this areas mentality.

When you think about the billions of dollars we spend on roads it's understandable that there isn't much left for much else.

All these roads lead to sprawl--such that everything spreads out so that costs for all other government services skyrocket as well--policing, public works, maintenance, etc.

Give a listen to KunstlerCast_27.mp3 (http://kunstlercast.com/forum/index.php?topic=308.0). These aren't always spot-on but I think these do make some good points that relate to this discussion here.

Is this scheduled meeting tomorrow going to finally be BIG NEWS? Any of you going? If so, fill us in. I'm sure most or all of it will be in closed session.

SPECIAL MEETING
AGENDA

REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF GREEN BAY

Tuesday, August 19, 2008

City Hall, Room 604

4:00 p.m.
MEMBERS: Harry Maier, Chair; Gary Delveaux, Vice-Chair; Jim Blumreich, Dan Dallich, Maria Milano, Matt Schueller, Tom Weber
LIAISON REPRESENTATIVES: Jeff Mirkes
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Approval of the agenda of the August 19, 2008, special meeting of the Redevelopment Authority.
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
1. Discussion and possible action on the Astor Place and River Center projects.

I had a quick question with regards to the RDA meeting tonight. As long as they are not in closed session is it possible for anyone to show up and go in and listen to the meeting?

^^Closed Session you cannot listen to. There could be discussion prior to the session or not. They do report what was decided what occurred during the session.

I had a quick question with regards to the RDA meeting tonight. As long as they are not in closed session is it possible for anyone to show up and go in and listen to the meeting?

Absolutely! RDA is a government entity, and as such all meetings are open to all who wish to attend. As for today's meeting, it will be interesting to see if there's much closed session. You'd think they'd have hacked out most of what they wanted to last time, but we'll see. I think there's entirely too much closed session in general.

I wonder who the mystery investor is. I'm rooting for the mystery investor to be Brett Favre. That would be awesome. People would be sitting in the meeting room and Vetter stands up and says he'd like to introduce their investor, then some techno music starts playing, and in runs Favre wearing his Packers shirt and carrying on of those giant promo checks for like $30 million that he's going to invest in the downtown. The assembled crowd goes wild!!!

I wonder who the mystery investor is. I'm rooting for the mystery investor to be Brett Favre. That would be awesome. People would be sitting in the meeting room and Vetter stands up and says he'd like to introduce their investor, then some techno music starts playing, and in runs Favre wearing his Packers shirt and carrying on of those giant promo checks for like $30 million that he's going to invest in the downtown. The assembled crowd goes wild!!!

It could be! :lol: I know for a fact Brett and his wife are heavily invested in Nicolet National Bank in the tune of over $10 Million. He was just looking at property the other day w/ Donald Trump on a great golf course, Trump National in Westchester (NY).

Absolutely! RDA is a government entity, and as such all meetings are open to all who wish to attend. As for today's meeting, it will be interesting to see if there's much closed session. You'd think they'd have hacked out most of what they wanted to last time, but we'll see. I think there's entirely too much closed session in general.

I wonder who the mystery investor is. I'm rooting for the mystery investor to be Brett Favre. That would be awesome. People would be sitting in the meeting room and Vetter stands up and says he'd like to introduce their investor, then some techno music starts playing, and in runs Favre wearing his Packers shirt and carrying on of those giant promo checks for like $30 million that he's going to invest in the downtown. The assembled crowd goes wild!!!

nah, he doesn't have the money since he passed up that $20 bribe...errrrrr...."marketing deal".

Why don't they name Astor Place - Brett Favre Tower. I am sure there are still people so dedicated to Favre that they would buy a condo in a tower named after him no matter what the costs... Because not to buy would go against him and either you are on Brett's side or the Packers... Morons.:lol:

http://www.prestigeparktowers.com/

I see Prestige Park website is out of commission. Could be just a web thing...but it seemed to be a little unrealistic for this area. Probably a little too high class for Green Bay. I admire his never ending efforts to hit the jackpot. He aims high...

http://prestige.balancestudios.com/

Why don't they name Astor Place - Brett Favre Tower. I am sure there are still people so dedicated to Favre that they would buy a condo in a tower named after him no matter what the costs... Because not to buy would go against him and either you are on Brett's side or the Packers... Morons.:lol:

Even better--buy some property outside of downtown & name it "Ted Thompson Tower". Soon enough someone will burn it down, & with the insurance money we could finally build Astor!!

http://prestige.balancestudios.com/

Thanks for the updated link.


Even better--buy some property outside of downtown & name it "Ted Thompson Tower". Soon enough someone will burn it down, & with the insurance money we could finally build Astor!!

Way funny! I like your approach. :applause:

http://prestige.balancestudios.com/


I'm amazed at the pricing...comparable to what condos in downtown DC are selling for these days...and I think the prices in DC are nuts...let alone Green Bay!

My inflated salary in DC barely is enough to afford something respectable, I find it very hard to believe there are enough people in Green Bay with a high enough income to support even one of these towers.

I love the idea, but maybe starting with something a little smaller would be nice. Condo living is a foreign concept to most Green Bay residents. The condos along the Milwaukee River are absolutely wonderful, and probably more scale appropriate for GB, at least to start.

I'm amazed at the pricing...comparable to what condos in downtown DC are selling for these days...and I think the prices in DC are nuts...let alone Green Bay!

My inflated salary in DC barely is enough to afford something respectable, I find it very hard to believe there are enough people in Green Bay with a high enough income to support even one of these towers.

I love the idea, but maybe starting with something a little smaller would be nice. Condo living is a foreign concept to most Green Bay residents. The condos along the Milwaukee River are absolutely wonderful, and probably more scale appropriate for GB, at least to start.

I didn't even know there were condos in Duck Creek. Huh...and they're expensive?

I didn't even know there were condos in Duck Creek. Huh...and they're expensive?


You're on a roll....unstopable. knock if off! :)

You're on a roll....unstopable. knock if off! :)

I have to admit, I stole that one. A friend of mine would introduce himself & another guy as being from DC & the Twin Cities. That was Duck Creek & Luxemburg-Casco..

On a serious note, I'm out of town so updates from that RDA meeting would be great--this is the only way I can keep up to date when I'm traveling..

I'm pretty sure that that updated link is to a version of the site on the server that belongs to the company that did the web design. It's probably what they were using for testing. When I did web design, I often kept a live copy of the sites I did on my server.

I always thought the prestige project was pretty silly. I especially disliked the name. If you have to name something 'prestige' then you are probably trying to hard. It's not very classy.

Well, another meeting that was basically all in closed session (about an hour and a half this time). They did present an investor, a businessman from Green Bay, but I don't know much about him (such as his name) nor do I know how much the investment would be. The RDA's action was to refer the new details to staff so that they could work out an extension the details of which would be presented to the RDA and the 9/9 meeting. Hopefully there will be more details in the paper tomorrow, and channel 11 was there as well. I'll refrain from editorializing until I've read that.

I'll try to type as I watch:
A small group of local investors may be breathing new life into the projects...River Center & Astor Place --
Details-
the signs have been up 2 years. old younkers still stands unfinished.
Big money from small group of investors
"we're pushing ball uphill on financing level", vetter said.
local investor--Lives in DePere-- Gordy Renn-- Prez of Fox Converting--More to this group. Small group. No papers signed, Not done deal. No committment yet. But are considering it. Huge development. WOrk to do but interest is real, mayor says, securing downpayment. Vetter would not say how much investment is needed, but it's enough to move forward. RiverCenter will start this year. Redevel author meeitng again in 3 weeks. Arch firm from colorado also expressing interest in developing site.

Well, another meeting that was basically all in closed session (about an hour and a half this time). They did present an investor, a businessman from Green Bay, but I don't know much about him (such as his name) nor do I know how much the investment would be. The RDA's action was to refer the new details to staff so that they could work out an extension the details of which would be presented to the RDA and the 9/9 meeting. Hopefully there will be more details in the paper tomorrow, and channel 11 was there as well. I'll refrain from editorializing until I've read that.

Another extension possible! Good Lord how long is Schmitt going to play games here. This town does not have the need nor desire for a 17 story albatross, do something downtown that is more acceptable to the people who live here. Do something with the so called "festival grounds" flatten that mall, expand the confrence center if there is a demand for downtown conventions. Stop plopping bars into vacant buildings, if your gonna have that kind of stuff bring some national chains downtown food/spirits, familes are bound to go to that type of business. Stop trying to make this some kind of huge metro area , Green Bay is not, they need to refocus on small town athmosphere make the downtown come alive with familes, not white collar stuff shirts, it just is not going to work here.

I don't know where you're coming from, gbmphillips. "White collar" people also have families and 'blue collar" people often go out to places that are not Texas Roadhouse. I don't think those terms are very meaningful.

I guess who says we don't have a need or a desire for a 17 story building. If a developer came forward with financing already in place and starting tomorrow ona 20 story building - we would say no - no need for this. This site is too valuable to give and put in a drive thru McDonalds or a sit down restaurant. I don't think we should shut the door on the other proposal, but at the same time if there is progress is this economic climate - that at the very least is promising.

"Another extension possible! Good Lord how long is Schmitt going to play games here. This town does not have the need nor desire for a 17 story albatross, do something downtown that is more acceptable to the people who live here. Do something with the so called "festival grounds" flatten that mall, expand the confrence center if there is a demand for downtown conventions. Stop plopping bars into vacant buildings, if your gonna have that kind of stuff bring some national chains downtown food/spirits, familes are bound to go to that type of business. Stop trying to make this some kind of huge metro area , Green Bay is not, they need to refocus on small town athmosphere make the downtown come alive with familes, not white collar stuff shirts, it just is not going to work here."

I guess I didn't realize that we were one 17 story building away from being Manhattan. A few buildings over 10 stories doesn't automatically mean that it is a big city and that you lose the family feel. As long as they keep a lot of activity on the street level, people, including families, will make there way down there.

GBMPhillips, I do appreciate your opinion though. It is nice to have at least one person in here offering a different view from the rest of us. At the very least it leads to good discussion. I do agree with you though that the mall site needs to be flattened and then developed. I was at Coaches Corner last weekend and afterwards went with some friends to a few places on Washington St. and the KI center area really feels disconnected from the rest of the downtown. Even if they can just open Adams St. up to pedestrians it would be a huge improvement. Hopefully in the future if development continues downtown the city would eventually tear down the Main St. ramp and restore the street grid. Then rebuild a structure similar to the Cherry St. ramp on the JCPenney side of Adams and then the other side (Next to the Days Inn) would be open for another larger structure. Then again this is just a pipe dream.

http://www.myfoxnewisconsin.com/myfox/pages/Business/Detail?contentId=7245392&version=2&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=4.1.1

Near the end of the video it says that River Center will begin this year, slightly ahead of Astor, because RC has more presales than AP. I didn't realize that they were pre-selling units for RC. Are they or is this just another error on the part of our local media?

http://greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080820/GPG0101/808200716/1207/GPG01

There is a picture of AP on the right side of the page. I didnt realize that we were getting a tower on Cass St. as well. Good job PG.

Anyone notice the construction of the ramp retail has started? I saw a flurry of activity there late this afternoon. Have any tenats been announced?

So the way I understand these financing issues are affecting both the RC and Astor. I assume that one outcome could be that the RC moves forward because of the commercial commitment that they have, the Childrens Museum, the Bar and relocated Kavarna. I also assume that there was some sort of parking arrangement with the flats building that will utilize the ramp.

Astor could and will take a back seat to RC- Who even knows where the pre-sales are? Who would commit that long? I am sure if Astor gets built there will be people intersted in living there.

GBMPhillips, I do appreciate your opinion though. It is nice to have at least one person in here offering a different view from the rest of us.


Unfortunately, GBMPhillips' opinion represents the majority of people living in the Green Bay area...

Stop trying to make this some kind of huge metro area , Green Bay is not, they need to refocus on small town athmosphere make the downtown come alive with familes, not white collar stuff shirts, it just is not going to work here.

Hey, "white collar stuff shirts" are people, too! And what about our families?

Even though the transition from manufacturing to service and technology has been slower here than elsewhere, and we are fortunate to still have high-paying jobs in paper and other industries, it will come. Green Bay will have more "shirt-stuffing" (?) and those shirts will want to experience an urban environment.

A vibrant downtown will have a variety of destinations for many different types of people. The children's museum, Neville, and City Deck -- among others -- will bring in families (plus my hoped-for ice rink). Successful urban cores are a democratic mix of classes, ages, ethnicities, and interests. I feel like we're headed in the right direction with what's on the table.

Furthermore, if you look at what was in downtown Green Bay during its heyday, it was the most exclusive department stores, clothiers, prestigious banks, restaurants, cultural institutions, etc. If we have to look at current development down there in a framework of white collar vs. blue collar, then there will probably be less stuff meant to appeal to exclusively 'professional class' people than there was fifty years ago. Personally, I think that the white collar versus blue collar thing is not a useful framework in a community where teachers earn less than electricians. What's being developed (apart from condos that few can afford) is meant to appeal mostly to our middle class which encompasses professions that range from bankers to people who do flooring. A Children's museum? If you've ever been to the one in Appleton, you'll see that it's used by everyone - from recent immigrants from Mexico to the spoiled children of plumbers and professors. A sports Bar? Maybe you find the organic grocery store objectionable for some reason, but I think you'll find that the people who are concerned about healthy food cut across all economic and cultural strata.

If I were to alter the mix of things downtown (which is a silly exercise since it's not how things work in the real world) I'd have fewer luxury condos and fewer bars on Washington St. Vicenzi's alone is probably enough to scare people who might locate businesses down there.

Vicenzi's alone is probably enough to scare people who might locate businesses down there.

The alderman have no backbone in saying NO to liquor establishments if they might fill a empty building. Then they establish these "rules" that bars are supposed to follow or loose their license. When the time comes to enforce the rules, the alderman bend or change the rules to keep the business going. I'm hopeful the sports bar/restaurant will be a nice change of pace & not be another contributor to the downtown alcohol problems. If you want to see another world, go downtown on Friday or Saturday at bar closing. It's a zoo.

We are not a "big city" and I am not interested in us being one. But like others said, one or two MID-RISE 10-20 storey buildings does NOT make us a "big city"

GBMphillips, I do appreciate you coming on here and offering alternate opinions. Don't take this as getting beat up, keep bringing it. I like to examine other perspectives too. I remember once I said something about the river and everyone here started pouncing on me...but it's all good. Open discussion is good. No hard feelings.

Would anyone one mind posting some new pics of Shopko Express, Flats on the Fox (have the railings been installed yet?) and work on the ramp retail? A many, many thanks!

Vicenzi's alone is probably enough to scare people who might locate businesses down there.

not sure what this statement means. I've been out of town, has something happened with Vincenzi's? Did they close or something?

Would anyone one mind posting some new pics of Shopko Express, Flats on the Fox (have the railings been installed yet?) and work on the ramp retail? A many, many thanks!

I posted some pics a few pages back and nothings changed...Shopko looks like it did in all the other pics..some glass was going in last time I was by there otherwise it looks how it looks.

Flats look the same.....

Parking garage retail? Lots of dirt mounds and equipment and fencing.

I'll see if I can snap some pics while I'm at artstreet but really there isn't much of note....the Flats won't get interesting til it's done...same with Shopko.

Vicenzi's is the loudest business that I have EVER come across (and I've lived in urban areas from New York to Chicago). They actually put large speaker cabinets in the doorways and blast terrible music out towards the street. It's actually loud from two blocks away. They also have a flickering light show that's directed outwards. All of this is happening from evening on, pretty much every night of the week. I was down on Washington street around 8 pm recently on a weeknight and I found the atmosphere oppressive. What they're doing is certainly illegal, people are just looking the other way.

I think that the way that downtown is developing, in the evenings/nights, the East side will be for young adults who want to get trashed and Broadway will be for everyone else. I find it kind of upsetting, but the bars on Washington are pretty entrenched and as long as Vicenzi's is there, it's hard to imagine investing money down there in a business that doesn't cater to the young crowd that wants to binge drink. The owners of Kavarna have pretty much decided against moving into the River Center for this and other reasons. They're looking at a building on Broadway now.

Nativist I completely agree with you about Vicenzi's. Once inside its not much better either. I was unfortunately dragged in there twice with some people I was with and the first time I was in there a large fight broke out and the second time someone was smoking weed in the bathroom. Granted this can happen at any establishment on Washington St. but just the overall feeling inside Vicenzi's is that something is about to go down at any second. In a perfect world that whole building would be demolished and the street grid would be restored, but I guess all we can hope for is that something else eventually takes Vicenzi's place in the Baylake Center.

Were did you hear that about Kavarna? Was the only reason given that Vicenzi's was there or were they just getting tired of waiting for River Center to begin construction. That really is too bad. It would have been nice to be able to enjoy a cup of coffee and sit on the "City Deck"

Straight from the owner: the timeline doesn't work for them anymore, they're also pretty sour on John Vetter. They want to have the kind of place that absolutely anyone would feel comfortable going to at night, and the Washington St. scene is a big turn off. Vicenzi's is just the biggest offender. I can't blame them. They're looking at various options on Broadway, wouldn't say which.

I think that Green Bay needs a nightclubbin' district, all cities do. Boston has Lansdowne street, Chicago has several, NYC has a lot. I just wish Green Bay's wasn't on Washington St. The development of a downtown depends on lots of little decisions by individual business owners and investors who have to weigh their risk. The drunken rowdiness makes downtown less appealing. In the end, it will probably end up being that that area will be business/family oriented during daylight, and more alcohol oriented after dark. That won't work for some businesses who would otherwise be drawn to it.

GBMphillips, I do appreciate you coming on here and offering alternate opinions. Don't take this as getting beat up, keep bringing it. I like to examine other perspectives too. I remember once I said something about the river and everyone here started pouncing on me...but it's all good. Open discussion is good. No hard feelings.
I married into a family of teachers, lawyers and medical professionals. Being a conservative with that bunch I have developed thick skin over the years, so don't worry, I don't feel beat up here. :) (yet)

As for my opinon, I do support Green Bay growth, I would love to see some building(s) of size downtown, it would be nice when guest come to Green Bay and we are standing downtown they would not ask, "so where exactly is the downtown". It just seems like while Vetters has gotten a couple of projects down there, this main anchor seems to be a real problem for him. He has been given a number of extensions and each one never really solves anything. I would like to see the city maybe say, ok lets just see what else we may be out there, while they are waiting for Vetter. Another reason I am a little miffed with Vetter is that he said the only way HIS project would go through is if we built the now infamous city deck project, he said it was a necessity in order for him to do his projects. While not a big fan at the beginning of that idea, and still not jumping for joy about the deck, I do believe it will be an asset, the city has come through with their end and Vetter is still dragging his feet.

Now yes the economy may not be the best at the time to try and sell $1.5 mil condos downtown, so that is why I say, maybe we need to look around and maybe for now see what else people may be willing to do down there.

Sometimes I jump with both feet into the fire before I fully engage how badly I am going to get burnt, but I will always admit when I may have been wrong ......its just so rare I have to do that. :bash:

PS I am not one of them der 4 year college grads, just work in logistics, so I may not always be the most coherent either. :nuts:

Well the mall continues to frustrate me. Even the part that was "redeveloped". I mean, when the downstairs first opened up as the high school cafeteria (Zeppelins and stuff) I thought, well, I guess it's OK. I went there once in a while. But then that mysteriously closed after such a short time. Now this Vicenzi's thing guts pretty much all of the cafeteria and puts in a nightclub. I went there once...not for me. Sure it's fine there is a whole bunch of workers in teh BayLake part & upstairs part but none of it has ever really impressed me. Now the "civic square" idea that Danillo posted might be nicer than the parking lot in front, but given that this square will be flanked by this ugly building on one side and the hideous parking ramp on the other, it's just not going to be much. Well I complain too much I guess.

By the way--the shroud was removed from the old Reiser's Diamond Vault (soon to be Chewy's Steakhouse). They left the cool stained glass transom windows but really changed the other parts of the front. I can kinda understand why, given the new purpose of this place. The doorway isn't as deep and instead of the large storefront windows they put in smaller windows behind some planters. THere's also a window showing off a standpipe. Check it out at Artstreet this weekend and let me know what you guys think of it.

Selected thoughts:

I'll have to check out Vicenzi's sometime. I've not heard the loudness, that sounds pretty bad and like something where existing laws need to be enforced. One the plus side, I was down there one evening and they had a duo signing outside there and I thought it really made for a nice atmosphere, but it wasn't overly loud either.

In general, the bars on Wash. St. don't bug me. I think most keep things reasonably under control, and the drunkeness doesn't seem to start until after families have left.

As for Astor Place, in May they said that Vetter had a month to attract investors. Two months later, he was able to produce one individual who MIGHT invest. If he needs a month maximum to try to firm that up, I guess I can live with that, but at this point Vetter saying that he's closing in on anything regarding Astor Place lacks credibility.

Meanwhile, during closed session on Tuesday, I had time to talk to Paul De Leeau from Sinclaire. He seems very excited about his proposal, and from what I gather it would be very urban and suit that site as well as Astor would. I don't know a lot about this firm other than what Paul told me, but from the sounds of it they know what they're doing, and had many significant projects going around the country. So whether this plan is better than Astor or not nobody can say until further investigation, but it's certain that unless Vetter can produce something in the near-term, the site should be made available for whichever project is better and more feasible.

That is disappointing with Kavarna. It feels as if every time there is a little momentum (possible investors stepping forward) going, you later hear something that bums you out. Even more so because this place is established and would instantly draw many patrons. I also loved the renders with KaVarna (the signage and everything). I hope that they can find someone else that substantial to fill that spot. Gosh, I want some good news, like a "BREAKING, Riverfront development secures investment." It needs to happen now!

Is the ramp really that hideous? Thoughts?

I thought that 'Chewy's' was to be the 'The Republic?'

Danillo-What is your take on the Kavarna news?

I really cannot believe that there are not any establishments that cater to trail users. on any given day there are thousands of users on the trail alone. If there was a destination I am sure traffic would increase. Even a simple coffee shop, a small deli, an ice cream shop. The buzz is close, but not on the trail. I really liked the location of Kavarna in the RC plan. The City deck is a neat idea if it gets built, but what will make it a destination will be the business located around it. The city is missing the boat with riverfront development. Nicolet bank is a nice looking building but it is so elevated which really deactivates the area. The Riverfront lofts offers a large wall to conceal parking but no action. Hopefully whatever happens to rivercenter it will incorporate some retail.

I hope the weather holds out for Art Street. If I remember I will take a few pic, the balconies of the flats seem pretty cool.

You're right, it's the Republic steak house.

I hate that north side of the parking ramp, it's where most of the car traffic comes in & out. I think its nasty, trying to walk past this part along the sidewalk is not good--cars, blind spots, people fumbling with parking tickets and change as they drive out of the ramp. Pedestrians are going to get run over here. As far as the visuals--it has this dark cavernous cold dank concrete. Typical though I guess. Parking is just never "good" no matter how you slice it.

I'm also very disappointed to hear about Kavarna not moving into RC. It seems as though this was a done deal and then nothing happened.

Does anyone know if that organic store is still signed on?

As far as nobody catering to trail users--that is odd. Danillo should get his bike shop up & running, mix in some refreshments and he'll be raking in the dough. Right. By the way, I've seen his custom bike...It is sweeeeet. I think he said he did the custom paint job...rarely do you see a bike this nice. It's like the bikes on that TV show about motorcycles (orange county choppers) only his bicycle is that nice.

Will be posting shortly.

Fellas-

I talked to Jen K. again for about 45 minutes tonight. Before I start, yes I am a 28 year old guy making a phone call on a Friday night about downtown Green Bay development:lol: Just so you know, I am ok with this:) The fiance is out of town and while watching the Pack get back on track, I started to think about some things and talked to Jen. I came away with this-it is time to open up Site 1. Like Danillo said, unless something is concrete by the next RDA, we could be missing the boat on what sounds like a truly outstanding project.

I am just going to start by what she had to say about Robert Sinclaire's proposal. Again, she could not send me any renders or divulge too much, but that is understandably so and I respect that. However, she did mention a few tidbits that sound cool. She is a very, very nice lady and was willing to take the time to talk about downtown and her excitement. She is a big-time enthusiast as well and I really appreciated her thougts. Anyways, the dirt. The building is projected at 12 stories. It will be wider than Astor and also not angled, but moved more north. This is too give more sunlight and views for both Flats on the Fox and their proposal. The architect on the project, the gentleman from Green Bay ( I forgot his name of off the top of my head) is very detailed and intricate on this project and it will be very urban. I guess he is combining some of the elements with old Green Bay, along with materials that will complement the boardwalk. It will include a fitness facility like Astor, ground floor retail and the organic store. The organic store, I believe that she mentioned floors 3 & 4 would have the green rooftop (again, like Astor) and the 10th floor would also have a green rooftop for private residents. The roof on the 12th floor would have some type of an angular, pointed design (triangle meeting at the point). Here is the thing that I thought was awesome. There will be reflective glass on the building that when you move across the fox, or the sun shines hit on it, artwork will appear out of the glass. We have talked about something that is distinctly unique for the riverfront and I believe this is it.

She mentioned this developer has a strong marketing team, a true passion for doing something special in Green Bay, a strong background and financing. She wants something done. That is, she wants presales in 3-6 months and construction in 7. She mentioned this needs to be done now since you don't want construction detering people from a finished boardwalk. I asked her if they will get the opportunity to present their proposal and as of now, they have to wait. The city is giving Mr. Vetter more time and she is frustrated since after three years there is 'progress' to keep getting extensions, but feels now it is time to do or don't, simple as that. Jen mentioned it was her suggestion for the organic store on Astor and they do not have the marketing that Robert Sinclaire has. This is huge because she feels that will pull in the presales. They have the definate answers for prospective buyers and this will portray credibilty and confidence.

I asked her what would happen if Vetter came through and she said there is no definate plan for that, but there are other opportunities downtown. She said they may consider Site 4, but that is more for a company and their focus is on Site 1. I had to thank her and to pass the message on to the developer for their work and that I hope no matter what, they will work in downtown. Jen said that Robert Sinclaire Arch. was phenomenal and they are on a mission and have a plan. I hope!

We talked about River Center a little as well. She wished that these were seperate projects and I agreed. Financing and progress would be a heck of a lot easier. She really liked the Children's Museum (this is a major development). She thoughts Flats on the Fox wasn't bad, but it is obviously not as sharp because demo was started on the warehouse and left. In her words, it 'looks like it was bombed.' Jen said that it would look better, granted the warehouse portion is complete and when the boardwalk is done, but wondered why it was just left like that. I think this makes for a negative perception. This needs to get done, now-bottom line. She did not have any answers for the River Center though. She was a big fan of the original renders of the River Center (the modern looking, glass structure) but was pleasantly surprised with how the interior of the flats look. She would live there and mentioned the design and quality of the interior at the affordable rates was again, a pleasant surprise. They are attracting a diverse group with elderly to the young professionals and she said that these were good, quality people. That is all for now, whooh! If I can think of anything else I will post. Again, I appreciated her taking the time to talk and she is working hard with people, but it sounds like she was hamstrung by a lot of things out of her control. I hope this changes.

Go Green Bay^^

Morse, you're SUCH a LOSER!!! Cool people are out on Friday nights getting shitfaced and stoned on a night like this!!! Why were'nt you at Viscenzi's?? What the hell's the matter with you??? :lol:

Thanks for the scoop, once again. We all apprecaite it!! Something else to hold at least a bit of promise, though I wonder how this next project will get the financing.........Sounds interesting though, that's for sure

Danillo-What is your take on the Kavarna news?

Well, that was as much news to me as to anyone else. I guess it continues a trend of business unveiled as having interest in one of the projects and then backing out because they can't wait forever.

The city is missing the boat with riverfront development. Nicolet bank is a nice looking building but it is so elevated which really deactivates the area. The Riverfront lofts offers a large wall to conceal parking but no action.

To be fair, both projects, particularly Nicolet Bank, predate the boardwalk plan. I think Nicolet would certainly have built differently had they known what would be coming. What I don't understand is why Nicolet didn't put the tower on the Cherry St. corner, as it was always evident that Site 4 would be developed at some point.

By the way, I've seen his custom bike...It is sweeeeet. I think he said he did the custom paint job...rarely do you see a bike this nice. It's like the bikes on that TV show about motorcycles (orange county choppers) only his bicycle is that nice.

Thanks! :tyty:

Sinclair Proposal

Morse, the details you've given seem to agree with what I know about the project (which they should considering Jen knows a lot more about it than I do). It think it's a really good project. Not sure it would work on site 4 at all, so as Jen said I doubt they could just move it there, although a case could be made that if Sinclair proposed for site 4 and were successful, that may help the city move on at site 1.

Regarding the idea that River Center and Astor Place are tied together as a project, I'm highly bothered by that. I was told two years ago by Vetter himself that River Center had enough equity from the state grants for the rental portion to proceed even without presales, that it was financially that solid. Now I understand that economies change, but if he's now indicating that RC and AP are tied together I think that's being at least a bit disingenuous. AP has no momentum, and while it may make sense for Vetter to tie it with RC to seek investment, I don't think this does the city any good.

At this point, even if AP gets investment, I think at the least it needs a new name and new renderings so it can be marketed anew, as I just don't see how a three year old plan is going to suddenly regain momentum unless the amount of investment is so great that construction can begin, which I don't understand is going to be the case. Opening the site up to look at the Sinclair proposal would breath new life into that site, and I'd bet make River Center more attractive as well.

As I said, I'd give him one month MAX to prove that he can make significant progress, beyond that he should compete in a free market to make the best proposal for the site.

To be clear, I don't think Vetter's a bad guy or is trying to screw the city over or anything. His job is to worry about his proposals and his business, and I give him a lot of credit for the work he's done here and what he's brought to the downtown. It's the city's role to set up the framework in which he works. I think developers should be given every opportunity to make their project successful, but at some point the city needs to decide that exclusive access to a site for one developer is no longer in the city's best interest. Sometimes you just have to say thanks but we need to take a look and see what else is out there. It's not about kicking Vetter to the curb, but about seeing if something more viable is out there after 3 years.

Danillo-I competely agree with you about finding it bothersome that these projects are tied together. In our talk, I got the impression that the investment group for the Riverfront was mostly interested in the River Center portion. I am not going to claim to have any inside info, because I absolutley don't. Making this project a joint venture (combining RC and AP) is a good business move on Mr. Vetters part because it allows him to 'keep hold' on Site 1. I don't think this is good for Green Bay either. I do not see it having any momentum either. Again, I think his work for downtown has been very commendable because his ideas have at the very least opened up eyes of what is possible. He seems to aim high, and Jen said as much. However, at this point I just wished that River Center getting finished would be the priority. To use a football analogy lets open Site 1 for competition (ala Aaron Rodgers vs. Brett Favre-sorry, I couldn't resist, haha). Downtown needs the momentum. This would be good for several reasons. Competition (at least to those are driven) brings out the best in everyone. If Sinclaire has something that can get done now-outstanding. But like Danillo says, maybe this makes Vetter come back and say I am not going down without a fight, I will make some changes for renewed interest. I also like this because obviously someone else's architecture will add a new dynamic to the riverfront. Rather than the majority of it being designed by one group, this can make it more interesting. Like Jen said, something needs to get done now and to coincide with the Boardwalk. Now, the Boardwalk starts next month, RC gets completed, Site 1 is developed (Sinclaire), T Wall starts on the mall in 2009, holy smokes! Couple this with Larsen Green, and the proposals on the table getting done and downtown will be night and day in two years. Now you have momentum and someone else comes in and says I want Site 4, maybe Steve at Bellin does the Daily Planet (again, his 4 story proposal with the green reflective glass similar to Thrivent in Appleton sounds very cool, though I would prefer not to see the skywalk to Bellin), Port Plaza Towers has interest, maybe you build a new YMCA downtown and refurbish the current building, some smaller infill, the Federal Courthouse-talk about big changes! Maybe I am way off base, but I think this all starts up front (the riverfront). Green Bay strikes me as a city that has to see to believe and will build off of momentum and others getting the ball rolling. If Sinclaire can do this, you have to let them at least try. Jen said that they are working very hard on the proposal, but it was very important for them to have a good relationship with the city. She didn't elaborate, but reading between the lines I think they would wait there turn and be respectful to Vetter Denk, but I worry that waiting to long will make them change their mind. She said that if nothing got done, there was some ideas for Ashwaunbenon. Jen said that their is a 'great hunger' for an downtown urban environment and that she is getting more calls than ever for this. The time is now fellas and I truly hope that this gets done right!

Go Green Bay!

Thank you for those mentioning that they may get some pics at Art Street. That would be cool.

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&layer=c&cbll=44.517526,-88.019474&panoid=3vDVr4dRLdt68p_2x3ielQ&cbp=1,126.05257983169053,,0,-2.3754169050457245&ll=44.51882,-88.020031&spn=0.002371,0.004125&z=18

You think this site on Museum Place is a possible location for a future development? Obviously they would have to work the veterans, since I think there is a monument near the edge of the property. It would have a great view of the river with a museum next door. Just something to throw out there.

In case you can't open the link correctly, it's the property located between the museum & the river's edge apartments.


***I seem to have more luck opening up the link if I hold down the Ctrl key and hit the link (instead of just clicking on it)

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&layer=c&cbll=44.517526,-88.019474&panoid=3vDVr4dRLdt68p_2x3ielQ&cbp=1,126.05257983169053,,0,-2.3754169050457245&ll=44.51882,-88.020031&spn=0.002371,0.004125&z=18

You think this site on Museum Place is a possible location for a future development? Obviously they would have to work the veterans, since I think there is a monument near the edge of the property. It would have a great view of the river with a museum next door. Just something to throw out there.

In case you can't open the link correctly, it's the property located between the museum & the river's edge apartments.


***I seem to have more luck opening up the link if I hold down the Ctrl key and hit the link (instead of just clicking on it)

Don't quote me on this but I recall hearing that at some point in the future that land would serve as the expansion land for the museum.

There was a article in the paper today regarding the development of "party houses" around lambeau field. The following is a small part of that article.

Alderman Chris Wery, who represents the area, doesn’t like those types of uses.

“If they use the houses for friends and family, that’s fine. But any time you start charging people, or renting out to people you don’t know, you’re asking for problems,” he said.

Of course this time it's not downtown, but here the city has investors driving up property values around lambeau, not causing any problems. Probably the best neighbor one could ask for (only around 10 weekends a year) & now you got a alderman complaining about it. This is from the same city that has way to many slumlords that actually generate police calls. The city seems to be OK with any other house being turned into a rental. From the same city that in the past was OK with dividing up these nice single family houses into a four or six rental unit. It seems their priorities are way out of whack.

I'm sure when it comes to accepting the increase in taxes because of the property value rising, they will take it with open arms and spend it even faster.

You think this site on Museum Place is a possible location for a future development? Obviously they would have to work the veterans, since I think there is a monument near the edge of the property. It would have a great view of the river with a museum next door. Just something to throw out there.

I'm not sure about that site. First, it's a Veteran's Parkway, so you can't just move it (as you pointed out). Beyond that, given it's location behind the museum, and separated from Broadway by a road, railroad tracks, an alley, parking, and the Broadway facing buildings, it isn't like it's an integral part of the On Broadway district. The plan for the west side of the river there calls for removing the stone banking, replacing that with wetland terraces, and having that side be green and more natural. Also, a boat dock with a trail through that site could link the river back towards Broadway.

I don't want to sound like I'm jumping all over the idea, but in this case I think a parkway is actually the highest and best use for the site, and if it can honor Vets at the same time, all the better. Now, on the other hand, someday replacing the River's Edge apartments with something more urban would be nice, but that's a long way off and behind many other priorities.

Of course this time it's not downtown, but here the city has investors driving up property values around lambeau, not causing any problems. Probably the best neighbor one could ask for (only around 10 weekends a year) & now you got a alderman complaining about it. This is from the same city that has way to many slumlords that actually generate police calls. The city seems to be OK with any other house being turned into a rental. From the same city that in the past was OK with dividing up these nice single family houses into a four or six rental unit. It seems their priorities are way out of whack.

I'm sure when it comes to accepting the increase in taxes because of the property value rising, they will take it with open arms and spend it even faster.

I'm not sure about this. The people who bought houses there did so with the reasonable expectation that the area was zoned for residential and would remain so. And there's more to life then having the value of your home rise. I don't know that much about what the "party houses," but I'm not sure I'd be so thrilled to have one next door. Heck, maybe they'd be fine, but as important as growth is, protecting neighborhoods is important as well. As I said, I don't know a ton about the specifics, so I'm sort of playing devil's advocate here, but I can certainly understand why people may be opposed.

I'm not sure about this. The people who bought houses there did so with the reasonable expectation that the area was zoned for residential and would remain so. And there's more to life then having the value of your home rise. I don't know that much about what the "party houses," but I'm not sure I'd be so thrilled to have one next door. Heck, maybe they'd be fine, but as important as growth is, protecting neighborhoods is important as well. As I said, I don't know a ton about the specifics, so I'm sort of playing devil's advocate here, but I can certainly understand why people may be opposed.

I don't disagree with you. I just wish the city would have a consistent view on turning houses into rentals. There are some older, more crime ridden areas that have nice houses with respectable people. When the homeowners pass away or move, many of these are being bought to be turned into rentals. I would guess the people in these older neighborhoods would like to have the rentals stop also. But I don't hear any mention of it happening or being investigated. You could consider a lot of the rentals "party houses", because they don't go to work and seem to party quite often, not just packer game days. Thanks for replying Danillo!

I had forgotten all about the wetlands portion on the west side of the river. The plan is for it to start with City Deck, correct?

pgrimmer-If you still frequent this board, have you heard anything more with T Wall? Will there be construction in 09'?

Anyone get pics from the weekend?

Thanks!

You think this site on Museum Place is a possible location for a future development? Obviously they would have to work the veterans, since I think there is a monument near the edge of the property. It would have a great view of the river with a museum next door. Just something to throw out there.Absolutely NO! That memorial is a wonderful addition to that area and to move it would be a disgrace to the men and women it is dedicated to. I can guarantee nothing else will EVER be built there.

^^I have to agree here. Leave the memorial park as is. This is all built on "fill land", formerly part of the river/swampy. The park/memorial is nice as is. I think the plan as shown below, in the currently adopted downtown plan, is good.

http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o52/Puant/BoardwalkPlanPlanimetric.jpg

That's cool, I had no idea that they were doing anything on the West Bank...

ADDITIONALLY: I've been thinking that the connection needs to be strengthened at least visually for pedestrians between the river banks. The Walnut bridge needs to be made more inviting. One way to do this would be to create a series of placards along the Northern edge of the bridge that showed the development of downtown GB as a timeline, or something historical about the city. The city of Boston has a really cool Freedom Trail thing where you follow this red line embedded in the sidewalks all over the older part of the city and it conveys the tourist from historical site to historical site, kind of a self-guided tour of the city.

As a long time viewer of this form I thought it would be interesting to join the discussion. I have lived and worked in downtown for many years. I lived on the near east side for a long time, I was the second person to rent an apartment in the Washington Square apartments when it was built and I operated a computer store / ISP located downtown for several years.

Recently I purchased an old house on the near west side and have been slowly updating it (it needs a lot of work).

My wife and I walk almost every day and a large part of our walks takes us over the bridge. I can honestly say that during the winter I can't stand walking over the bridge. I find this to be a big dividing point between the east/west sides of the river.

I really wish there was a way to make the crossing easier during the winter such as regular trolley service between the two sides.

I do however love the idea of a self guided tour as a reason to take the trip.



ADDITIONALLY: I've been thinking that the connection needs to be strengthened at least visually for pedestrians between the river banks. The Walnut bridge needs to be made more inviting.

WELCOME ABOARD TO THE FORUM!

I really wish there was a way to make the crossing easier during the winter such as regular trolley service between the two sides.


Maybe this would work to get across the river?

http://pics4.city-data.com/cpicc/cfiles21272.jpg

^^ HAHAHAHAHA... You'd have to pry the frozen corpses of the people who decided to ride that in the winter off once they crossed the river!