Green Bay Development News

[i_am_hydrogen]

...continued from the previous thread.

Here's a link to the old thread:

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=333289

[GBSurveyor]

I have to admit that I frequent chain restaurants, mostly because of convenience and close proximity to where I live, more so now with kids. Many of the local establishments that we used to enjoy are just too Smokey. With friends in the Appleton area we have been dining down there more now with the smoking ban, we have been able to go to places that we wouldn't go before. Anyways I think that chains bring along with them the level of consistency that many people like. I am sure downtown would welcome any investment, chain or not, one of the main reasons chains locate where they do is based on traffic counts alone. And unless you work downtown you probably don't go there for much else. I just really think that we are blessed to have establishments like Titletown and Hinterland.

[Emerald City]

Not to get off the topic, but as we had anticipated no construction has started by Vetter on Astor Place or River Center by the end of our 2nd thread. Here's to hoping there will be a foundation by the end of our 3rd. :scouserd: For all the discussing we do about development maybe we should all start our own firm to get things moving.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Looks like there is some real potential for this with a lot of business owner input.

Businesses put in driver's seat

City offers 'blank canvas' on project

By Paul Srubas

Military Avenue, on the short list for major road construction, is ripe for major development that could make it a retail strip to rival Ashwaubenon's Oneida Street, city officials told business owners Wednesday night.

City officials met Wednesday with about 40 business owners at Kennedy Elementary School to ask their help in developing a vision and strategy for the retail district.

"Many times, we're criticized for coming out with a complete plan," Public Works Director Carl Weber told the group. "This time, we're coming in with a blank canvas."

The road, built in 1952 and resurfaced in 1972, was scheduled for another resurfacing recently, but that project was scrapped when engineers discovered that the original bed of concrete was reduced practically to gravel at many of the joints, said Ed Wiesner, director of engineering for the city.

That means resurfacing wouldn't last long enough to make it economically feasible, he said. Therefore, the city must make plans to reconstruct the road, a project planned for 2009-10.

While that will provide at least an inconvenience for business traffic during construction, it also provides an opportunity, Mayor Jim Schmitt said. He joined aldermen John Vander Leest and Steven Deneys, the representatives of the area, in calling for business owners and residents to volunteer for a steering committee.

The committee, when it forms, will advise the city on the needs and desires of Military Avenue businesses both for access considerations during construction and for a vision for the future — to determine the look, the atmosphere of the retail strip and, perhaps, develop a unified business strategy. It may recommend forming a business improvement district, tax increment financing district or some other strategy for redevelopment and encouraging new business.

Rest of Article http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061026/GPG0101/610260553/1978

It may take some time, but a plan is better than no plan.

[Bartles53]

If you could make an axis and on one side indicate how much traffic volume passes through an area and on the other side indicate how ugly an area is, I think the area surrounding Military and Mason would stand out as being the most in need of a makeover in Green Bay. That area is embarrassingly hideous. The strip malls are straight trashy. With as much traffic as passes through there I would suspect that with a couple fresh coats of paint, that spot could eventually begin to resemble Oneida. And if they do a great job on the streetscape and implement the business improvement district, it could potentially blow away the Oneida scene. I'm glad they're going at this with some sort of master plan. This project is long overdue and I'm happy to see it happen.

[gbmphillips]

Why is Oneida Street the benchmark people use? A mall, a bunch of little strip malls , ton of ugly neon lighting fats food after fast food.....not sure what makes that all that apealing and any better than Military Ave.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Oneida is used as the benchmark because the amount of commercial development, not so much the look. To me Oneida is as hideous as Military, save for maybe a little newer buildings. Getting landscaping in, banners, and lighting would go a long way in making the street look better, but the businesses have to buy in to improve the look of the actual users to attract customers. There is a lot we can learn from Oneida, but I think the goal should be to learn from more of the negative aspects of it.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Okay, just read the minutes from the Special RDA Meeting regarding River Center and Astor Place updates. I feel a little bit better. Reservations should be converted to sales contracts by Thanksgiving for Astor, and both projects may be under construction at the same time. Wow, talk about going from nothing to something, heh? Again, When they both start rising up I will feel a lot better, but it is nice to know that by January we should have seen some major beginning progress. FINALLY!

RDA 10/23 Minutes

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

[downtownVital.org]

Why is Oneida Street the benchmark people use? A mall, a bunch of little strip malls , ton of ugly neon lighting fats food after fast food.....not sure what makes that all that apealing and any better than Military Ave.

The answer: $$$

I'm with you, Oneida in unwalkable and unattractive. Once again, Ashwaubenon is ahead of the curve here. Green Bay is trying to emulate Oneida St., while at the same time Ashwaubenon is trying to make the Oneida St./Holmgren Way corridor more urban, walkable, and attractive with their boulevard plan. I guess we'll see what they come up with for Military, hopefully it will only be like Oneida in terms of tax base.

[Puant]

4Life: Thanks for linking to those RDA minutes. Made me feel better. The projects will still garner $56 million in assessed value, combined, when finished. From a taxpayer standpoint, that's pretty sweet considering those 2 parcels generate nothing in tax revenue right now.

ONe of the many reasons I believe in Downtown: Here we'll see $56 million in value on just 2 acres of land. Consider: to get to $56 million in assessed value on your typical suburban sprawled-out subdivision, it would require hundreds of parcels built on hundreds of acres with 3-4 miles of streets.

[Clashman]

I have to admit that I frequent chain restaurants, mostly because of convenience and close proximity to where I live, more so now with kids. Many of the local establishments that we used to enjoy are just too Smokey. With friends in the Appleton area we have been dining down there more now with the smoking ban, we have been able to go to places that we wouldn't go before. Anyways I think that chains bring along with them the level of consistency that many people like. I am sure downtown would welcome any investment, chain or not, one of the main reasons chains locate where they do is based on traffic counts alone. And unless you work downtown you probably don't go there for much else. I just really think that we are blessed to have establishments like Titletown and Hinterland.

The problem with chains is that often they come and go with the traffic counts, and they have no real interest in keeping their development local. I mean, that's precisely what lead to the flight from downtown in the first place. We tore up all of the buildings and businesses that made downtown unique so we could have a mall full of chain restaurants, which jumped ship for Ashwaubenon as soon as they saw that they could squeeze a few extra dollars out of Oneida. Big chain restaurants have next to zero real investment in the community, and as such they're quick to leave. If you look at the way Broadway has managed to revitalize itself, they didn't do so by asking Chipotle to do it for them. I really think that an over-reliance on chains would just be setting the city up for a repeat of the Port Plaza Mall collapse another 10-15 years down the road.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

I understand the fact that people view chains as having no real tie to the community. The successful local restaurants have carved out their own special niche. But out of town people and many residents still associate with name recognition. Still others are attracted to the city because they see familiar establishments that are available elsewhere. Local restaurants and chains can coexist - I do believe there is enough people to frequent both. Besides, if a chain is going to locate here anyway, I would rather it be here in Green Bay than in one of the burbs. Besides, I recall the mall having Subway, McDonald's, The Crockery Restaurant, to name a few associated with it. I don't believe Subway or McDonald's is going away from the community as they are everywhere. It was more of the retail aspect of the mall that drove the original development. As far as the new restaurants going in the Baylake Building. Good. It is good for competition and choice. Local restaurants need to set themselves apart in terms of quality, service, and variety. That's the main reason people will seek out those restuarants, eat there, and recommend them. If people ask me where to eat when they come to Green Bay, I point to local restaurants first, but frequently get asked where the nearest Friday's or Hooter's is. It is just the way of the world. We have enough issues in Green Bay to start telling TGI Friday's or Chipotle that they are not welcome downtown.

[Bay2Bay]

There is a place for chain restaurants. Some people do like them. They're not very adventuresome nor do they raise the culinary bar; but, they are familiar. Someone visiting Green Bay from a larger metro area could probably care less if there is a TGIF or Olive Garden. Someone visiting from a smaller town across Wisconsin or the U.P. would probably find it to be a treat.

[GBSurveyor]

I understand the fact that people view chains as having no real tie to the community. The successful local restaurants have carved out their own special niche. But out of town people and many residents still associate with name recognition. Still others are attracted to the city because they see familiar establishments that are available elsewhere. Local restaurants and chains can coexist - I do believe there is enough people to frequent both. Besides, if a chain is going to locate here anyway, I would rather it be here in Green Bay than in one of the burbs. Besides, I recall the mall having Subway, McDonald's, The Crockery Restaurant, to name a few associated with it. I don't believe Subway or McDonald's is going away from the community as they are everywhere. It was more of the retail aspect of the mall that drove the original development. As far as the new restaurants going in the Baylake Building. Good. It is good for competition and choice. Local restaurants need to set themselves apart in terms of quality, service, and variety. That's the main reason people will seek out those restuarants, eat there, and recommend them. If people ask me where to eat when they come to Green Bay, I point to local restaurants first, but frequently get asked where the nearest Friday's or Hooter's is. It is just the way of the world. We have enough issues in Green Bay to start telling TGI Friday's or Chipotle that they are not welcome downtown.
Once you mentioned the Crockery, I started to reminise a bit about Port Plaza, I spent a great deal of my childhood there, and it dosen't seem that long ago that I would go chrsitmas shopping with the guys and we would always make a stop at Diamond Dave's and have a few tall ones. Ah the good ol days... at least in my life time. I dont know if anyone had a chance to check out the old Pranges window displays when they still had windows, but last year when the Neville Museum had many of the snow babies on display for the christmass season, I overheard many, many peolpe talk about the old storefront displays, it was a family event to walk around and view a different display each year, my mom said that many people would go to view the snow babies and then go over to Kapps (not sure on the spelling). It was like a tradition.
I don't know if they ever will be a specticle like that again but I sure hope we can improve on our downtown and someday I can spend a christmas season with my family enjoying the simpler things in life... without having to pay $ to have a picture with santa. Peace

[Puant]

edited

[Green Bay roots]

i saw on Commercialhorizons.com that the regency center downtown is for sale for 16 million dollars. do you think a renovation or redevelopment opportunity is on the brink if a developer or major financial backer comes in? any thoughts on what this may mean if we have one more building for sale downtown?

[GBSurveyor]

I find it intersting that the Regency is for sale. Does anyone know if there is a connection in ownership with the Hotel/Office end of it??? There are seperate owners for each parcel.
I often wonder what is going on with WPS, or whatever there new name is going to be. They have been spending a ton of money on developing some of the best surface parking there is in Green Bay, does anyone know if they lease out office space in the regency??
Also wondering if there has been any word on the street in regards to the KI expansion.

I'm still waiting for the day of the iminant destruction to commence on the Younkers Building. So if I understand the RDA minutes, the Vetter group plans to completely take down the oldest most historic portion of the building while completely stripping down the exterior of the most northerly part? the part with the white bricks? then phase 2 will start to deal with the western and southern part of the brown brick structure. Is that what the new plan is?

[downtownVital.org]

I'm still waiting for the day of the iminant destruction to commence on the Younkers Building. So if I understand the RDA minutes, the Vetter group plans to completely take down the oldest most historic portion of the building while completely stripping down the exterior of the most northerly part? the part with the white bricks? then phase 2 will start to deal with the western and southern part of the brown brick structure. Is that what the new plan is?

I'll have more info for everyone to look through on this and related topics later this week, but for now... no, that isn't what the plan is.

Phase one takes care of all demolition for the whole site. As you stated, the oldest part will come down, as will much of the newest white part. The remainder of the white part and the brown brick part along the river will be stripped down. The remaining white part on the north will be converted into rental lofts, while the brown part along the river will have two floors added and become condos averaging about $140,000. The remainder will be retail, parking and the children's museum. All of this is part of phase 1. Phase two is the commercial space that will go on top of the parking structure along Washington St. The size of this will be determined by market demand.

Hope the makes sense. It is important to note that phase 1 can and will begin without any presales of the condo portion, as the state housing grants for the rental portion are sufficient to enable project start.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

There are seperate owners for each parcel.
I often wonder what is going on with WPS, or whatever there new name is going to be. They have been spending a ton of money on developing some of the best surface parking there is in Green Bay, does anyone know if they lease out office space in the regency??


Best surface parking? There are way too many surface lots near the former headquarters of WPS/People's Energy or their new name Integries or something like that. If they combined them into one parking ramp and then opened up those other lots for development, that would be great. And what was with the reconstruction of that lot on the river north of the Holiday Inn? No trees or anything. With it being a utility company you would think they would see the benefits trees have on the heat island affect and what not.

[GBSurveyor]

Best surface parking? There are way too many surface lots near the former headquarters of WPS/People's Energy or their new name Integries or something like that. If they combined them into one parking ramp and then opened up those other lots for development, that would be great. And what was with the reconstruction of that lot on the river north of the Holiday Inn? No trees or anything. With it being a utility company you would think they would see the benefits trees have on the heat island affect and what not.

The only reason I can see that they would improve their parking lots is that in the short term parking may be the best option for them, there may not be a whole lot of interest just yet in that land and the old Holiday Inn parking lot was in pretty bad shape. That is their main enterance to their GB headquarters and it should look nice. I do think that they went way overboard though and of course there are much better uses for all of that land. I think the GB Downtown plan highlights what could be there. Maybe someday in the future WPS/Peoples will build a new building there. Plus I guess I would rather see a parking lot over a single story strip mall.

[Puant]

Does anyone know if the apartments above The Heel and Angelina's (http://picasaweb.google.com/gBayPacker/AdamsStreetMisc)on Adams St are rental units? And if so, I wonder how much the rent is?

These types of unique apartments downtown are rarely vacant, it seems, so why wouldn't the "New York Loft" style apartments that were proposed for the upper floors of the Schauer-Schumacher (http://picasaweb.google.com/gBayPacker/SchauerSchumacherBuilding) building next door be viable? (remember Adams Street Station)?

Maybe someone could start by developing upper floor apartment units to generate cash flow and inject some life into that old buiding. Then develop the first floor into a coffee/bookstore or something later.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

That corner has so much potential. Thanks for the pictures of the S&S Building. That has urban loft written all over it. Again, maybe this wait and see idea that Vetter has will spill over to buildings such as this and the Frankenthal building once things get going. We can only hope.

Check out photos of some of the projects going on downtown on the DGBI web site.

http://www.downtowngreenbay.com/photogallery/index.html

[GBSurveyor]

Puant- Nice photos... Looks like you have been getting out a bit lately.

That one block of Pine St. really looks great. It would be super if the old Northern Hotel??? (the one with senior housing) could get a makeover and maybe add something to break up that long wall, I think there are a few offices in the lower floors. Also does anyone know what the deal is with all of those floors in the YMCA building? It sure looks vacant up there.

[i_am_hydrogen]

Oh, and something I forgot to mention when I started the new thread...

GO PACK!!!

[Puant]

I drove through downtown this morning, and crews were scrubbing the terra cotta on the Bellin Building....lots of crud was coming off. That old building will be gleaming white again soon.

Younkers redevelopment
I am anxious to see Vetter's plans unveiled for river center. I'm very curious to see how that brown brick part will look. I assume the Pine St. tunnel through the building will remain?
Based on what I've seen from Vetter so far, he will make the parking structure on Washington nice, pedestrian-friendly and such (right?). We sure don't need another big ugly parking structure on Washington right now. Not that the other new ramp is all bad, but they really need to fill in those street level retail spaces--soon.

P.S. Hydrogen--Must be unbearable to be a Packer fan in Chicago right now...

[Green Bay 4 Life]

I would assume that the Pine Street tunnel would remain as another pedestrian connection point to the boardwalk. If you actually look closely at the white portion of the Younkers building you can see the 6 bays that were discussed during the RDA meeting. So it is pretty easy to see the 4 southerly bays that will be removed. You would assume that some type of rendering would be released soon showing the redesigned River Center if they intend to start demolition and construction within 2 months. The Astor Place web site has since been updated with a little more information regarding the anticipated construction date. Getting exciting to say the least.

[Green Bay roots]

Stoss landscaping made a page dedicated to the fox riverfront development. mostly the same pictures seen before but a couple different ones giving much more of a 3D look.
http://stoss.net/fox.html

[Puant]

*****************************************
Washington Commons Lawsuit Reaches Settlement
Nov 8, 2006 12:59 PM CST

Green Bay's mayor says the city has reached a settlement the owners of Washington Commons.

The downtown mall closed last February when its utilities were shut off for non-payment.

Development Associates blamed the city and neighboring Baylake Bank when a deal to move APAC Customer Services into the vacant JC Penney building fell through. APAC moved into the Baylake Bank building instead.

The city council is scheduled to vote Wednesday night whether to accept the settlement.
*****************************************

So what happens next?

[downtownVital.org]

^^
http://clintjcl.wordpress.com/files/2006/06/delme-h-bomb.jpg

[GBSurveyor]

By Richard Ryman
rryman@greenbaypressgazette.com Link (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061109/GPG0101/611090579/1978)

The Green Bay City Council on Wednesday approved dividing a riverfront development project into two phases so construction can begin next year.

The developers of the River Center project, on the site of the former Younkers department store in downtown Green Bay, said that by doing the project in two phases they could proceed with the retail and residential development while putting the harder-to-sell commercial development off until later.

Developer John Vetter said the first phase, to begin in 2007, will consist of rental lofts, the new Children's Museum of Green Bay and condominiums. It will be worth $23 million.

Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority awarded $7.5 million in tax credits to help finance the $10 million rental lofts. The proposed 65-unit development will include units set aside for people with lower to moderate income.

He said the rental lofts should be ready for occupancy in early 2008.

The second phase, valued at $5 million to $17 million, depends on whether an office user signs on as a tenant.

Vetter said the Children's Museum has raised nearly $2 million of the $2.2 million it needs to build out its project.

[GBSurveyor]

City Center Café is opening for business today.
— Terry Anderson/Press-Gazette- Link (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061109/GPG03/611090491/1247)

Owner Andrea Verheyden said the $1.6 million complex will have a soft opening, with Prail's Coffee House opening at 6 a.m., while 2 p.m. openings are set for Noah's Pizza, Zeppelin's sub shop and Slick Nick's Bar & Grill.

The City Center Café will occupy about 9,500 square feet in the southwest corner of Baylake City Center at Washington and Cherry streets.

The food court will feature a smoke-free common eating area that can accommodate 200. Additional seating will be available outside. Free Internet service also will be available.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

:applause: :cucumber: :cheers1: :banana2: :righton: :drunk: :nocrook: :okay: Hallelujah!!! Wow, it isn't Christmas. Am I dreaming. This is so huge. :nuts:

:banana: :cheers:

Anyways. On another positive note. The Astor Place web site sales list was updated and now 43 of the 87 units have been reserved, are pending, or have been sold. That equals about 50%. No doubt the ability to move forward on the Younkers project giuven last night by the City Council, the ability now to sell the mall and redevelop that site will I believe lead to more of an interest in this property.

Man I am giddy. Bring on the mall proposal debate again - this time it could be reality.

[GBSurveyor]

:applause: :cucumber: :cheers1: :banana2: :righton: :drunk: :nocrook: :okay: Hallelujah!!! Wow, it isn't Christmas. Am I dreaming. This is so huge. :nuts:

:banana: :cheers:

Anyways. On another positive note. The Astor Place web site sales list was updated and now 43 of the 87 units have been reserved, are pending, or have been sold. That equals about 50%. No doubt the ability to move forward on the Younkers project giuven last night by the City Council, the ability now to sell the mall and redevelop that site will I believe lead to more of an interest in this property.

Man I am giddy. Bring on the mall proposal debate again - this time it could be reality.

This is so true... I have heard on the radio about this but no real details. Has anyone seen or heard about the deatils? If I understand Baylake will get the deed and then ntry to dump it off. I believe that I have also heard that there are parties interested in the property, but up until this point there has always been a black cloud hanging over it. Can't wait to see haw this plays out.

[GBSurveyor]

Mall now can be sold, redeveloped or razed

By Richard Ryman Link (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061109/GPG03/611090524/1247)
rryman@greenbaypressgazette.com

The way is now clear to sell, redevelop or raze Washington Commons mall in downtown Green Bay.

The Green Bay City Council on Wednesday approved a three-way settlement of lawsuits between the city, Baylake Bank and Development Associates, the mall's owners.

"This is big news. This is good news for the city," said Mayor Jim Schmitt.

Some terms of the settlement are:

The lawsuits between the parties are resolved and none admit liability.

Development Associates deeds the mall and adjacent former J.C. Penney building to Baylake Bank, the mortgage holder, in lieu of foreclosure.

Development Associates pays Baylake Bank $600,000.

Baylake will attempt to sell the property, but between June 1, 2007, and Dec. 31, 2007, it can deed the property to the city. If it does so, the city will not attempt to recover money from Baylake Bank.

The city has a $2 million lien on the mall through 2007, which means if the property is sold the city can attempt to collect on the lien.

The city is responsible for tax assessments on the mall and the Penney building for 2004-2006. For 2007, the city will be responsible for mall taxes and Baylake Bank for Penney building taxes.

"It's a very significant step for downtown," said Jeff Mirkes, executive director of Downtown Green Bay Inc. "I am also confident it will serve as a catalyst for other nearby developments."

The history of Washington Commons in a nutshell is this:

The once-thriving Port Plaza Mall began losing tenants and consumers in the mid-1990s. The continuing downward spiral prompted then-Mayor Paul Jadin to engineer a sale by out-of-state owners to local ownership.

Development Associates — whose most recent roster consisted of Russ DeMille, Fred Fleck, Andrew Hilliard, Daniel Hilliard, Tom Parins, Michael Schumacher and Tom Schumacher — purchased the mall, promising its redevelopment into a mixed-use facility. Their efforts stalled, in part, they claimed in their lawsuit, because the city was not supporting their efforts, and because Baylake Bank lured away a promising tenant — APAC Customer Service Inc. — for its adjacent Baylake City Center.
Baylake, meanwhile, filed suit to foreclose on the property.

And the city wanted to collect on a loan made to the developers. Lawsuits ensued. In the end, the sides agreed to engage a mediator, who led them from "far apart," according to City Attorney Jerry Hanson, to the settlement announced Wednesday.

[Puant]

Looks like they're done scrubbing the terra cotta on the Bellin Building, and boy, that old building is gleaming white again.

I took some photos today, and put them on this web album along with some pics before cleaning:

http://picasaweb.google.com/gBayPacker/BellinBuilding

MALL
I obtained some more of the street grid graphics from the city's 2000 plan. Here they are if you're interested. (http://picasaweb.google.com/gBayPacker/Plans) I wonder if the City's going to officially re-insert this street grid plan back into the plan? (remember, the former mall owners made them take the grid plan out a few years ago).

[Bartles53]

Dan, you posted this comment a few weeks ago in regards to the Younkers building demolition:

I'll have more info for everyone to look through on this and related topics later this week

You have me curious as to what the other info is.

BTW, I caught your pictures of the Milwaukee Art Museum on another thread. Good work. I'm planning on checking that place out for the first time over Thanksgiving week. I'm really looking forward to it.

[Puant]

^^
Yeah, me too!!

Another thing I've been anxiously awaiting is the news on the Daily Planet site. Someone (I think it was GB4Life) mentioned that he? even saw a render of the proposed building for that site. Apparently it was impressive--I recall 4Life saying it was going to be a favoroite building.

I'm wondering what the status is--when will this go public?--Is it an Art Deco tower that jives with the adjacent Meyer Theater building, or another matching design?

Sorry but I don't have the patience to sit around in this town where plans and developments move soooo slllooooowly. Rome was built faster than this!

[Green Bay roots]

yeah but look at ashwaubenon and how screwed up onieda street is because they are letting any one and everyone build and pretty much do what they want without input from village officials. onieda street is not able to get any bigger and i just cringe when i am back in town and have to use onieda street down by the mall. that is such hell and jsut think how shitty that will be in 10 years from now

[downtownVital.org]

^^ No... I can assure you that Rome was not built faster than this :)

I should never give myself deadlines on stuff like this. Sorry.

Here's the deal, I'm working on an editorial for my web site, in the course of doing that, I went to Milwaukee and interviewed John Vetter for about an hour, and then the next day interviewed the Mayor for about a half-hour. So I had my essay/editorial written, but I don't like it. Plus, there was quite a bit of stuff that came out in the interviews that is worthwhile but won't really fit into an editorial. My plan now is to A) make an editorial that doesn't suck, and B) write out a transcript of the two interviews to post. I'm learning that writing transcripts sucks. I don't type fast enough to keep up with dialogue, and so it's taking me about 5 minutes for every minute of recorded talk. I need to get this up fast though, so stay tuned. Sorry for the delays.

[Bartles53]

Wow. Good deal. I'm looking forward to reading it (whenever that may be).

[titletown]

I cannot wait to see Astor Place and River Center built as well. Sometime next year I will moving to Florida. I will be keeping an eye out for any new developments on this website. The warmer weather and faster pace is what is bringing me to Florida. My wife is from a city of 3 million in Colombia and she really hates it up here. I will always defend Green Bay if others bash the area. Its funny how people in many parts of the U.S. have no idea where Green Bay or Wisconsin is. I am looking forward to seeing the new Green Bay skyline when I watch the Packers in a few years on tv.

Green Bay Roots- Ashwaubenon will expand Oneida St. between Hansen and Willard to 6 lanes. This is going to be a real mess. I believe they will even have to tear down the 172 overpass. Not sure when they will start on this. I work in Ashwaubenon and when the holiday season starts it is absolutely a nightmare to drive.

[Geography Teacher]

Completed project opens Washington St. to downtown growth

By Richard Ryman
rryman@greenbaypressgazette.com

Cured of its winding Way, a straight North Washington Street reopened Wednesday to traffic between Pine and Main streets.

Washington Street was made straight, and curvy Washington Way eliminated, to make room for the construction of Astor Place condominiums by Milwaukee developer John Vetter. Drivers can once again turn onto North Washington Street from Main Street, and vice versa, including making left turns onto Main.

"It has been a short-term inconvenience for some of the establishments on North Washington Street. They are very happy the street is open to traffic again," said Jeff Mirkes, executive director of Downtown Green Bay Inc.

Work on the road project began in mid-September. Though the street was opened Wednesday, some work remains and won't be completed until the condo project is farther along. The west side of the street does not have a curb and gutter or parking lane.

"We felt they would have been damaged during the building construction," said Carl Weber, Green Bay public works director. "We will continue to have barrels along the west edge through the winter."

Weber said near the completion of the building, the city will finish the street and add a cul de sac between the planned buildings.

Mirkes said the clear line of sight into downtown is also an improvement.

"I think it's especially important for first-time visitors. The improved visual connection will be a strength. To many, if you can't see it, it's not there," he said.

The street was straightened to facilitate riverfront development. Vetter and fellow investors plan mixed commercial, retail and residential buildings from Main Street to their completed Riverfront Lofts project midway between Main and East Walnut streets. The new projects will include renovation and partial destruction of the former Younkers department store.

Mirkes said the open street will benefit people coming to the Time Warner Cable Green Bay Holiday Parade at 10 a.m. Saturday. It will allow access to the Cherry Street parking ramp from another direction.

[gbmphillips]

Driving Downtown today snap a couple of quick pictures

http://newffl.net/pic/gb1.jpg


http://newffl.net/pic/gb2.jpg


http://newffl.net/pic/gb3.jpg

[downtownVital.org]

^^ Cool! Thanks for the photos.

[gbmphillips]

http://newffl.net/pic/IMG_0013.JPG
http://newffl.net/pic/IMG_0014.JPG
http://newffl.net/pic/IMG_0015.JPG
http://newffl.net/pic/IMG_0016.JPG
http://newffl.net/pic/IMG_0017.JPG
http://newffl.net/pic/IMG_0018.JPG

[Inside the Beltway]

Not sure what time of day those Washington Street photos were taken, but one thing that sticks out to me...no people on the sidewalks! In any of the photos!

Oh, and that Baylank Bank building has to have the most "blah" exteriors ever...it makes the parking garage look "interesting."

[Green Bay 4 Life]

This image was shown on Fox 11 after the RDA Meeting on Tuesday. They discussed funding the boardwalk and also the Prestige Park Development at the RDA. Weird that they showed this image on the news because this had nothing to do with the story they ran. This was discussed back on the 2nd development thread, and even a little on the 1st. Kind of a blah design in my opinion, but oh well - the density would be nice. Still not sold on the location - but we'll see if they ever start marketing this...

http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r147/phatty_013/PrestigeTowers.jpg

http://www.prarch.com/portfolio/project.aspx?id=382

[Puant]

Not sure what time of day those Washington Street photos were taken, but one thing that sticks out to me...no people on the sidewalks! In any of the photos!

Oh, and that Baylank Bank building has to have the most "blah" exteriors ever...it makes the parking garage look "interesting."

Yeah, in Green Bay, if you can't park your car less than 20 feet from the door, then you don't go there. The sidewalks are getting busier than they were 2 years ago, but it still isn't exactly pedestrian gridlock.

That Baylake building is an enigma: On one hand, it took an ugly, 90,000+ s.f. vacant mall building and turned it into new offices that are now chock-full of thousands of people. And the restaurants inside aren't bad, either. ON the other hand, the new facade is kind of sickening. And they didn't reconnect Pine St. I have often wished they would've run Pine Street back through that building, and put up a taller building with as much leasable space, with a nicer design. But of course that would have been expensive.
Ah well, it is what it is: A stepping stone that has helped get the downtown moving in the right direction again.

[gbmphillips]

Not sure what time of day those Washington Street photos were taken, but one thing that sticks out to me...no people on the sidewalks! In any of the photos!

Oh, and that Baylank Bank building has to have the most "blah" exteriors ever...it makes the parking garage look "interesting."The pictures were taken around 11:00 am 11/16/06

[GBSurveyor]

Not sure what time of day those Washington Street photos were taken, but one thing that sticks out to me...no people on the sidewalks! In any of the photos!

Oh, and that Baylank Bank building has to have the most "blah" exteriors ever...it makes the parking garage look "interesting."

Not that there ever is a bunch of foot traffic anywhere downtown, for that matter anywhere in Green Bay, but that part of Washington Street is really vacant of anything, from Main St. all the way down to Walnut and even past that there are a lot of empty storefronts, not to mention half of the "occupied" block consists of many bars which wouldn't be opened yet.

Looking back, Im not sure on how the mall improvements were hatched up or why they decided to do the red brick look for the Washington St. skywalk.

But looking ahead things can only improve. Street life should greatly improve with:
1. Astor Place construction will fill a large void.
2. the younkers complex AKA Rivercenter.
3. New ownership of the mall, I have my fingers crossed.
4. the parking ramp retail- lets get that built out.
5. the Daily Planet Site- new construction?
6. the Bellin Building renovations.
7. the ground level retail in the Washington St Apartments.

continued growth of downtown will only help to improve other parts.

[Emerald City]

I was checking out some of the other threads on SSC and thought I would post this one: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=363342
There are a lot of pictures of proposed buildings for the Seattle Area, and while some are clearly not feasible yet for the Green Bay Skyline, there are quite a few in the 10-20 story area that would be great fits for DT GB. Why can't we get some of these designs to work out for the signature building downtown?

[Inside the Beltway]

I guess the only time there is real foot traffic on Washington Street is at 2 AM on a Saturday or Sunday morning!

As for Baylake, I am glad to see the old Boston Store being used for something...maybe someday, someone will see the light and improve the facade. I guess that's the easy part.

Bellin Building looks great!

[Green Bay 4 Life]

The minutes to the RDA were posted today. Here are some quick hits on the Prestige Proposal:

- two 12-story condominium towers

- the towers would include 200,000 sq. ft. of retail (200,000 SF of Retail??? - HOLY COW!!!)

- planned for 88 units, 44 per tower, with a mixture of 1-bedroom 2-bedroom, 2-plus bedroom, and penthouse, prices to start under $250k

- market study conducted and research has determined that the proposed site would be suitable for residential luxury condos and that Green Bay is ready for one

- only one property is not under Paul K's Control. Accepted off on Engle property and Smitty's lot may move to the old Economy Inn property.

- looking to start marketing in mid-January

- goal is to sell 40-50% and break ground on both towers at the same time

- estimated tax value is between $60-$65 million

- New Pizza Hut building to be completed by 2/15 (next to Perry's Cherry Diner)

- Plans underway for Champion Sports Bar & Grill to be built facing Tony Canadeo Run, once MasterFleet vacates their property at the end of February.

Could Paul K. pull this one off??? We'll have to wait and see. I'm still not sold on it, but I guess I'm warming up some...

[fridaynightlights]

Wow,t hat's pretty amazing: 200,000 sq.ft. for GB!!!

[GBSurveyor]

How many square feet is Port Plasa? 200,000 really does sound unrealistic for that location. I have a feeling that something will happen there, but I am skeptical about 2 12 story towers.

Anyone know the status of the "Ashwaubenon" tower, if I recall construction was going to start in a few months...

Also for those of you who do not subscribe to the email "What's Up Downtown 11.14.06"

Save the date....for "Good Morning Downtown" Thurs. Nov. 30th at the Meyer Theatre...exciting new business announcements and development project updates taking place in downtown Green Bay. 7:30 a.m. networking....8- 8:45 program. No need to rsvp, there will be a chair there for you. Open to the public.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

How many square feet is Port Plasa? 200,000 really does sound unrealistic for that location. I have a feeling that something will happen there, but I am skeptical about 2 12 story towers.

Anyone know the status of the "Ashwaubenon" tower, if I recall construction was going to start in a few months...

Also for those of you who do not subscribe to the email "What's Up Downtown 11.14.06"

Save the date....for "Good Morning Downtown" Thurs. Nov. 30th at the Meyer Theatre...exciting new business announcements and development project updates taking place in downtown Green Bay. 7:30 a.m. networking....8- 8:45 program. No need to rsvp, there will be a chair there for you. Open to the public.

Port Plaza, aka Washington Commons, aka the Dead Zone (Just the mall) is 411,260 SF. The JC Penny building is 152,142 SF. Just as a comparison the new Wal-Mart proposed on the City's east side is approximately 205,000 SF. So 200,000 SF of retail is in my opinion, a streeeeeeeeetch. Oh well, who knows?

As far as the Good Morning Downtown. I'm so there. Been waiting for the next one, very patiently. Hopefully they will announce a ground breaking ceremony for Astor Place. Let's get it started... Or, could we possibly see some info on the long awaited Ramp Retail or an update to the Bellin Building progress of attracting a tenant? I don't want to start another chain discussion, but Chipotle. Please announce Chipotle...

[GBFAN]

This link list the Ashwaubenon complex as a total of 210,000 feet for both buildings. I think the 200,000 feet of retail somewhat got turned around
http://www.prarch.com/portfolio/project.aspx?id=382

[Green Bay 4 Life]

This link list the Ashwaubenon complex as a total of 210,000 feet for both buildings. I think the 200,000 feet of retail somewhat got turned around
http://www.prarch.com/portfolio/project.aspx?id=382

Yes, I think you are right. The minutes of the Redevelopment Authority must be wrong when it stated 200,000 SF of retail. The more I thought about it, the less believeable it seemed. Some office towers aren't even 200,000 SF.

But it isn't the Ashwaubenon complex. The site is actually in the City of Green Bay.

[GBFAN]

Yes, I think you are right. The minutes of the Redevelopment Authority must be wrong when it stated 200,000 SF of retail. The more I thought about it, the less believeable it seemed. Some office towers aren't even 200,000 SF.

But it isn't the Ashwaubenon complex. The site is actually in the City of Green Bay.

I do get abit confused by the stadium area. Would you know where (St or intersection) Green Bay / Ashwaubenon border is?

[GBSurveyor]

The border jogs around a little bit. Starting at the river it is just north of Potts Ave., (Georgia Pacific-Green Bay) then it runs down a line between Potts and the road just south of Lombardi, (I think it was once called Advance, it has since been renamed) about to where Brett Favre stakehouse (Green Bay) is then it turns north at the back of the Stadium View Bar(Ashwaubenon) and runs up to Lombardi, it then goes west along Lombardi to Onedia St (Resch Center-Packer practice fields are in Ashwaubenon) then the line runs southerly along Oneida St to the South line of the Lambeau Field (Green Bay) parking lot, then along the parking lot (the houses are in Ashwaubenon) west to Ridge Road, (Krolls is Ashwaubenon) then down Ridge to Lombardi again, then the line continues down Lombardi to 41.

Sorry for the winded description....but I am a surveyor. Hope it helps.

[GBSurveyor]

Port Plaza, aka Washington Commons, aka the Dead Zone (Just the mall) is 411,260 SF. The JC Penny building is 152,142 SF.

Thanks fo the info.

Not sure if you googled Port Plaza or not but this listing is hilarious... sort of, or maybe just depressing. Wikipedia listing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Plaza_Mall_(Washington_Commons))
At least it didn't make it to deadmalls.com (http://deadmalls.com/) , yet.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

I do get abit confused by the stadium area. Would you know where (St or intersection) Green Bay / Ashwaubenon border is?

I'm more of a visual kind of guy...

Anything north of the red line is Green Bay. South is Ashwaubenon. Ashland Avenue is on the right side of the photo and just west is the Tundra Lodge. The site just west of that is where the proposed towers are to be constructed....

http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r147/phatty_013/citylimits.jpg

[GBFAN]

wow , okay I got it. Thanks GB Surveyor and GB 4 life. Any word on the street on the Washington Commons?

[Puant]

On this forum, we spend a lot of time complaining about places around town that suck and at the same time we dream about what the future could bring.

But what are your favorite existing places around town, and why? Do you choose to spend time at these places because it's where other people go, or because you like the food or product, or because of its environmental setting?

What about public areas? What are your favorite public places, including streets or parks, where you can feel free to walk around and do whatever without having to buy something?

I guess I'd like to avoid the usual easy answer, which is Lambeau Field. Like anyone, I love to be there on a Sunday afternoon during a game (especially when the Packers win, which is a rare event these days!). I'm more interested to know what other places you like to go.

[GBSurveyor]

On this forum, we spend a lot of time complaining about places around town that suck and at the same time we dream about what the future could bring.

But what are your favorite existing places around town, and why? Do you choose to spend time at these places because it's where other people go, or because you like the food or product, or because of its environmental setting?

What about public areas? What are your favorite public places, including streets or parks, where you can feel free to walk around and do whatever without having to buy something?

I guess I'd like to avoid the usual easy answer, which is Lambeau Field. Like anyone, I love to be there on a Sunday afternoon during a game (especially when the Packers win, which is a rare event these days!). I'm more interested to know what other places you like to go.

Bay Beach and the Wild life Sanctuary (especially the raven & Coyote) are tops in the summer, the NEW ZOO is nice, I also spend a lot of time hiking at the arboretum at UWGB and Baird Creek, Roller Blading at Meadow Brook Park and the Fox River Trail. The National RR museum is cool, Neville Museum, Art Garage, (some cost involved), for eats, Titletown, St. Brendon's, Blackstone and Pearly Gates. Can't forget about the downtown farmer market or maybe my favorite the tuesday night concert at St. James park, but probabaly best of all, (for Green Bay at least) I always seem to drag the family downtown to look up at the tall steeples at the downtown churches, passing freighters or just people watching. Probably pretty lame to most, but spending time with the family is the best.

[sr22ger]

I'll second St Brendans....awesome facility. Food is good, wide selection of draught beers and a great atmosphere. They will often have live folk music on the weekends. Plus the hotel is really nice itself. Anyone looking for a romantic place to take your wife/girlfriend should check out the rooms there, make a night of it. Pretty decent price for the rooms too.

Hinterland is a great place to eat as well. :cheers: I travel a lot for work and have even found their custom brews out of state before.

UWGB men's basketball at the Resch is a great sporting event to see (kinda biased because I'm an alum).

[Green Bay 4 Life]

The places that really get me going…

Joliet Park along the Bay of Green Bay for sunsets.

Walking around the Astor Historic District. It is really cool to see all of the grand old homes that exist in this area. I plan on doing a photo spread on this area soon and am currently going through my pictures to determine my favorites.

Baird Creek Parkway – walking the trails and being within a city, but feeling you are in the middle of nowhere.

Driving along Bay Settlement Road. The view of the Bay and back towards downtown is pretty amazing. I sure do wonder what it may look like when there are some taller towers downtown.

Not in Green Bay but close. Playing golf at Ledgeview Golf Course, a.k.a. Mystery Hills. The views of the City are incredible up on Scray’s Hill. Again, a perfect opportunity for some fantastic photo opportunities in the future.

Hinterland Brewery and 10-0-1 Club for dinner. Wally’s Spot for dinner and to meet some pretty local people with great stories, at the bar. I do miss John Paul Bistro though on Main. Have not been to the restaurant that replaced it.

In terms of bars… Ned Kelly’s mainly for the type of music played and beer pong on Thursday nights, Brewbaker’s when it isn’t too busy, the Firehouse is a pretty cool bar as well. And who can pass up the Cock & Bull?

What Green Bay needs is a better music venue. Something between the Riverside and the Resch Center. Ala the Rave in Milwaukee. I guess I am biased as I love music and the music scene really kind of blows here…

But my favorite place to be will be the boardwalk when Astor Place, River Center, River Tower, and the rest of the downtown development is done. Hands down – except Lambeau Field of course.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Just a curious question. If Associated ever signed on to be a major tenant in one of the proposals that are kicking around, does anyone here think that the white neon that is present on their existing headquarters should be incorporated into the new building design. Again, this is completely hypothetical. I know it may sound cheesy (excuse the pun for Green Bay), but you think of the tower in Dallas with the green argon filled gas lights that outline that tower. All you have to do is see it once, figure out that is the Dallas skyline, and every time you see a shot of a skyline – that building defines that you are looking at the Dallas skyline. There are other examples around the country of buildings that do the same. Like the office tower in Charlotte that was shown on MNF a couple weeks back, lit up in blue. I think a tower like that would truly stand out in the proposed skyline and add some definition that is severely lacking at night. I guess when you think of the Astor Place tower being residential, once people go to sleep – off goes the lights. At least that seems to be present theme in the Riverfront Lofts building which is hardly visible at night (although that may change if the boardwalk lights up that area. With talk about lighting up the Bellin Building (even the fire escape) it got me thinking that the Courthouse lights up the dome, churches shine flood lights on the steeples, yet no building except the Nicolet Bank Building has really shown off their building at night. People that know the Associated Bank Building at night, know the white neon that outlines the top, I think that would be a perfect transition to a new building… Oh well – I just don’t see an element on the proposed Astor Place tower that will be lit up on top, with it being a flat roofed design and all. Of course if they never move to a new building or sign on, this is a mute point – but it brings up a question for proposed buildings downtown…

http://www.p450dallas2005.us/Pictures/dallas_skyline_1000.jpg

http://www.aactfest07.com/images/skyline.jpg

[Puant]

If Associated Bank builds on the existing site Meyer Theater/Daily Planet site, I would assume they'd tie the existing Art Deco design to the new structure. If that's the case, then some cool lighting would be quite appropriate because that sort of design lends itself well to lighting--though not usually neon tubes--intead you usually see flood lighting cast upon the facade to accentuate the textured pattern of the facade. Look at some of the nice Art Deco towers around the country--Tulsa Oklahoma actually has some great Art Deco buildings that are of an appropriate scale for Green Bay (New York of course has some great Art Deco towers but the most well-known are giants such as the Chrysler building). Tulsa's buildings are really snazzy.

That said, while I like Art Deco, I'm not sure that we need to go back in time like that. We've seen what happens when someone tries to replicate "old world' Green Bay (ala Baylake city center). It just doesn't feel "right"...as Dan said, it's kitsch.

But hopefully there is a matching design that ties in to the existing Theatre, yet is contemporary and classy. As I've said before--I'm anxious to see what's proposed and even more anxious to see that corner get redeveloped nicely.

[Puant]

The Press-Gazette is once again asking readers what they think should happen to the Downtown mall, now that the lawsuit is settled (here's the article (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061125/GPG03/611250579/1247/GPGbusiness))

I went out on a limb and gave my $0.02 earlier this year. Now it's your turn to come up with an even better idea and submit it to the P-G. Maybe some of our ideas will sink into some developer's head. We can only hope, right?

I've personally changed my mind from what I posted on this website (http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/downtown_GB.html)in February. I've been very close to taking that site down lately. Again, here's why:

The city's 2000 plan for a restored street grid is better than my street plan (I had not seen the city's when I drew up the web site concepts)
I'm shying away from the idea of tall towers downtown. Sacrilege for skyscrapercity forumers, I know, but I am starting to believe we can have a great downtown without having to build towering behemoths that look good from afar but tend to wreak havoc on people near the base of them. A few towers no taller than Astor Place would be fine, but probably no more.
let the site be carved up into smaller parcels and redevelop over time. I'm impatient but I'm starting to understand that building great places simply takes a lot of time.


I do, however, still believe an atrium would be a great community benefit: It would provide walkability in an otherwise oversized block (http://picasaweb.google.com/gBayPacker/Plans); it would create public gathering space (even in inclimate weather) and it would lend some credence to a revitalizing downtown and attract even more business. The layout of it needs to be changed from where i had it--perhaps moved to the center of the block (south) and connected to Baylake Bank.

Whatever happens, let's just hope that the city, the developers, and the citizens of this city can understand this is our downtown, the urban core of our community, and needs to be designed as such. Great buildings are one thing, but also, any spaces inbetween each individual building should be just as important and of high quality as the buildings themselves. It should be a coherent, well designed place. Let's not build another clusterfuck of cheapass buildings surrounded by big ugly parking lots, stupid looking signs, and other junky unwalkable, uninteresting shit that fills the spaces between just about every other new development in this city. That's what I think we all fear the most.

[GBSurveyor]

The Press-Gazette is once again asking readers what they think should happen to the Downtown mall, now that the lawsuit is settled (here's the article (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061125/GPG03/611250579/1247/GPGbusiness))

I went out on a limb and gave my $0.02 earlier this year. Now it's your turn to come up with an even better idea and submit it to the P-G. Maybe some of our ideas will sink into some developer's head. We can only hope, right?

I've personally changed my mind from what I posted on this website (http://home.new.rr.com/visualizeit/downtown_GB.html)in February. I've been very close to taking that site down lately. Again, here's why:

The city's 2000 plan for a restored street grid is better than my street plan (I had not seen the city's when I drew up the web site concepts)
I'm shying away from the idea of tall towers downtown. Sacrilege for skyscrapercity forumers, I know, but I am starting to believe we can have a great downtown without having to build towering behemoths that look good from afar but tend to wreak havoc on people near the base of them. A few towers no taller than Astor Place would be fine, but probably no more.
let the site be carved up into smaller parcels and redevelop over time. I'm impatient but I'm starting to understand that building great places simply takes a lot of time.


I do, however, still believe an atrium would be a great community benefit: It would provide walkability in an otherwise oversized block (http://picasaweb.google.com/gBayPacker/Plans); it would create public gathering space (even in inclimate weather) and it would lend some credence to a revitalizing downtown and attract even more business. The layout of it needs to be changed from where i had it--perhaps moved to the center of the block (south) and connected to Baylake Bank.

Whatever happens, let's just hope that the city, the developers, and the citizens of this city can understand this is our downtown, the urban core of our community, and needs to be designed as such. Great buildings are one thing, but also, any spaces inbetween each individual building should be just as important and of high quality as the buildings themselves. It should be a coherent, well designed place. Let's not build another clusterfuck of cheapass buildings surrounded by big ugly parking lots, stupid looking signs, and other junky unwalkable, uninteresting shit that fills the spaces between just about every other new development in this city. That's what I think we all fear the most.


I think that I pretty much agree with all of you points, however, fundamentally, Green Bay is not very dense. We need to continue to build up density (Apartments, flats, condos, just not town homes!). If change is going to occur, which I don't think it will be this generation, we need to start thinking differently. We are to auto dependant (myself included), to make a place really walkable/livable, you have be able to restrict auto use, not require 1.5 parking spots per unit. Horrible example, but go over to Bay Park Square, they have been increasing the retail density and people have adapted. Downtown, I am sure has much, much more parking then out at Bay Park, and I still here people complain that the thing that killed the mall was a parking shortage. And I am not going to lie, people would balk at any idea of decreasing auto density downtown, but it is pretty sad that you have to market free parking as a selling point.
Anyways there I go again rambling...
so for the mall site to prosper.
1) restore as much as the street grid as possible.
2) make a nice public square or plaza.
3) develop a lower cost housing with the option of no parking included (people become resourceful when it come to money) 1 parking spot is probably close to 200 sq. ft.
4) retail is needed, bring back a Osco/CVS/Walgreens, they have most of your daily necessities.(skip the parking lot)
5) grocery is vital to walk ability-Trader Joes would be great.(again, skip the parking lot)
6) Property tax abatement/rent credits for a year lease or more. (I have read about how this has worked wonders)
7) Keep bringing in the dining options. ( I know how everybody despises Starbucks, but that would be a very, VERY positive sign).
8) NO SURFACE PARKING
THINGS NOT TO DO...
1) Create surface parking
2) Restrict the type of buildings found on South Washington St. Although they are very nice looking buildings, they are no good to walk to/through.
3) create gaps between buildings.

I am sure I could go on and on, but I guess my point is this is not a suburban area, make it a downtown, the way it once was, and maybe just maybe we can keep a few people from leaving here after school.

[Bay2Bay]

^^
Ditto to the two posts above. It would be great to see the mall torn down and the street grid put back in.

It would also be nice to see Macy's locate in downtown GB (River Center Mr. Denk?). Green Bay is probably the largest metro area in the country where they don't have a store. Of course, if they did enter the market they'd probably build in Ashwaubenon.

The coments about new buildings surrounded by parking lots is something the zoning has to tighten up on. You're right in stating how nice the buildings look and correct in noting that we're talking about a downtown and not a suburb. Parking should be either hidden by landscaping, underground, or above retail space in ramps.

[Fillmore]

Hello Everyone,
I had a lot of reading to do this morning on this forum. I was overseas for quite a long time, but am glad to see downtown is (slowly) creeping forward. I did stop at the Trader Joe's on my way through Milwaukee at the new Bayshore Mall. TJ's, as I have said before, would be an absolutely perfect fit for our new downtown. The people of north Milwaukee are eating it up, and I think, like Starbucks, TJ's will make it's way north sooner or later. My fear though is that Appleton will get first dibs unless all of us, and our spouses, and our spouses' friends, and our spouses' friends' friends send countless letters to TJ's and beg them to come to our city. I know it is not that easy, but I do know that the corporate office in California, which is comprised of hippies :), would love our grass roots approach. Who knows..... Anyway, to see the improvements made over the past few months is just awesome, and I look forward to the day when we have a new downtown we won't be afraid to show people. Stay Positive :) http://traderjoes.com/contact_us.html

[Bartles53]

I know a couple people mentioned they are planning to attend this. I'm really looking forward to hearing what everyone has to say. Based on this article it looks like the re-opening of the street grid is likely to happen and I'm also intrigued by the Wi-Fi idea. I'm anxious to hear the attendees' take on the presentation...


Posted November 28, 2006

Leaders to update public on progress of downtown Green Bay

Several projects already are under way, in the works

By Mike Hoeft
mhoeft@greenbaypressgazette.com


Citing a growing confidence in downtown redevelopment, Green Bay leaders will present a public update Thursday morning on several positive efforts in the works.


Several hundred people are expected to attend the Good Morning Downtown update at the Meyer Theatre.


"We wanted the entire community to be invited and hear first-hand what's happening," said Jeff Mirkes, executive director of Downtown Green Bay Inc.


Mirkes said he expected announcements on several topics:



New business. Up to seven business announcements on a variety of projects planned downtown. Some existing businesses are showing a commitment by relocating downtown, Mirkes said.


Waterfront development. Milwaukee developer John Vetter is expected to give a brief update on construction of the Astor Place condominium project near Main and North Washington streets. Vetter and fellow investors plan mixed commercial, retail and residential buildings in addition to their completed Riverfront Lofts project a half-block south of the site. The new projects will include renovation and partial destruction of the former Younkers department store.

Carl Weber, Green Bay public works director, will share news on infrastructure work and the city's boardwalk project.


Also, a local public relations and marketing company has been selected to head branding efforts for waterfront development.


"It's important as a community to know what we call this destination," Mirkes said. Strategy for identifying the most appropriate name will be discussed. There will be opportunities for corporate sponsorship and naming rights.



Wi-Fi. A committee evaluating free Wi-Fi access near the downtown waterfront is close to implementing the process.

"We'll learn more how that is evolving. The exact geographic area is still being determined," Mirkes said.


Wi-Fi — short for wireless fidelity — allows people to log onto the Internet without using a wired connection. Wi-Fi technology already is available at Green Bay businesses on a small scale. Several Wisconsin cities are trying to blanket entire neighborhoods with wireless access in efforts to stimulate economic growth.


"It would be an appropriate amenity for residential users, visitors and nearby businesses," Mirkes said.



Mall redevelopment. Earlier this month the Green Bay City Council approved a three-way settlement of lawsuits between the city, Baylake Bank and Development Associates, the owners of the closed Washington Commons mall. Ending the litigation clears the way to sell, redevelop or raze the 7-acre site.

Green Bay Mayor Jim Schmitt will discuss a conceptual vision for the area and reintroduction of the street grid system.


"There appears to be stronger interest now that a settlement has been reached," Mirkes said.

[Puant]

[QUOTE=GBSurveyor;10624300]...not require 1.5 parking spots per unit.... no parking included ...skip the parking lot....(again, skip the parking lot)
8) NO SURFACE PARKING
THINGS NOT TO DO...
1) Create surface parking
QUOTE]
You are pretty much right on with your anti-parking lot statements. The restored street grid and many new street parking options (as well as the fact most of the restored streets will butt right up to the existing parking ramps) will help people get past the perception that there is a parking shortage downtown. At least that's what I hope.

And I agree with your observation about South Wash.---that whole part of "downtown" where every building is situated in the middle of big god-awful ugly ashphalt parking lots--some right up to the foundations! It's just hideous. I don't even know how they can call that "downtown"--they have to put up the banners on the light poles that say "downtown district" just to try remind you that you're in the center of the city, not in the middle of "no mans land". That's what I have always called it. That area, especially on South Adams St, is just nasty. There are more "dead zones" downtown than the old mall site.

On the other, optimistic hand, I'm glad and excited about Thursday's Good MOrning Downtown. Thanks to all who put that event together (Jeff M. and others)..

[titletown]

WBAY: At a news conference taking place at noon, The Salvation Army is announcing Green Bay will be one of the few cities across the country to be home to a multi-million dollar community center.

The Salvation Army in Green Bay will get $30 million to build and operate a Ray and Joan Kroc Community Center.

Plans for the huge facility include classroom space for before- and after-chool programs, a gym, fitness center, pool, and ice rink.

To be eligible for the donation for a Kroc Center, the local Salvation Army chapter raised $7.5 million locally to support the facility, which it worked toward for more than two years.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

^^ It's about time this was finalized. But alas, good things come to those who wait and in this case the City of Green Bay. I believe this facility will be a highly appreciated fixture on the east side of Green Bay. Hopefully some renderings will be released. I'm not expecting anything, grand - but for $30 Million to build and operate... That could be a pretty unique building. Maybe include some "green" elements into the design. That would go along way to not only help the community on a social level but also an environmental level as well.

[downtownVital.org]

Hello,
I've put my editorial up on the website now, along with some of the interesting quotes. I still plan on posting the full transcripts, but what a pain in the rear. I spent 2 hours on that last nigh and got though only about 20 minutes of converstion. Ugh.

Anyway, this should be a good warm-up for Good Morning Downtown tomorrow morning, I hope to see you there (even if I wouldn't know what any of you look like!).

The editorial is at: http://www.downtownvital.org/html/editorial1129.htm

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Good editorial...it will be interesting to read the rest of the interview transcripts.

It is weird to hear that people don't think Site 4 is sexy enough. Makes me wonder, I guess, what isn't sexy about it? It is a corner site. Walnut Street is a heavily traveled east/west arterial into downtown, Washington Street will become more and more heavily traveled as it is now open back to Main Street and with the continued development along the waterfront, the site is on the future boardwalk and is on the river, it is across the street from a parking ramp, should I keep going? I guess it could come from the size of the site. When it was split in half to make room for the Nicolet National Bank (which don't get me wrong - I love that building) it may have lessened the attractiveness the amount of floor area you could develop or utilize per floor. That is why many businesses moved out to the 'burbs to have everyone on one or two floors, to be more connected with your fellow employees, oh that and parking and $$$. Maybe Nicolet would have been better on a different site? Hindsight is 20/20, but it is what we have and someone needs to step up at sometime in order to complete what hopefully will be the final piece on the east riverfront. From the transcript it said the deadline for Astor contacts was Thanksgiving. Well, that day has passed fellow posters. Maybe that is the big announcement for tomorrow. To actually say "we are breaking ground". It will be interesting to see any update on the mall redevelopment. Again, from the article, it may be just rehashing what we already know, but they need something to get people fired up like there is a "plan" or an "idea".

[downtownVital.org]

I was surprised about Vetter's characterization of site 4 as well. It seems to me that that is the premier site in all of the downtown, even with Nicolet next door (incidentally, I think it was absolutly the right thing to break that site up). I think the general feeling is that site 4 will be an easier sell once the other projects are completed. Also, it will be easier to determine what uses will work at site 4 at a later time too. I mean, if Astor Place and River Center both essentially full upon completion, that would be a strong sign that site 4 can support a fair amound of residential along with other uses, but if AP and RC are, say, 50-75% full, more high end condos proabably will be less likely to work. I have a feeling River Center will sell out easily, so that leaves Astor Place.

As for tomorrow, I'd be surprised (delighted, but surprised) if they announced they were ready to break ground on Astor Place. Vetter's goal was to know where they stand by Thanksgiving. Now maybe where they stand is ready to break ground, but I got the impression the main idea was to get an idea where the origianal reservations stood in order to move ahead with sales. We'll see.

On the mall site, I saw a rendering the Mayor had of the area with the streets through and what type of development he'd like to see there. So I'm guessing that will be presented tomorrow. It was nothing too spectacular, but it was very solid and I thought a good goal... it was achievable. I think what I saw was the sort of thing that will be very good to help set the vision and agenda for that site, which is what is needed. Beyond that, I have heard some things about how interest has increased for development within that site now that the ownership issues are cleared up. It would be awesome if they had a developer ready to make a proposal there. I don't know that things are to that point yet, but at least people can start to see that there is a vision and that things are beginning to move ahead at that location again.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Bellin Building to get new Daily Buzz coffee shop

Update on downtown development set today

By Terry Anderson

What's brewing in downtown Green Bay?

For starters, a new coffee shop in the lobby of the historic Bellin Building.

When Green Bay leaders provide an update on downtown development today, one of the projects that will be unveiled is the Daily Buzz, a coffee shop and restaurant to be located at the corner of Washington and Walnut streets.

Work has already begun on the Daily Buzz, which will be owned by Green Bay native Heather Conard.

"It's looking like we'll be ready at the end of January, but with some luck we could be ready sooner," said Conard. "I envision a place that will be cozy and comfortable, where you'll come in the morning and have a cup of coffee and pastry as you read the morning paper."

The Daily Buzz will feature specially roasted coffees and also serve soups and sandwiches and wines.

It will be open 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. weekdays and 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Saturdays. And it will be open in the evening when there are performances at the Meyer Theatre, she said.

The coffee shop will also offer free Wi-Fi services.

A locally owned and managed coffee shop was among the goals of Steve Schneider, who with investment partners purchased the Bellin Building from Vicki Safford. Her late husband, Robert, bought the building in 1972.

The purchase includes a portion of the basement, floors one through five, and the penthouse on the ninth floor. The sixth, seventh and eighth floors are independently owned business condominiums that house legal services and mental health offices.

The acquisition group, which spent about $1.4 million for the building, plans a significant exterior and interior renovation during the next year.

City officials are expecting up to seven business announcements at this morning's meeting.

There will also be presentations on the mall redevelopment, waterfront development and some information about Wi-Fi service in the downtown.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061130/GPG03/611300587/1247

Victoria's restaurant moving to Glory Years site

Victoria's Italian Restaurant will move from Regency Suites, 333 Main St., to the former home of Glory Years Sports Bar and Grill, 321 S. Washington St., at the end of the year.

Victoria's will cease operations at Regency Suites on Dec. 31, to be replaced by a new, as yet unnamed restaurant. Regency Suites said Wednesday that "The Pub" in the hotel will add a menu to cater to hotel lunch and dinner guests while the new restaurant is being prepared.

Victoria's opened at the Regency Suites in January 2001.

Chris Victoria, owner of Victoria's, said the new location adjacent to Quality Inn & Suites will have more surface parking, and "we are going to have a better lunch business."

He said the space will be remodeled and he hopes to open the new Victoria's the first week in January.

Victoria also owns Victoria's restaurants at 2610 Bay Settlement Road and in Appleton.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061130/GPG03/611300595/1247

[Green Bay 4 Life]

On the mall site, I saw a rendering the Mayor had of the area with the streets through and what type of development he'd like to see there. So I'm guessing that will be presented tomorrow. It was nothing too spectacular, but it was very solid and I thought a good goal... it was achievable. I think what I saw was the sort of thing that will be very good to help set the vision and agenda for that site, which is what is needed. Beyond that, I have heard some things about how interest has increased for development within that site now that the ownership issues are cleared up. It would be awesome if they had a developer ready to make a proposal there. I don't know that things are to that point yet, but at least people can start to see that there is a vision and that things are beginning to move ahead at that location again.

I guess I respectfully disagree with you on one comment, the "nothing spectacular" comment on the mall exhibit. I think it is nothing short of spectacular. The City actually has a vision for the site. It doesn't mean that what was shown will be built exactly like that, but when a developer shows interest the main points identified in the exhibit - such as the reconnection of the street grid, mixed use buildings containing national retail tenants, a plaza area, will be elements that the City can say - we would like these to be incorporated. I feel it is better to have that type of vision for such an important area of the downtown - rather than just relying on a developer to come up with something on his/her own who maybe doesn't know Green Bay as well as the City Staff and Mayor.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Green Bay tops in sewage handling among Great Lakes cities

The Business Journal of Milwaukee

The city of Green Bay ranked the best of 20 major cities at managing municipal sewage and sewage discharges into the Great Lakes, according to report from a Canadian environmental group.

The same report ranked the city of Milwaukee -- long criticized for its sewage discharges into Lake Michigan -- ninth among the list of 11 Canadian cities and nine U.S. cities. Milwaukee's sewage management topped major cities like Toronto, Cleveland and Detroit.

The rankings were released Wednesday in the first "Great Lakes Sewage Report Card" issued by the Sierra Legal Defence Fund. The Toronto organization said the report is an ecosystem-based survey and analysis of municipal sewage treatment and sewage discharges in the Great Lakes basin. The report grades cities on issues such as collection, treatment and disposal of sewage based on information provided by each municipality.

The report documents that many cities in the region have antiquated systems for collecting and treating sewage and regularly release untreated sewage into local waterways. It is estimated that the 20 cities evaluated, representing a third of the region's 35 million people, dump more than 90 billion liters of untreated sewage into the Great Lakes each year.

The city of Green Bay received the highest grade of B+, while the Peel region of Canada (Mississauga and Brampton, Ontario) and Duluth, Minn., received B grades. All three generally have more sophisticated treatment processes and permit "very little" sewage to escape through combined sewer overflows, spills or bypasses, the report said.

The city of Milwaukee received a grade of C+ under the analysis, along with London, Ontario (which ranked 7th); Grand Rapids, Mich. (8th); Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario (10th); and the Niagara region of Ontario (11th).

Cities receiving the worst grades were Detroit (20th), which received a D, and the cities of Cleveland (19th) and Windsor, Ontario (18th), which received grades of D+.

The city of Chicago was given a grade of B-, but was not included in the rankings because its sewage is discharged into the Mississippi River basin.

http://milwaukee.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2006/11/27/daily20.html?jst=b_ln_hl

[gbmphillips]

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

[Green Bay 4 Life]

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

Seriously, run for public office. If you feel that strongly about the individuals we have here "running" the city, than step up and demand a change. I've read your other forum and everything that happens is a criticism to the employees and elected officials of the City of Green Bay. Since most are elected, run and see what you can do better. Again, not every idea is going to have 100% support from every citizen. But good lord, a baseball stadium on the Fox River will not make the City of Green Bay any better than what the boardwalk would. So why don't you list your other ideas here? I would love to hear them. If everything else everyone is proposing or talking about is a stupid waste of time and money, step up to the plate and belt out a couple of ideas. It is easy to read or listen to what the media portrays as the story without knowing the in's and out's of every discussion and say, well the City screwed up again. Believe me, a lot more takes place in a story than is reported in a one minute story on Fox 11 or Channel 2.

I'm for the Boardwalk, but more so I am for making Green Bay a better place to live because I live here. In attracting more businesses and residents so that the tax burden isn't as much and so that there are more oppurtunities for people here. So that my property value goes up. So that the education system is above average. Will a boardwalk cure all that? No. But what it will do is be a starting point. You will never get to the finish line unless you actually start the race. I feel Green Bay can be a lot better than it is today. There are many probelms and issues that need to be debated, but since this is the development thread, knock yourself out and lay out some ideas....

The floor is yours.

[sr22ger]

If Associated Bank builds on the existing site Meyer Theater/Daily Planet site, I would assume they'd tie the existing Art Deco design to the new structure. If that's the case, then some cool lighting would be quite appropriate because that sort of design lends itself well to lighting--though not usually neon tubes--intead you usually see flood lighting cast upon the facade to accentuate the textured pattern of the facade. Look at some of the nice Art Deco towers around the country--Tulsa Oklahoma actually has some great Art Deco buildings that are of an appropriate scale for Green Bay (New York of course has some great Art Deco towers but the most well-known are giants such as the Chrysler building). Tulsa's buildings are really snazzy.

That said, while I like Art Deco, I'm not sure that we need to go back in time like that. We've seen what happens when someone tries to replicate "old world' Green Bay (ala Baylake city center). It just doesn't feel "right"...as Dan said, it's kitsch.

But hopefully there is a matching design that ties in to the existing Theatre, yet is contemporary and classy. As I've said before--I'm anxious to see what's proposed and even more anxious to see that corner get redeveloped nicely.

And this taken from downtownvital.org:
-'When you look at the boardwalk, we based the tax increment financing looking at just the waterfront, and when you look at what's going to be happening at the Bellin Building, when you look at what's going to be happening at the Daily Planet site, they're doing that because of the boardwalk, se we may take some of that tax and direct it at the boardwalk.'

I haven't heard much released about this site. I am curious what the mayor will reveal, if anything, about plans for this site today.

I won't even bother responding to Mr Zima jr's post. None of us are here for negativity. :)

[gbmphillips]

I thought people invoked change by their vote? If I am unhappy with the elected offcials, I can vote them out, and I thought freedom of speech was also part of my rights. If I don't like something I can speak out against ot and then I can VOTE for a CHANGE.

As for the boardwalk, I know some people are excited, especially the thougt of strolling down there and hear someone playing his quitar, how romantic. But the cost seems extravigant, 12 million, my lord, they build whole buildings for less, thnk how many more homeless shelters that could be built, how many food pantries could be stocked!

I understand that the wholewheat world really has little use for sports, cappacinos are whast really make a city, where people can sit around little tables and discuss how important they are and they just can't wait for the next bookstore to open so they can sit there and read and sip more coffee. All very nice and cozy but only attractive to a small market. Blue collar people don't get elected to offices, thats because these days it takes money and backing by "certain people" to make it work. So that leaves the working class on the outside and at the whim of psecial interest.

[gbmphillips]

I won't even bother responding to Mr Zima jr's post. None of us are here for negativity. :)Thats right let's just rubber stamp everything, that way we can all feel good about ourselves.

[GBSurveyor]

I guess I respectfully disagree with you on one comment, the "nothing spectacular" comment on the mall exhibit. I think it is nothing short of spectacular. The City actually has a vision for the site. It doesn't mean that what was shown will be built exactly like that, but when a developer shows interest the main points identified in the exhibit - such as the reconnection of the street grid, mixed use buildings containing national retail tenants, a plaza area, will be elements that the City can say - we would like these to be incorporated. I feel it is better to have that type of vision for such an important area of the downtown - rather than just relying on a developer to come up with something on his/her own who maybe doesn't know Green Bay as well as the City Staff and Mayor.

I also agree that the mall rendering were fabulous. Exactly what needs to happen. The public plaza at the end of Flatly Court will be just great if that happens and I get the feeling that the JC Penny building will become the expanded KI center. That would just be a perfect connection to the Downtown from that place.

I still am not entirely sold on the Boardwalk having the impact on people as some think it will. Also the 12 million number seems high, but I have to believe that once this thing starts going up we will see the quality and be amazed. At least I hope. What I do know is that it is not just an extension of the "boardwalk" in place in front of the River Lofts. I was a little surprised at the project staging. I feel that they should start at the south end (Walnut) and work north. But I guess I don't know all of the details.

Did anyone catch the part on the ramp retail? Najah Davenport (former GB Packers running back) had put an offer to purchase, but has since been cut, so it is back on the market.

Other news was the Subway store going in the old Comedy City building.
No news on the Daily Planet site yet.

sr22ger- Love the Avatar!

[downtownVital.org]

As for the boardwalk, I know some people are excited, especially the thougt of strolling down there and here someone playing his quitar, how romantic. But the cost seems extravigant, 12 million, my lord, they build whole buildings for less, thnk how many more homeless shelters that could be built, how many food pantries could be stocked!

Personally, I don't think I could be much more excited about the boardwalk, except if it was going to be built more quickly. I understand that you, GBM, are opposed to it and that's fine and I think you're free to express that. I'd argue the point about $12 million for a boardwalk versus for homeless shelters a bit differently from you. People can always claim that money would be better spent on things like shelters instead of other items, but I don't feel that such an idea, while noble, is especially realistic. One could extend that argument that government has no role in providing public spaces because any money spent on parks could be "better" spent, but I think common sense shows that parks play an important civic role and are worth the cost.

So is the boardwalk worth it's cost as public space? I say yes. First, the majority of the money comes from TIF, I could be wrong but I doubt TIF money could be used for a shelter. Beyond that, homeless shelters do little to increase property values in the downtown (they may do the opposite), and tax base is necessary to provide other services such as shelters. That's not to say I'm against homeless shelters, just that they and services like them are a different case than public gathering spaces.

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

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

[Green Bay 4 Life]

I thought people invoked change by their vote? If I am unhappy with the elected offcials, I can vote them out, and I thought freedom of speech was also part of my rights. If I don't like something I can speak out against ot and then I can VOTE for a CHANGE.

As for the boardwalk, I know some people are excited, especially the thougt of strolling down there and hear someone playing his quitar, how romantic. But the cost seems extravigant, 12 million, my lord, they build whole buildings for less, thnk how many more homeless shelters that could be built, how many food pantries could be stocked!

I understand that the wholewheat world really has little use for sports, cappacinos are whast really make a city, where people can sit around little tables and discuss how important they are and they just can't wait for the next bookstore to open so they can sit there and read and sip more coffee. All very nice and cozy but only attractive to a small market. Blue collar people don't get elected to offices, thats because these days it takes money and backing by "certain people" to make it work. So that leaves the working class on the outside and at the whim of psecial interest.

I agree and disagree. Voting is the method. Your vote does make a difference, but then again, in a way one vote in the terms of hundreds or thousands doesn't. But I disagree that blue collar people don't get elected. I think if you look at our city council there is a make up of all types of individuals elected to represent their districts and the future of Green Bay. Again, the money for the Boardwalk will be raised through TIF's in the district to make improvements in the district, also fund raising (if someone wants to give money to the project great, if not so be it), and lastly grants. There are grants that can be awarded for these types of projects. So it isn't like Joe Taxpayer who will never use the boardwalk will be footing the bill for $12 Million. In terms of price, it seems about right. $12 million may seem like a lot, but in a way there is a lot to do and put into it. It's not like we are ging to a forest, cutting down some trees and laying the wood side by side. If we are going to do something like this, let's do it right and not half assed. Green Bay has enough half assed things, that it is time that we are recognized for truly doing soemthing right.

My question still stands though... This is a development thread - I can agree we can disagree - so you have made your thoughts known on objections to the Boardwalk. But is the money isn't coming from you, and it is from fundraising, grants, and the TIF which is created for these types of imporvenments - why not? I agree homelss shelters are needed, pantries do need to be filled. But the grants don't cover that aspect - nor does the TIF. Also if people want to donate money, then maybe they should donate $$$ to those causes. What besides the social aspects of change are you in favor of the development side of change?

[Emerald City]

Just wondering, did anything new come out of the meeting this morning that we all didn't know already? Such as concrete AP and RC timelines and such or was it all hedged again like last time? Just checking since I did not get to attend.

[gbmphillips]

From what I have read, Vetters is still threatung to start the project, sometime next year, nothing concrete. One odd thing I read was that the mayor said one of the uses of the old mall could be a skating rink, now correct me if wrong but did not the original plan from Vetter include an outdoor skating rink? Has this also been chnaged from his original plans? Also he said that "The new projects will include renovation and partial destruction of the former Younkers department store." I thought the original plan was to tear down the whole store because it was so old a not usaable, is he changing that plan alsso?

Otherwise GBPG has this story

http://greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061130/GPG0101/61130062/1978

[gbmphillips]

From what I have read, Vetters is still threatung to start the project, sometime next year, nothing concrete. One odd thing I read was that the mayor said one of the uses of the old mall could be a skating rink, now correct me if wrong but did not the original plan from Vetter include an outdoor skating rink? Has this also been chnaged from his original plans? Also he said that "The new projects will include renovation and partial destruction of the former Younkers department store." I thought the original plan was to tear down the whole store because it was so old a not usaable, is he changing that plan alsso?

Otherwise GBPG has this story

http://greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061130/GPG0101/61130062/1978

[Emerald City]

Hmmm, many times these meetings just frustrate people more because of the lack of information we didn't already know. Yes, some of the things that came out are interesting and fill another hole in the entire picture, but I would like to see a crane raising date or such. I think people will get a lot more excited with some steel in the air. I hope some more exciting designs come about though with further development. Eveywhere you seem to look are hip roofs or flat tops, why not some high round domes, or pyramid tops on buidings, something to break up the skyline and lend some contrast.

[Bartles53]

As for the boardwalk, I know some people are excited, especially the thougt of strolling down there and hear someone playing his quitar

Personally, I'd prefer to stroll down there and hear someone playing his key-tar but maybe that's just because I'm so fond of the 80s.

http://www.keytarmusic.com/images/KeyWallStubev_small.JPG

Some interesting points from the GBPG article:

He suggested luring...local landmarks such as Kaap?s and Kroll?s in the renovated area.

I love this. I've heard my parents mention all of the Green Bay landmarks that used to be located downtown (Sammy's Pizza, Krolls, Wally's Spot) that ended up relocating to the 'burbs. And everyone over the age of 50 or so raves about Kaap's. I'm a big fan of bringing old world Green Bay back to downtown.

New businesses. Captain?s Walk Winery, a wine-production and tasting venue in a historical building at 345 S. Adams St.

I'm not very familiar with the streets in the area. Puant, is this the building that you had mentioned in the past as a great restaurant location? Or is this the Schauer & Schumacher(?) building that was to be opened as a lounge/cafe a couple years ago?

One odd thing I read was that the mayor said one of the uses of the old mall could be a skating rink, now correct me if wrong but did not the original plan from Vetter include an outdoor skating rink?

I thought this a little odd myself. That was one of my favorite aspects of the boardwalk proposal. I hope that hasn't been scrapped.

One more question. In the article they mentioned that Astor Place is to break ground early next year (heard that before) but there was no mention of the time frame of the River Center. Has that been delayed again?

Any other input from the attendees would be appreciated.

[Bartles53]

One more thing. People have mentioned the conceptual drawings of the mall area with the public areas and improved street grid. Any idea where these can be viewed online? Also, on the City of Green Bay website there is a picture of the mayor next to a slide show of a drawing entitled "mixed use building development" (I'll try to post it here). Is this the River Center? It's tough to get a good look at it but it doesn't resemble any drawings I've seen in the past.

http://www.ci.green-bay.wi.us/artwork/goodmorningdowntown11_06.jpg

Were there any other new drawings shown at the meeting that haven't been shown before?

Thanks in advance.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

River Center timeline.

It was mentioned that you could actually see demolition of the Younkers building (sections of it anyways) begin in January of next year and construction of the rental lofts (north end of the project) begin prior to construction on Astor Place.

The winery will be located further down Adams Street, at the corner of Crooks Street so not that close to the Adams Street Station proposal (a couple blocks south)

As far as the ice rink. I think the Mayor was just throwing this out as a possible element. Who knows?

As far as projects changing. They do over time. Market changes, the ability to save portions of the structure to save on construction costs, etc, etc.

However. I will say that the proposed rendering of the rental lofts, and condos in the tower portion of the Younkers building (sans the commercial tower and the two extra floors per building) look an aweful lot like the renderings for the Juza project (hotel and condos) a while back. So if you can imagine that, this is what this could look like (if you were not there)...

Also, there were a few other slides. The Mayor's portion with the mall redevelopment was shown on Fox 11 news a while back when City Center Cafe opened. I have not seen it shown anywhere else. The mixed use buildings in that picture were just an example of what is possible for the mall area.

[downtownVital.org]

I thought this a little odd myself. That was one of my favorite aspects of the boardwalk proposal. I hope that hasn't been scrapped.

I don't think the ice rink is in the plans there any longer. I don't know that for sure, but the footprint has, I think, changed a bit and I don't know if there's room for a rink there anymore. I had questioned whether there was enough room for one there before in the first place.

One more question. In the article they mentioned that Astor Place is to break ground early next year (heard that before) but there was no mention of the time frame of the River Center. Has that been delayed again?

River Center is not delayed at all. Abatement will be starting in the next month or so and demoloition will follow, then consturction. There are not more, to my knowledge, obstacles to this project starting. It will happen.

Is this the River Center? It's tough to get a good look at it but it doesn't resemble any drawings I've seen in the past.

http://www.ci.green-bay.wi.us/artwork/goodmorningdowntown11_06.jpg

No, those are just concepts of things that could go on the mall site.

[Puant]

Presentation today
Pretty exciting! Things are happening, at last. I was sort of anticipating a let-down of some sort--I thought Vetter might say that his projects have been scaled back due to lack of interest, but that didn't happen, exactly.

Mall plans & renderings
I loved these!! It's exactly the right thing to do with the mall site.

Captain's Walk Winery
This surprised me. I know that building, it's not the one that I dream about renovating, it's farther south as someone mentioned. It's a very nice, historic building. I've looked at this building with awe, but to me, the immediate surrounding area (the city block around it) is one of those places that's been pillaged, killed and rendered hideous by our car-dominated culture (big assfault parking lots that they've tried to 'beautify' by putting in railroad tie planters which cannot actually grow anything so they're now looking like shit as well). Hopefully some of the revitalization and pedestrian-oriented INFILL spills south into this area as well.

Boardwalk
Didn't it appear to you that today's renderings of the boardwalk showed a much scaled-back design, with much less wood, fewer or smaller piers extending into the water? I thought I saw a whole lot more of the existing sheetpiling exposed today, whereas in the past, that was all covered with wood.

Boardwalk cost
As others have stated, it's becoming more & more clear that this boardwalk is what is finally helping to stimulate the rebirth of the core of our city. This is a facility that can and will be used by not just a few people--but thousands of people. ANyone can use it. If this was Vetter's boardwalk, they would have gated off the waterfront around his condos and kept the public out. That is what typically happens with expensive condos on waterfront, but it's not happening here...THis boardwalk keeps the waterfront open to anyone and everyone.

Lots of different people will be working and living here in this same, compact area, sharing the boardwalk and everything else it connects to. These will be people from all walks of life: from those living in the the low-income housing that's part of RiverCenter to the rich folks in high-end Astor condos right next door; from people working for a meager wage at a small downtown business and on up to the bank executives making loads of jack--they'll all be living, working, mixing together on that public boardwalk and the surrounding area. It's exactly what we need.This will be a place where people from all classes can live, work, recreate (YMCA, trail), study (library), eat, all sorts of things...in one small compact walkable area.

People who live/work downtown won't be essentially forced to buy a car (the HUGE drain of $$ for a lot of people), because they'll be able to do everything within a walking distance, and/or they'll be on a transit route. Just about every other place in this city has been built such that people have no choice but to buy a car and all of the expense that goes with that, just to get around at all--to go to work, get a few groceries, etc.

Nobody ever seems to care about the tax dollars that are spent when new streets are continually hurled in sprawl developments farther and farther out on the fringe. These require new schools ($cha ching), expanded police, fire, and other services ($$$$), new parks (which are truly used by just a few), utilities, you name it. The sprawl developments are what makes "Joe Taxpayer"'s tax bill go up....not only on a local level, but the dependence on cars of course costs so much more in terms of oil dependency as well (federal taxes, wars, environmental degradation, etc). And when people have no other choice but to live in these places becasue there is no decent residential housing downtown, they are forced to buy a car.

So why would a relatively small investment in our urban, walkable, dense, mixed, fun, core be an issue?

Sorry, I rant. What matters is that most people seem to understand it. This is why we get hundreds of people turning out to events like today's Good Morning Downtown event. Most people are enthused, and I'm excited too. I just don't want this whole thing to be killed in the 11th hour.

[titletown]

I heard that Imaginasium is going to decide on the Boardwalk's name. I wonder what name they will go with. I know there is not a naming contest, but here are a few that I thought of: Fox Landing, Fox Walk, or maybe even City Pier.....PCB Pier,Toxic Docks'it, Da Pier would not make the cut, lol. I just hope they decide on a name that will go in the lines of Navy Pier, Fisherman's Wharf, Riverwalk, etc. I am glad to hear all the great news today. I look forward to 2007's groundbreaking projects.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

According to the Astor Place website, 19 units have been sold, 11 units are pending, and 9 units have been reserved.

If we figure pending means, in the works and close that will bring the nimber to about 34%. Add in the 9 reserved units and they are closer to 45% units being sold. So I recall reading through this threads (older) that around 40% pre-sales was the goal before construction would start. Hopefully yesterday's announcements, the start of River Center demo and construction being closer, will get these "urban pioneers" to make a strong committment and turn those reservations into sales contracts...

I mean for the people who have done this, waiting another 6 months for construction to begin would really irk me...

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Captain's Walk Winery
This surprised me. I know that building, it's not the one that I dream about renovating, it's farther south as someone mentioned. It's a very nice, historic building. I've looked at this building with awe, but to me, the immediate surrounding area (the city block around it) is one of those places that's been pillaged, killed and rendered hideous by our car-dominated culture (big assfault parking lots that they've tried to 'beautify' by putting in railroad tie planters which cannot actually grow anything so they're now looking like shit as well). Hopefully some of the revitalization and pedestrian-oriented INFILL spills south into this area as well.

Funny you should mention this, I was reading through the 11/27 GB PC Minutes and saw that the building located at the corner of Crooks and Jefferson is being proposed to be torn down and converted into a parking lot... This lot is like two or three to the east of the future winery building... Looks like more surface parking. Hooray! That is urban for you...

[mohammed wong]

is younkers the dept store from greenbay?
what a weird name for a dept store :nuts: ,
its like the old english spelling for yonkers or something?

heard a piece on npr this morning about how they will tear down the mall downtown and put back in street sections that were destroyed by the mall with its creation, sounds like a good idea, i hate street destruction.

i would like to see some more pics if possible :)
like what does the younkers building look like?
i always enjoy driving through greenbay on the way back to chicago from wausau.

any other chains or stuff that originated in greenbay?
the signs for 29 are really bad, i was driving east on it and it said to go north,
and i ended up in allouez i think which is really cool looking with all the industry and old houses,
but i doublebacked and saw that it just jogs over one street, doh!

[Emerald City]

I heard that Imaginasium is going to decide on the Boardwalk's name. I wonder what name they will go with. I know there is not a naming contest, but here are a few that I thought of: Fox Landing, Fox Walk, or maybe even City Pier.....PCB Pier,Toxic Docks'it, Da Pier would not make the cut, lol. I just hope they decide on a name that will go in the lines of Navy Pier, Fisherman's Wharf, Riverwalk, etc. I am glad to hear all the great news today. I look forward to 2007's groundbreaking projects.

I vote for your "City Pier." I think it gives a strong title to a central focus for a location that will emulate the city and it's cultural tie to the water along with it's desired growth!

[downtownVital.org]

Mall plans & renderings
I loved these!! It's exactly the right thing to do with the mall site.

I think the vision for the mall site is adequate. I love putting the streets back through, and I think the general plan for use is good. My concerns are two-fold and related. First, the Mayor talks about basing this around one or more big-box realators such as Crate & Barrell. I'm not necessarily opposed to a big-box within a downtown, but I A) question whether such a company would be interested in Green Bay, and B) worry about filling to much space with one retailer becuase if that goes out of business you have a hole in the area again, though obviously a smaller one than the mall.

My second concern builds off of point B above. If you look at the downtown over the past 30 years, the part that survived the best has been along Washington St and to some degree Adams St. where there are the good old, narrow, 2 to 4 story buildings lining the street with retail/entertainment on the first floor and the potential for commercial space or lofts above. This sort of development pattern lends itself to diversity of use and survives better through changes because the district A) is less dependant on any one development, B) is owned by a greated number of steakholders, and C) is more adaptable to new uses becuase no one site costs an arm and an leg to renovate.

By contrast, the mall site renderings are filled with four or five block-long developments. The total scale is the same, but I worry that these sorts of building patters will be less sustainable and have less character. I'd like to see a portion of the sites divided so that individual investors can build buildings on the scale of what lines much of Washington and Adams, in much the same way that Maloney's built there new pub on N Washington. Obviously this development pattern would take longer to fill, and you'd still want somewhat larger buildings on the corners where maybe a big-box could go. I just would favor a more organic approach to filling the space than a quicker approach with larger developments to fill the space as fast as possible.

Boardwalk
Didn't it appear to you that today's renderings of the boardwalk showed a much scaled-back design, with much less wood, fewer or smaller piers extending into the water? I thought I saw a whole lot more of the existing sheetpiling exposed today, whereas in the past, that was all covered with wood.

The plans have changed in part to reflect public input for things like more greenery and more transient boat docks, and I think in part to keep the approapriate clearance from the shipping channel, which runs pretty close to that bank. There is indeed less wood, especially on the up-land parts.

These will be people from all walks of life: from those living in the the low-income housing that's part of RiverCenter to the rich folks in high-end Astor condos right next door; from people working for a meager wage at a small downtown business and on up to the bank executives making loads of jack--they'll all be living, working, mixing together on that public boardwalk and the surrounding area. It's exactly what we need.This will be a place where people from all classes can live, work, recreate (YMCA, trail), study (library), eat, all sorts of things...in one small compact walkable area.

I'd caution agaist the phrase "low-income housing." This is "affordable housing," which means income below the median but not necessarily "low." A picky difference, but some people seem to have the impression that the plan is to have a housing project on the site, which is not the case but contributes to a feeling that the area may be less safe than it will be. These will be nice loft-apartments, and the people living there will be solid working-class people, who's annual income happens to be below the medain (I think somewhere around $30 or 35,000).

According to the Astor Place website, 19 units have been sold, 11 units are pending, and 9 units have been reserved.

If we figure pending means, in the works and close that will bring the nimber to about 34%. Add in the 9 reserved units and they are closer to 45% units being sold. So I recall reading through this threads (older) that around 40% pre-sales was the goal before construction would start. Hopefully yesterday's announcements, the start of River Center demo and construction being closer, will get these "urban pioneers" to make a strong committment and turn those reservations into sales contracts...

I mean for the people who have done this, waiting another 6 months for construction to begin would really irk me...

Important point: to proceed with construction they need to sell a percentage of value, not a percentage of units. With the penthouses not being reserved, the 30-40% of units sold equates to less than the same % of value. However, I do not know if the % of value needed is 40% or some number lower than that.

is younkers the dept store from greenbay?
what a weird name for a dept store :nuts: ,
its like the old english spelling for yonkers or something?

The department store from Green Bay was Prange's. Like happened in so many cities across the country, and like has happened to Marshall Field's in Chicago, Prange's was bought by Younker's, which is a chain owned by Saks. Many Green Bay traditions were lost after the sale, and ultimatly the former Prange's location downtown closed when Younker's moved to another site at Bay Park Spuare mall in Ashwaubenon. That's not to villify Younker's, Prange's had tried to expand and may very well have failed had they not been bought out.

[gbmphillips]

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

[downtownVital.org]

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

WHOA!! Glad you're on board.

Your question is a good one. Some of the business, the more commercial end (APAC, Smith Barney, Archetype, Imaginasium, etc.), are established businesses that have made it and I'm sure will do fine. My guess is though that you were refering more to the retail businesses, and I guess time will tell. If the owners are good business people, they will probably be fine. The folks who are running City Center Cafe have been in business a while, and my guess is they know what they're doing and have a good built-in market right in their building with Baylake and APAC. The new coffee shop in the Bellin Building will hopefully do well, though I wonder if there's enough density to support Cafe Espresso, Daily Buzz, the new coffee shop in City Center Cafe, The Attic Coffee and Books, and any other shop that opens (Starbucks?). They all have a little different niche. I suppose a big key will be how Frank's Dinner Theater does at the Meyer. If they maintain their success from SC Grand, and are bringing 500 to 1000 people into the city 100 nights a year, that will be a huge boost. I'll also be curious thow the winery does. Does Green Bay have the market to support that? We'll see.

I guess in the end some business will fail, such is the nature of business. If 25% fail, then not so bad. If 75% of the new businesse fail within a few years, then there's a problem. A few years ago when Jillian's and Gallagher's openened it seemed like a good fit for those types of businesses and it seemed like people wanted them. But as we now know, the market didn't support either. So, now it seems like people want the types of businesses that are opening downtown. These new businesses are fundamentally different than Jillian's or Gallagher's, so I'm not predicting they'll do bad, but time will tell if they are a good fit or not.

[GBSurveyor]

I think the vision for the mall site is adequate. I love putting the streets back through, and I think the general plan for use is good. My concerns are two-fold and related. First, the Mayor talks about basing this around one or more big-box realators such as Crate & Barrell. I'm not necessarily opposed to a big-box within a downtown, but I A) question whether such a company would be interested in Green Bay, and B) worry about filling to much space with one retailer becuase if that goes out of business you have a hole in the area again, though obviously a smaller one than the mall.

My second concern builds off of point B above. If you look at the downtown over the past 30 years, the part that survived the best has been along Washington St and to some degree Adams St. where there are the good old, narrow, 2 to 4 story buildings lining the street with retail/entertainment on the first floor and the potential for commercial space or lofts above. This sort of development pattern lends itself to diversity of use and survives better through changes because the district A) is less dependant on any one development, B) is owned by a greated number of steakholders, and C) is more adaptable to new uses becuase no one site costs an arm and an leg to renovate.

By contrast, the mall site renderings are filled with four or five block-long developments. The total scale is the same, but I worry that these sorts of building patters will be less sustainable and have less character. I'd like to see a portion of the sites divided so that individual investors can build buildings on the scale of what lines much of Washington and Adams, in much the same way that Maloney's built there new pub on N Washington. Obviously this development pattern would take longer to fill, and you'd still want somewhat larger buildings on the corners where maybe a big-box could go. I just would favor a more organic approach to filling the space than a quicker approach with larger developments to fill the space as fast as possible.
Very well put, but I do believe that a large development is needed, something to kick start the retail boom we all want. A Macy's, Crate & Barrel, Borders, Barnes and Noble, or IKEA (I'll keep dreaming) would be a start. Something to give that "little guy" some traffic. I don't really disagree with you, however I think someone with bigger pockets needs to come in and get something going right a way, at least to help change peoples perception and maybe rediscover downtown. The Mayor did mention that they would try to build in some sort of reduced rent option for the local guy to get established, which is exactly what needs to happen for people to take risks.

The rendering that I liked the best of the grid was the one at the JP Penny end of Admiral Flatly Court, you could look down and see the river in a urban setting, something we currently lack.

I think that the 3 season ice rink would be a better fit down near the plaza area, then on the river anyway. Just think how nice the January wind off the river would feel.

Whatever happens will be an improvement over what is there right now.

[mohammed wong]

dont know about steakholders,
but i do agree that cities in general should zone like cities,
and ive never been a fan of huge developers,
in the old days lots were small and buildings were built on order by individuals,
which would be a nice way to develop where the mall is or any reclaimed deadzone in a city but nowadays is NEVER DONE.
if the area is a large SWATH the chances of a variety of buildings is lower,
but park east area in milwaukee has been divvied up not too bad, good example of what to do with an urban wasteland.

[downtownVital.org]

I do believe that a large development is needed, something to kick start the retail boom we all want. A Macy's, Crate & Barrel, Borders, Barnes and Noble, or IKEA (I'll keep dreaming) would be a start.

Like you, I'm not opposed to larger developments. I guess a better way to put it would be to pattern the development like along the lines of traditional downtowns with 4 to 8 story buildings on the corners, and 2 or 3 story buildings filling in between. So a prospective big-box could go in a larger corner development. What I don't prefer is a block-long development anchored by a big-box. Not only would that be less aesthetically appealing, but if the big-box goes out of business the whole development may be in danger, much as the mall suffered from losing its anchors.

One problem as well is that stores like the ones you mentioned either don't typically build in downtowns, or when they do they don't tend to lead development. If your city has a district that is already attracting the demographics that are attractive to the large retailer, then they'll be glad to move in, but I don't know that they are very interested in moving into an area in the hopes that their business will lead to their target demo coming down. My impression is that they tend to follow markets. We'll see how the condos affect the downtown demographics, and how major retailers respond to our "new" downtown.

A friend of mine is in commercial real estate and told me he may do some investigating into what sorts of businesses tend to open locations in the downtowns of cities similar in size to Green Bay. He's someone who's opinion I really respect, and he got me thinking about the issues like the one described above. It isn't enough to want a Borders, the city needs to be attracting the demographics that Borders looks for (or more accuratly, needs to have the right demos living in the city/metro). I'll be curious to hear if he learns anything from his research.

I think that the 3 season ice rink would be a better fit down near the plaza area, then on the river anyway. Just think how nice the January wind off the river would feel.

I don't think there is room for a ring along the boardwalk any longer. Even still, I think they need more space than may be available there now or ever. The preferable situation is to have the rink outdoors but covered. A couple years ago I met with the head of the Downtown Dayton Partnership. She told me that their rink has been a big hit, but they moved it to a new location with a cover because everytime it rained the rink would be ruined. It's apparently a lot easier to maintain one of those when they can be a bit more sheltered, though obviously many cities get by fine with them right out in the open.

The new Flatley Court (or is it Flatley Way?) will be pretty impressive though if it is developed right. With the Flatley Pier on one end and potentially a plaza on the other, it should look pretty great. That was one of my favorite, if not my favorite outright, of the renderings shown yesterday.

dont know about steakholders...

Oops! Is steakholder another name for a butcher? I guess I meant stakeholders. :doh:

[Puant]

Its nice to see business moving back downtown but are too many coming before the people move in?

I wonder this same thing. I am surprised to see how many restaurants, coffee shops, etc are clamoring to open so quickly. A year ago, there were just a few places to eat in this whole area. Now, just one year later, there are new restaurants popping up all over including that large food court. Yet, they all seem busy so far, from what I can tell, and many of the "big" projects haven't even started yet. I wonder where all of these people came from already?

The Press-Gazette had an editorial today, in case anyone missed it:

Editorial: Turn big downtown plans into a reality
12-1-2006

Hope and vision are key components of any significant project. Both were on display Thursday when Downtown Green Bay Inc. and other city and business officials presented their status report on the proposed development of the city's waterfront and downtown.

While optimism was apparent during the report at the Meyer Theatre, hard evidence that the dreams will become a reality was still missing.

We support the concept of revitalizing downtown Green Bay by making full use of its most valuable natural resource, the Fox River. We like what Mayor Jim Schmitt and his lieutenants want to do to make the city's core a destination for residents, visitors and businesses. We admire the efforts to encourage retail, residential and educational interests in this area.

But, as we have stated before, there is still a sizeable gap between wanting it and having it. Only the formation of a plan to close that gap is missing.

Those in attendance at the Meyer got a healthy dose of the vision Thursday. Milwaukee developer John Vetter took his audience through his three-step plans to develop the waterfront between the Walnut Street and Nitschke bridges — the Riverfront Lofts, Astor Place and Rivercenter. These would include condominiums, business space and the Children's Museum.

Green Bay Public Works Director Carl Weber used artist renderings to show what improvements to the waterfront could provide, stating that the piers and boardwalk would "re-establish the Fox River as the heart of Green Bay."

Patrick Hopkins said his business, Imaginasium, would help develop a slogan for the redevelopment.

Schmitt announced the imminent wireless service coming to the downtown area, said the street system would return with removal of parts of Washington Commons, allowing Adams Street to reach Main Street, and Pine Street to reach the river. He also talked about luring national franchise businesses to the downtown, mentioning both Crate & Barrel and the Pottery Barn.

Schmitt talked about giving the downtown a historic flavor, hoping to see such businesses as Kaap's and Kroll's as part of the downtown retail district. And he said the vision includes both an educational aspect and hopes that a facility providing more business meeting rooms could be added downtown.

Good things are happening in Green Bay. The city's winning bid to receive a $30 million grant to build the Ray & Joan Kroc Corps Community Center on the east side is a plum. The announcement that new or relocated businesses have committed to downtown Green Bay is encouraging.

But we await the breakthrough that says there is more than hope and vision in the city's future.

[downtownVital.org]

A year ago, there were just a few places to eat in this whole area. Now, just one year later, there are new restaurants popping up all over including that large food court.

Now, see, I've thought for some time the quality and variety of places to eat was a strength of downtown. For instance, there's Victoria's for american-italian in enormous quantities, Angelina's for real-italian, the Stein has a nice menu with a few German selections, St. Brendan's for Irish, Cafe Espresso has sort of mediteranean plus other foods, Coaches Corner for the whole sport's bar thing, Oxford's/Fillmore has been open in one form or another for a while, China Palace for New York style Chinese, a variety of places for pub food, Al's Hamburger, Titletown Brewing, Hinterland Brewing, Bangkok Garden for Tai, Little Tokyo for sushi, is Maria's Mexican still open on Boradway?, plus more if you count the Olde Main district. These are all well established places, I think pretty representative of what's available in metro Green Bay, and I think a pretty good concentration. Now, add in new places like Fetaz, City Center Cafe, Subway, and Erbert's & Gerbert's (which isn't new) and there are more options for quick lunch food.

Puant's not the first one I've heard claim that there haven't been enough food options downtown, not by any means. I just am not sure what people have wanted down there for a city the size of Green Bay besides American, Italian, Irish, German, Tai, Chinese, Japanese, plus whatever else is there. It obviously isn't Chicago, Milwaukee, or Madison. But I've always been impressed, and have enjoyed many a meal down there. A good pizzaria would be cool, i guess.

[Puant]

^^You're right, there has been a good selection of restaurants.

Maria's closed...don't know why, they had a good thing going. But don't forget about Kavarna, it's still going strong and one of my favorites.

I guess my statement yesterday had more to do with what I had been thinking about doing with the Schauer-Schumacher building at 109 N. Adams about 1-2 years ago. I figured at that time, there was definitely a market for a coffee/pastry/bagel/lunch-type restaurant there. Now, however, suddenly the market for that sort of thing might be saturated, at least until some other things get going.

Since that part of Adams Street is one of my favorite parts of downtown, and for whatever reason I like that old building, I'm thinking that the best possibility for a viable business in that building now might be a bookstore serving coffee + bagels and stuff.... Loft apartments upstairs. Know anyone who'd like to risk some $$ on an investment like this? Could an independent bookstore survive, or would a chain like Borders consider revitalizing and reusing an old building like this?

[Puant]

I spent some time re-writing an earlier forum post about why I support the Boardwalk and put this on my weblog (click link below).

[downtownVital.org]

Maria's closed...don't know why, they had a good thing going. But don't forget about Kavarna, it's still going strong and one of my favorites...

Could an independent bookstore survive, or would a chain like Borders consider revitalizing and reusing an old building like this?

Didn't Maria's move to a larger location on the northeast side of town, just off of I-43 past east of Webster? I didn't know if they kept both locations open, but I guess not.

I think Border's opens in much larger buildings than Schauer & Schumacher. I independant store would probably be more likely.

[Emerald City]

Puant's not the first one I've heard claim that there haven't been enough food options downtown, not by any means. I just am not sure what people have wanted down there for a city the size of Green Bay besides American, Italian, Irish, German, Tai, Chinese, Japanese, plus whatever else is there. It obviously isn't Chicago, Milwaukee, or Madison. But I've always been impressed, and have enjoyed many a meal down there. A good pizzaria would be cool, i guess.

I think the downtown (and Green Bay in general) needs a good Polish establishment. There is a very large number of residents with a Polish Background in the area, yet a big hole in the Polish cuisine. I think this is another type of different venue we need to round out the cultural foods available downtown.

[Bartles53]

Posted December 3, 2006

Schmitt lists priorities in vision for downtown

Jeffries: 'I love the mix of work, live, shop and eat'

By Terry Anderson
tanderson@greenbaypressgazette.com


Green Bay Mayor Jim Schmitt envisions a downtown without Washington Commons that will be contemporary, but also harken back historically.


"This is a real opportunity for the people of Green Bay," Schmitt said of a recent settlement between the city, mall owner Development Associates and mortgage holder Baylake Bank. The settlement makes the property available for redevelopment.


"The decisions that we make will be long-term, but will also send a message who we are. We will be judged by our downtown."


Earlier this week Schmitt outlined his vision for downtown, noting five priorities:



Re-establish the street-grid system by opening Adams Street and establishing a new street, Flatley Way, that would go from Washington Street to the J.C. Penney building.


Attract $30 million to $40 million in new commercial development.


Create a mixed-use commercial district that will include national and local specialty stores, but not big-box stores that would compete with Bay Park Square in Ashwaubenon. At the same time, it could honor Green Bay's history by encouraging the re-establishment of historical shops and restaurants.


Expanded convention space. The first floor of the J.C. Penney building could be used for new convention space, with the second floor reserved for offices. This would provide meeting space and is not intended to conflict with the exhibit space offered at ShopKo Hall or the Oneida Radisson complex.


Provide additional green space and outdoors activities. There would be widened walkways and streets, attractive lighting and a pedestrian plaza leading to the convention center. Schmitt thinks there may be an opportunity to establish recreational draws such as a three-season ice-skating rink.

Other businesses will be interested in the downtown now that the mall issue is settled, he said.


Without casting blame, Schmitt noted that when city officials talked with major developers about downtown projects, "The mall was always the elephant in the room."


But don't expect the wrecking ball to start swinging immediately.


While Schmitt expects some construction to begin in 12 to 18 months, he stressed that nothing will happen without commitment and financing. And the redevelopment could be undertaken in phases.


Schmitt doesn't expect the entire structure to be razed.


His proposal not only preserves the J.C. Penney building for expanded meeting space, but also saves the parking ramps, which are owned by the city, generate revenue and are a necessary part of the urban environment.


"This is the 64-thousand-dollar question, make that the 64-million-dollar question," said Green Bay alderwoman Celestine Jeffreys, who represents that area. "I think whatever happens has to add to the economic activity, which should include but not be limited to the tax base."


In her "perfect universe," the heart of the downtown would include a combination of nationally recognized chains and locally owned shops and restaurants. A variety of affordable entertainment activities would keep the area active into the evening.


That "perfect universe" also would include housing that attracts families as well as single adults.


"I love the mix of work, live, shop and eat," she said. "Many of my constituents would like to see the shops and sidewalks come back to the way it was. They are sad that the downtown feel is gone."


Certainly there's a wide range of views about the property's future.


City officials should move deliberately, not hastily, said Mike Stange, owner of the Bangkok Garden Restaurant, 240 N. Broadway.


"First, the owners and city must get past the notion of a downtown shopping mall in Green Bay. It just won't fly, for a lot of common-sense reasons, first of which there is a very small customer base," Stange said. "I would say be cautious for now, but I certainly don't want to see it stay the way it is."


There's no disputing that the property has long-term value, Stange said. But currently there is so much property on the market that the owners probably could not get what it's worth.


His suggestion is to demolish much of the existing structure and establish park and parking space until market conditions change.


"Back off on commercial development of the property until it's financially warranted, then make a killing on the property resale," Stange said.


Could the existing mall be answer to another pressing problem — crowded schools?


A number of area residents have pondered that possibility.


"That was the first thing that came to my mind when the school district started talking about a referendum," said Tom Weinstein, an owner of Lou's Bootery, 222 N. Adams St. "What a perfect place for a new high school. There's parking downtown and the building is there. Gosh, you have a huge building there."


Weinstein isn't alone. When the Green Bay Press-Gazette asked readers for their views about the mall, more than a dozen mentioned converting the building into a high school, saving the expense of constructing a new high school on the far east side.


"I'm a former school employee, and I know how crowded the schools are," said Sue Lawrence of Green Bay. "I've talked with a number of people who have wondered whether it could be used to address that concern."


While converting the mall into a school doesn't meet Schmitt's criteria for raising assessed values, he doesn't dismiss that suggestion altogether. In fact, he has discussed the possibility of establishing a Green Bay Academy in the downtown area with Green Bay Superintendent Dan Nerad.


He has also talked with representatives of Northeast Wisconsin Technical College, University of Wisconsin-Green Bay and Marquette University about a downtown presence.


"We have to start acting like we're the third-largest city in Wisconsin," Schmitt said.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

^^
I actually just read the paper version of the story quoted above and there was a photo of the downtown mall redevelopment exhibit created by the City. The name sounded somewhat familar of who the paper credited in designing the exhibit. Even though he doesn't post here anymore, he may still read the threads, so kudos Avissers... Keep up the good work.:cheers:

[Geography Teacher]

I agree with the "organic" approach to redeveloping the Washington Commons site, with several 4-6 story buildings. Let the market dictate what is needed and wanted. We need signature buildings built by large developers too, but that's what Astor Place and River Center will be. Mohammed Wong mentioned the Park East development in Milwaukee; I've heard of it but don't know much about it. Does that situation teach us any lessons about planning for this parcel?

Also, the print story in the Press-Gazette had a sidebar listing the ideas that various community members had for the space. My favorite was from a gentleman who sees a monorail depot on the property!

[downtownVital.org]

^^ Monorail! Whenever I hear that I immediatly think, "Simpson's"

The Park East area is just now being developed, and a large part of it is still vacant land. As such, it's a bit early to learn too much from that. It is amazing to see a city that took down a freeway (admittedly, one that really didn't go anywhere) to develop the land though.

[titletown]

A monorail is hard to imagine in this city.... Seattle's monorail is the only publicly owned rail transit system in the US that makes a profit. This has never caught on in the US despite its unparalled safety record & cost. Japan and a few other countries are making us look like cavemen since all we think of in the future is cars, lol.

[Inside the Beltway]

Virginia is having a tough enough time trying to convince FTA to completely fund the extension of metro out to Dulles...good luck with a monorail in Green Bay...unless Homer Simpson is available to drive it...then it's another story.

[gbmphillips]

The day Green Bay gets a monorail will be the same day the open a Walt Disney Theme park here. This city is in no need of additonal mass transit, the bus system is adequate and people in this town are not goinbg to give up the convienece of having a car. Why do you think that EVERY project downtown includes some kind of parking ramp? This is not Madison of the North, we do not think green at all and we like it that way.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

This is not Madison of the North, we do not think green at all and we like it that way.

I disagree on thinking green. I think the monorail is a little bit extreme, okay, a lot bit extreme for Green Bay. If that were to take place they should have planned for that a long time ago. But development in Green Bay should be thinking green in the design of their buildings, use of landscaping and recycled materials, and conservation of water and electricity. We may not be the Madison of the north, but we shouldn't live in the stone age either... Those things may cost a little more upfront, but the long term benefits and costs savings to the community as a whole would more than make up for that. But alas, good old Green Bay thinking - "what me put money into something???" When we will actually be proactive rather than hardly reactive to what other communtiies like Madison, Milwaukee (In Wisconsin) and so many other communties across the US are requiring. At least ante up some incentives... My two cents. You can't have Green Bay w/o "green"...

[downtownVital.org]

Can you imagine an monorail in Green Bay? "Welcome to historic downtown Green Bay - whooooosshhhhhh- home of the Packers, and one of the oldest settlemnts in the midwest - whooooooosshhhhhhhhhh - "

I mean, in all seriousness, if someone had a plan to bring back the trolleys that were in the city pre-WWII, that migh make some sense (even if it won't happen). But the image of a monorail in Green Bay doesn't even pass the laugh test.

:rofl:

[Inside the Beltway]

Mass transit in Green Bay would never work becasue there isn't enough density for it. Where would you put stops that would attract enough ridership? Also, for Green Bay's population, the city is quite expansive and people don't live and work in places close enough to make transit work.

I guess you could say I'm an outsider now, but this past Thanksgiving was my first trip back to Green Bay since last Christmas. Some observations:

- Some areas of Green Bay look exactly the same as they did 10-15 years ago. At first I thought this was a bad thing, but maybe it is ok. Example: West Mason at Ashland...I felt like I was in a time warp to my high school days.

- Lots of new development along US 41 between Appleton and De Pere. Land must be very resonable along this corridor because many companies are opening up shops/offices out there. The thing that gets me is the lack of density. Each new office building is surrounded by a sea of asphalt and almost all have the same look: brick exterior with a shingled roof. Very residential looking.

- What's up with that strip mall eye sore along WI 172 adjacent to the "lake?" Was that the best use of that property, I mean there aren't any windows that actually FACE THE LAKE! Not inspiring.

- I grew up on the east side, and although I'm amazed at the changes along the new Huron Road, it also turns my stomach thinking of all the new sprawl that will swallow up the farm fields. I do like the interchange at the southeast corner of UWGB off of 54/57, it does improve access to the campus a great deal.

- The new movie theather is the I-43 industrial park is long overdue. No more having to drive to Ashwaubenon to catch a movie in a newer theater. It is about time the east side has some fun stuff too.

- Some of the chain like restaurants around the area were new to me, at first I was thinking to myself "what's a Tumbleweed or Ground Round or Boston Crab/Pizza" but quickly it turned to "allright, not another Ruby Tuesdays!" Green Bay has much more options for food than it ever had in the past.

- Downtown is looking better, even though I was looking forward to seeing a 250' tower crane swinging away at Astor Place...oh well, maybe next summer. My oh so observant mother pointed out that "don't those new condo's next to the old Pranges building look like a trashy sea side motel in Florida?" I must say, with the dilapitated vacent buildings to the north, she has a point.

Anyway, sorry for the long post, but I figured some of you would appriciate an outsider perspective on the city's progress. All in all, Green Bay is getting to be a much more livable place yet the sprawl is sort of nauseating. See the other current midwest thread on the topic of sprawl...

[Puant]

The Simpson's Monorail episode did come to my mind when I read that in the paper as well. :lol:

As far as mass transit not working in Green Bay--It's more about culture than it is density or anything else. I was just watching the Polar Express with my kids...and I got to thinking about passenger trains in general....Actually I think it would be kind of cool to be able to choose to ride a train to say, Appleton or Milwaukee. You'd be able to walk around in the train cars, stretch out, relax, read the paper... Maybe there'd even be a 'tavern car' where you could toss down a few cold beers along the way. :cheers: Actually, in the old days, Green Bay Packer fans used to do this for games vs. the Bears in Chicago. I've heard these trips were an absolute blast. I believe it. Anyone here old enough to remember that or even do that? Beats driving down on Hwy 41 if you ask me.

Now that the kids are in bed awaiting St. Nick's arrival, I started playing around with some Census data factfinders online (what's wrong with me?:bash: ). Anyway, using real data, I looked at the existing rail line that still runs from dowtnwon Green Bay, through downtown DePere and Wrightstown and down through the Fox cities (I think it's Wisconsin Central rail line). It's not going to support a monorail, but it could run a real passenger train.

Using the census data at the city block level, I looked at how many people lived near 4 potential depots along this line (I used dowtown Wrightstown, downtown DePere, and in Green Bay at Ninth & Ashland and also at the Titletown Brewing station downtown). According to the census data, there are about 24,000 people living within walking distance (3/4 mile) of at least one of these 4stops. That's quite a few people, and that's just the Green Bay metro. I don't know Appleton well enough to guess where the best stops might be there, but I do know this track still runs right through the middle of these Fox Cities (it basically parallels USH 41) so there should be some decent population there as well.

I have no idea what sort of population density you'd need to make a successful rail transit line, but I do think this existing track along a unique linear geographic corridor of the Fox Cities might make rail feasible here(limits the need and cost of branch lines, which is the killer for other cities), if only people were willing to leave their cars at home. Who knows? Maybe oil prices will rise so high that we'll be forced to start bringing passenger rail back into service.

Anyway, that's my little civic exercise for the night. Hope you enjoyed it. Remember, Mr Roger's Make Believe centered around a trolley. Now it's time to go be "normal" and go watch TV Maybe that Simpsons episode is on....

[GBSurveyor]

I don't want to sound really negative, but come on, does anyone on this board ride the GB Metro? I always say that I should but I don't. It is just not that convenient. I can hop in my car and practically drive anywhere in the metro in like 15 minutes. I am not disputing the need for alternative transportation, but we are both blessed and cursed with an abundance of land, an abundance of land to build and maintain the sea of asphalt that every fringe development has an abundance of and we all use. Love it or hate it I can't foresee the end in sight for the automobile.

There has been a number of sprawl topics lately on this forum. I really don't know what it is going to take to break the trend, maybe it is slowing, but it is still hard to justify spending $200k on a 2br condo when you can get a 3br house with a yard (the American dream) for the same price. What really bothers me is that most new greenfield developments feature lots with 100' of road frontage or more. If you look at the density of pre 1950 green bay it is pretty decent. If you look at a map, many of the lots are only 50' to 60' wide, and sure it is pretty tough to get a 2000sf ranch with a 3 or 4 stall garage, but you can still get a real nice house on one of those lots. I have asked several realtors about why all the new developments look and feel the same. All the houses are the same, there is nothing separating one neighborhood with another, the only answer was is that is what people want. Another trend that I do not like are the size and amount of parks, what I really like about 'old' Green Bay is the number and close proximity of parks to neighborhoods. You could actually walk to the park. Of course that now is practically impossible, most of the new parks feature a sea of asphalt to welcome you.

OK Rant over...Maybe if gas gets to be $5/gal people will make better choices? or are we to far in?

[gbmphillips]

I have to agree as I have others make comments on the first condos built by Vetter and the look of them, very out of place. As for the trains to CHicago, not old enough to have done it but my dad told great stories about going with his brothers to Milwaukee an Green Bay by rail. I only hope and that the GV area does not become another Oneida Street, ugliest area in Green Bay right now.

[Bartles53]

This is not Madison of the North, we do not think green at all and we like it that way.

GBM, you've become one of my favorites on this board. You remind me of my favorite Packer columnist, Cliff Christl from the Journal Sentinel. Very similar disposition. Anyhoo...

Beltway's post reminded me of something from my Thanksgiving trip home. My girlfriend joined me in coming back and when we had some free time she wanted to do some shopping. I decided to bring her down to the Broadway district. While we were there I stopped in at the Stringed Instrument Workshop. I got to talking with the owner (who I've been told is a nationally recognized violinist and instrument repairer). We discussed the changing downtown and the revamping of the Broadway district and he showed me before and after pictures of his building (before he was there it was an absolutely hideous bar). I asked him about playing at the Meyer and he mentioned that he's on the board of the Meyer Theatre. I started grilling him on that place and asked him how it's doing financially. Apparently they're carrying a load of debt from the renovation but otherwise they seem to be making ends meet. Then he mentioned the card that they're holding that could put that debt to bed is the Daily Planet site. [I apologize if everything from here forward is common knowledge on this board--I realize that my memory is shot] I was unaware (or forgot) that they were the owners. The plan at this point is to put up a good sized building (sorry, again the memory, maybe 8-10 stories?). The first floor is to be a restaurant, the second a banquet-type facility (the first two floors would compliment the Meyer) and the upper floors would be commercial condos that would be sold off after the building is up. It sounds like this is the ace that they're holding that will hopefully keep the Meyer financially solvent and thriving for years to come. Again, I apologize if this was a pointless post but I figured it's an open forum so I'd throw it out there.

Puant, interesting post. I drove down to Chicago when I was home. It's not a bad drive but it would have been nice to hang out on a train for a few hours instead of sitting behind the wheel.

One other thought, the homes going up along the river--especially on the west side south of De Pere--are ridiculously awesome. Huge, beautiful and for the most part different. But you can't beat the older places on Broadway in De Pere (east side) or in the Monroe/Porlier area of Green Bay. My girlfriend said she felt like she was back in Boston when driving through those neighborhoods.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Although I think the Riverfront Lofts does look a little out of place, designwise, currently - in the future the blend of architecture along the river will make it fit in more. I think any building you put up next to the vacant Younkers structure would look out of place. On the one hand you have a building that cries out decrepid, deteriorated, vacant, POS - on the other hand you have massive glass contemporary - something Green Bay isn't used to. Although hardly perfect (Riverfront Lofts) a new blend of architetcure is something Green Bay badly needs. We need not only to respect the past and preserve it, but also welcome in new fresh looking buildings that will add to the growing downtown area. As I said, the rendering I saw for the Daily Planet site more than does that - as well as the Astor Place rendering. However, I am not sold on the River Center rendering I saw. I still can't get over how closely it reminds me of the exact same rendering we saw a couple years ago proposed by someone else for that site.

As far as mass transit in Green Bay. What really irks me is moving the transit site to the University location years ago. Taking the hub out of downtown really I think made it less likely for people to ride the bus even if they had the chance to. Not that many did, but if downtown does take an upswing - who is going to wait for a transfer to head downdown at the University station or for that matter walk from there downtown? Since it doesn't seem like most residents choose to either walk places that are far (and as in far I mean across a half empty parking lot to Wal-Mart) because they will circle around looking for that one closer spot that just opened up or choose to ride a bus when when can drive to a parking lot dominated world. Funny - people will walk 8 or 9 blocks to a Packer game because that is as close to the stadium as they can get - but say they would never park two blocks away from a store/restaurant in DT because it is inconvienient. Okay, some people will... But they alone are not enough to change the scope and mind of developers and business owners.

As far as the real estate question of looking everything the same. It is funny that they say that is what people want. No, it really is that is what is cheapest to build and will give them the maximum return on their investement. And when I say them, I mean the developers and homebuilders. Why change what makes you money - for the betterment and aesthetic quality of Green Bay. Ha - you have to be kidding me. We need some outside developers from other parts of the country that are willing to take a chance. Until then, it will be staus quo for home development here. But when people talk about neighborhoods in the Green Bay area, they always mention Broadway in De Pere, or Astor in Green Bay, or some of the neighborhoods in Allouez as really beautiful and unique. It is just funny how people say one thing, but do another. That seems to be one of the monsters driving sprawl.

Long winded - just patiently waiting for the winds of change to sweep over Green Bay.

[Inside the Beltway]

As far as mass transit in Green Bay. What really irks me is moving the transit site to the University location years ago.

I couldn't agree more! There are so many sites in the CBD where the bus terminal could have been built.

I also couldn't agree more with the statement that developers only build the same crap over and over again because its cheaper and makes them more money. Residential land developers rank about as low as ambulance chasers...

Train service between Green Bay and Milwaukee/Chicago would be great if it could ever happen. As I've complained about on this forum before, connecting flights into GRB are usually delayed, cancelled, etc. especially during the winter months with poor weather at DTW, MSP, ORD. Living in DC and commuting to Baltimore I choose taking local commuter rail over driving 95% of the time. It beats being stuck in bumper to bumper traffic with the occasional BMW attempting to cut you off with cell phone at ear and Starbucks at mouth. Ok, so in Green Bay that's less likely to happen than Grandma cutting you off only because she can't see over the wheel of her Town Car but you get the point.

I wasn't knocking the Riverfront Lofts too much, just letting you all know the perspective on the development from my mother, who's lived in Green Bay her whole life. Anything different from the norm in Green Bay is a plus!

Ok, one last comment. I was really pleased with the new 4-lane US-141 up to 64 in Marinette Co. I will say this about Wisconsin drivers though, and I am not sure why it happens. You can be driving behind someone doing 50 mph on a two lane road, but as soon at it widens to a 4-laner, that person drops the pedal to the metal and before you know it you have to be doing 75 just to pass the person you were following at 50 a mile back! Insane!

[titletown]

Inside the Beltway, I agree, the Wisconsin drivers have to be the most don't have a clue drivers out there. I would take that over the rude drivers in other parts of the countries though. People around here just do not know how to merge. Then again, here in Wisconsin in Driver's ed class they teach you that who ever is coming down the ramps have the right of way, lol. I guess it could be the DMV instruction then. I am originally from northern Wisconsin up 141 and I know what you are talking about as far as 2 lane drivers....but that a different topic & forum.

The other day I talked to Steve Schneider's RF Engineer at Bug Tussel (GSM cellphone provider). I asked him what is going on as far as a 2nd floor restaurant in the Bellin Building. He mentioned Black & Tan again, although he did not say that it was them who was moving in, only a possibility. I am with the rest of you as far as building density and not building these taller skyscrapers, just not yet until we get some more 8-10 floor buildings. Once we have a newer downtown in a few years I will have Fox & CBS film downtown. It is too early yet. I have a few contacts with the Sports crew who comes here. Did you guys here that the opposing teams will now stay in Green Bay for now? They found that it was illegal for the police to give them an escort and illegally stop traffic for them.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Just walked by the Bellin Building and it appears that the lights have been installed on the Bellin Building near the roof and shining up over the 3rd floor. Looks good. Can't wait to see it at night... Wish I had a camera.

[Bartles53]

Couple thoughts:

Developers and homebuilders wouldn't build homes in a certain way if they weren't selling. The consumer drives the demand. If brick Victorian homes were all the rage and if the majority of the population could afford them, we'd see a lot more of them being built in the area. As it stands the bulk of the home buyers want the cheapest possible homes to call their own thus the homebuilders (who like every business exist for the purpose of making money) are fulfilling that request.

As for moving the bus terminal downtown, I have a comment on that as well. For a period in my life I lived in Dayton Ohio. Dayton's downtown was struggling at the time and they were working on revamping it to bring in some residents with money (similar to Green Bay). One of the complaints that you'd hear about the area is the fact that the bus terminal sat right in the heart of downtown. Any time you'd go downtown it would be packed with low income adults and students waiting for the bus. It wasn’t uncommon to see fights on the sidewalks. Eventually they had to ramp up the police patrols in the area. Now I should add the crime rate in Dayton is atrocious so we wouldn’t necessarily have the same problems in Green Bay but it’s something to consider when the goal is to attract a lot of investment to downtown. Just my $.02.

[Puant]

Dan-
Nice article in the Press-Gazette today!



Posted December 6, 2006

Guest column: People ultimately determine development

By Dan Moore

Downtown Green Bay's riverfront redevelopment plan promises not only to create a new front porch for the city, but also to do so in a first-class way. With recent developments such as the straightening of North Washington Street and news that work on the River Center project will soon start, many are justifiably anxious to see these plans come together — and soon.

While it is easy to expect to see construction equipment moving onsite and concrete timetables set for projects to be completed, it is important to remember that the ultimate goal is to build a quality urban space. According to John Vetter, "Each place, each space, each environment has a degree of life. Some places have a higher degree of life and some places have a lower degree of life, and the spaces that have a higher degree of life are places people want to be in."

Milwaukee's iconic addition to their art museum is an excellent example where a commitment to excellence in design, to creating spaces with a high degree of life, has paid great dividends for a whole city. "These [the Milwaukee lakeshore and bluffs] were the invaluable assets that the people of Milwaukee entrusted to me," Santiago Calatrava, architect behind the art museum expansion, is quoted as saying on the museum's Web site.

For all his ability, Calatrava is aware that his vision for Milwaukee could not have been realized had the Milwaukee community not embraced and fought for his design. In the same way, the fate of Green Bay's riverfront will ultimately be determined by the people of Green Bay. People like Vetter can only inform our sense of design. The most they can do is create a vision for our riverfront, and provide a path on which to realize that vision. It falls on us, the committed citizens, to follow through and fight for the vision until completion.

Seeing the recent updates regarding the riverfront plan makes it easy to be impatient. The reality is that development is difficult work. Development that transforms the center of a city is even more difficult. Plans change, timetables are moved back and obstacles that weren't on the horizon when plans were announced need to be overcome. Through this change, an involved community that maintains belief in the vision set forth, one that refuses to sacrifice the quality of the end result in order to speed up a timeline, is the community that will reap the greatest reward.

It was true in Milwaukee and will be true in Green Bay. The civic architecture that defines the center of every city reflects the citizens of that city. Cities that embrace change and persistently guide that change through informed design are rewarded with not only engaging public spaces, but also a civic can-do attitude that permeates their community's response to changes of all kinds. Cities that run from difficult circumstances or lack the persistence to see projects through suffer in ways beyond the quality of their architecture.

Dan Moore is founder of downtownvital.org and a lifelong Brown County resident. He works at UWGB in the Division of Outreach and Adult Access as a Web, marketing and data specialist. You can contact him at dan@downtownvital.org.

[Puant]

I don't want to sound really negative, but come on, does anyone on this board ride the GB Metro? I always say that I should but I don't. It is just not that convenient. I can hop in my car and practically drive anywhere in the metro in like 15 minutes. I am not disputing the need for alternative transportation, but we are both blessed and cursed with an abundance of land, an abundance of land to build and maintain the sea of asphalt that every fringe development has an abundance of and we all use. Love it or hate it I can't foresee the end in sight for the automobile.

There has been a number of sprawl topics lately on this forum. I really don't know what it is going to take to break the trend, maybe it is slowing, but it is still hard to justify spending $200k on a 2br condo when you can get a 3br house with a yard (the American dream) for the same price. What really bothers me is that most new greenfield developments feature lots with 100' of road frontage or more. If you look at the density of pre 1950 green bay it is pretty decent. If you look at a map, many of the lots are only 50' to 60' wide, and sure it is pretty tough to get a 2000sf ranch with a 3 or 4 stall garage, but you can still get a real nice house on one of those lots. I have asked several realtors about why all the new developments look and feel the same. All the houses are the same, there is nothing separating one neighborhood with another, the only answer was is that is what people want. Another trend that I do not like are the size and amount of parks, what I really like about 'old' Green Bay is the number and close proximity of parks to neighborhoods. You could actually walk to the park. Of course that now is practically impossible, most of the new parks feature a sea of asphalt to welcome you.

OK Rant over...Maybe if gas gets to be $5/gal people will make better choices? or are we to far in?

No I don't ride the metro buses either. I may sound hypocritical wiht some of my posts. After all, I also live near the edge of the city in a sprawl area in one of those ubiquitous houses. And it's OK. For my kids, my neighborhood is nice because there is school and a park across the street. We used to live near downtown on S. Van Buren and even right smack downtown for a little while in the RiversEdge apartments, however, living downtown with small kids at the time just didn't work for us for a variety of reasons.

When I rant about cars and the problems they cause like sprawl and nasty environments, it's not that I'm against cars. I don't think we should all ride mass transit and live in high-rise towers. That's not it at all. For me, I simply want to see at least one part of the city (downtown) be designed such that cars and parking lots are not the dominant features. I think we all agree on that.

I think downtown could be a great place to live for people who don't have kids, empty nesters, young adults, etc. Someday I'd like to move back down there. But first we all want to see some things get cleaned up and redeveloped nicely.

One more comment on mass transit --
I'd be more apt to use public transit if it ran between cities instead of just loops within it. A car is certainly much more convenient than that for short trips. It's when I have to travel on long rides to other cities--especially cities that I don't know well, don't know where to park, etc--that's when I think about how nice public transit would be. Not buses so much, though--they're too cramped. Even airplanes--while fast--it's often a hassle to deal with airports and you're squeezed on and off them like toothpaste in an aluminum tube. To me, trains are the ideal inter-city mass transit because they can be so much more comfortable, and they usually travel close to where you need to go--even inner city.

[gbmphillips]

GBM, you've become one of my favorites on this board. You remind me of my favorite Packer columnist, Cliff Christl from the Journal Sentinel. Very similar disposition. Anyhoo...Thanks I am just an average Joe Working stiff who enjoys reading this forum and offering a blue collar opinon now and then. :banana:

[Emerald City]

With all of the discussion that River Center Phase 1 will begin shortly after the new year I am quite surprised Vetter does not have a website up showing the project on his main firm's site. This is supposed to be a showcase type project similar to AP and the River Lofts, but yet there is no mention at all on the V-D website about it. Granted they are not pre-selling condos on this one, I would still believe he would like to get the word out that his firm is doing a huge project like this, especially for potential clients removed from the Green Bay/Wisconsin Area. Just interested in seeing more details and rendering of this project besides the quite old original ones that were posted long ago.

[GBSurveyor]

With all of the discussion that River Center Phase 1 will begin shortly after the new year I am quite surprised Vetter does not have a website up showing the project on his main firm's site. This is supposed to be a showcase type project similar to AP and the River Lofts, but yet there is no mention at all on the V-D website about it. Granted they are not pre-selling condos on this one, I would still believe he would like to get the word out that his firm is doing a huge project like this, especially for potential clients removed from the Green Bay/Wisconsin Area. Just interested in seeing more details and rendering of this project besides the quite old original ones that were posted long ago.

I am quite surprised about that as well. Maybe because it is a partnership deal that it is not on the Vetter web site? I am not sure how the financing for this works out with pre-sales and such, I do know that about 7 million is available over the next 10 years for the rent assisted market priced apartments and about 3 million has been raised for the Children's Museum build out.

I was at the Neville Museum recently to view the Prange's display, they had a picture of the store around 1940 and it still had all the windows, that is amazing that they decided to fill those in. There was another picture from the 1960's I think taken from the Days Inn area looking at the Pranges building with the new addition. It really looked different without the mall overpass there, which makes me really want to have that skywalk structure removed. Which I hope is the plan.

Here is a link to a project that I have seen awhile back, located in Boulder Co. which I think would be a super fit somewhere in downtown, its not a "tower", but it has a nice pedestrian feel. ice skating rink included. Downtown Boulder also has a very popular pedestrian mall located on Pearl St., which may be a far stretch for Green Bay, but the concept is very cool.

Link (http://207.174.21.208/index.html) to One Boulder Plaza

[GBSurveyor]

Couple thoughts:

Developers and homebuilders wouldn't build homes in a certain way if they weren't selling. The consumer drives the demand. If brick Victorian homes were all the rage and if the majority of the population could afford them, we'd see a lot more of them being built in the area. As it stands the bulk of the home buyers want the cheapest possible homes to call their own thus the homebuilders (who like every business exist for the purpose of making money) are fulfilling that request.

As for moving the bus terminal downtown, I have a comment on that as well. For a period in my life I lived in Dayton Ohio. Dayton's downtown was struggling at the time and they were working on revamping it to bring in some residents with money (similar to Green Bay). One of the complaints that you'd hear about the area is the fact that the bus terminal sat right in the heart of downtown. Any time you'd go downtown it would be packed with low income adults and students waiting for the bus. It wasn’t uncommon to see fights on the sidewalks. Eventually they had to ramp up the police patrols in the area. Now I should add the crime rate in Dayton is atrocious so we wouldn’t necessarily have the same problems in Green Bay but it’s something to consider when the goal is to attract a lot of investment to downtown. Just my $.02.

I totally agree with you on the market driving demand, however, at least in Green Bay, there is not a great amount of options when it comes to new developent, and if I choose to build a custom home, most preferablly a bungalow, it would be totally out of place in any neighborhood.

When you mention the relocation of the transit center, I think you hit it right on, even if no one will admit it. I still feel that many people refused to shop at Port Plaza mall because of the rif-raf that hung around there, not that I am trying to stereotype anyone for riding the bus. I think the same thing happened on Broadway with the relocation of the Homeless shelter to Mather St.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Couple thoughts:

Developers and homebuilders wouldn't build homes in a certain way if they weren't selling. The consumer drives the demand. If brick Victorian homes were all the rage and if the majority of the population could afford them, we'd see a lot more of them being built in the area. As it stands the bulk of the home buyers want the cheapest possible homes to call their own thus the homebuilders (who like every business exist for the purpose of making money) are fulfilling that request.

As for moving the bus terminal downtown, I have a comment on that as well. For a period in my life I lived in Dayton Ohio. Dayton's downtown was struggling at the time and they were working on revamping it to bring in some residents with money (similar to Green Bay). One of the complaints that you'd hear about the area is the fact that the bus terminal sat right in the heart of downtown. Any time you'd go downtown it would be packed with low income adults and students waiting for the bus. It wasn’t uncommon to see fights on the sidewalks. Eventually they had to ramp up the police patrols in the area. Now I should add the crime rate in Dayton is atrocious so we wouldn’t necessarily have the same problems in Green Bay but it’s something to consider when the goal is to attract a lot of investment to downtown. Just my $.02.

As far as the home building comment, I agree and disagree. I'm not saying change every new neighbrohood to a new urbanist or TND style. I'm just saying that no one dreamed of paying upwards to 3/4 a million for a condo downtown a couple years ago, and look at the success of Riverfront Lofts. We just don't have the people locally to take a chance with a conservation by design neighborhood or TND styled subdivision. I'm sure if it was an option then people would buy into it. There are success stories all around the US and even in the state of Wisconsin when you look at the Madison area. Again, it is a matter of choice. When all you have to choose is a cookie cutter subdivision or buying an older home to get that true neigborhood feel, of course those choices will be popular and more likely to be built.

The need is to be ahead of the curve and not follow it. Green Bay homebuilders have been historically very slow to follow the trend because it is all they know to build the subdivisions they build now. Besides one or two of these wouldn't hurt...

As far as the bus terminal. It's hard to compare two cities and what would happen. I just feel it didn't need to be right smack in the heart of the City but on the outer fringe of downtown away from residential would have been sufficient. It is where it is now, but I'm assuming those who found getting downtown via the bus prior to it being built rather easy, no longer ride it anymore. The mass transit sytem here is really no more than a bunch of busses traveling around mostly empty. We don't have the urban feel or population to warrant anything more, and again until you change people's perception of urban mass transit, and development patterns that make mass transit effective, it will always be hard to compare Green Bay to other cities. Not sure of the crime stats around the new terminal on University and if it went up or down since it was built. Again, tough to compare... But interesting about Dayton.

As far as River Center. probably no renderings, because the 1st portion (phase) will be rental lofts, a parking garage, and the Children's museum. They have plenty of time to tweak designs before going public since they don't need to pre-sell condos prior to this part of the phase happening. I'm assuming as they get closer to the market rate condos being constructed, we will see a rendring for the project. Just a guess.

[downtownVital.org]

A few thoughts:

Mass transit

I suppose transit can be broken down into metro transit and regional transit. For Green Bay, busses really are the most practial way to handle that, and will be for quite some time to come. The problem is that people have such a negative view of bus transit.

I don't remember the exact trem used, but when Milwaukee was looking into funding the Milwaukee Connector, the term that was being used to describe the system refered to them as busses. This seemed to really have an impact on perception. A friend I know who lives down there, who likes riding subways and light rail, was against the plan becuase he didn't want to ride busses. The actual system in fact wasn't for busses (look at the Guided Street Trams here (http://www.milwaukeeconnector.com/alternatives.html), but the trams had rubber tires and so people called them that. (To be fair, there were legitimate reasons to be against the connector, I'm just trying to illustrate the negative image of busses) I don't know why this, but I think people up here have a similar negative impression of riding busses.

So in Green Bay, I guess this means we're stuck with what we have. I can't see where there would be routes or demand for light rail, and if people don't like busses, then we can't expect them to use mass transit.

I do think a regional rail system is closer to being able to fly. If people could drive to Bay Park Square, and from there have reasonable access to that mall, Fox River Mall, and the regional downtowns, that may be popular, especially at this time of year. Obviously there's a whole variety of similar scenarios for why people would find that useful. The best chance may be for the Metra extension to Milwaukee to be successful and be successfully extended to Madison. Then one day if studies show that demand existed, extend from Milwaukee up through the Fox Valley to Green Bay. That's pretty ambitious, so I'd say it would take 20 to 50 years to get to that point, but something like that is probably the best bet.

Sprawl/Housing

I think there could be demand for different style houseing. In De Pere, a developer (I don't rememver who) want the city to reduce the minimum street frontage so that he could build a denser development for first-time buyers and empty nesters who may want a new house but smaller and with less yard to take care of. De Pere refused.

Beyond that, I think people want what they view as safe, so they build what the next guy builds. If other models worked, people would become receptive to that, but few buyers want to be guinea pigs. It's sot of a chicken/egg deal, who tries something different first, the devloper of the buyers.

River Center

Phase 1 includes the Rentals, the Museum, Parking, and the Condos. Of those, the rentals (with the tax credits) and museum are generating the % of value needed to go ahead. I don't think the condos are necessarily defined well enough yet to sell. From what I've gathered, that piece is still changing, so if would be hard to get reservations for an unspecified condo.

[Bartles53]

Believe me. Whenever I drive around in the outskirts of Green Bay I always wonder why people are building the exact same house that you'd find everywhere else in the city. It seems so pointless. And I just despise seeing the ranch house with the vinyl siding (90% of the time gray) everwhere you look. I'd personally love to see some variety (at least mix in some stone or brick) but when you're putting up homes that the masses can afford, you're going to be limited in your options.

Well I'm off to my favorite city to see the Packers absolutely destroy the 49ers (I know, not likely).

[Green Bay 4 Life]

:ohno:
Guest column: Good jobs integral to healthy Green Bay

HUDSON — I had the pleasure of reading the Press-Gazette Sunday, Dec. 3, when my wife's parents came to our house in Hudson, a Twin Cities suburb, to help care for our newborn daughter.

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry when I read the article on Mayor Schmitt's plans for redevelopment of the downtown. The options proposed by the mayor and fellow readers made me laugh and yet really scared me. None of the proposals brought any hint of attacking the real issue plaguing Green Bay: Use the land in an attempt to attract a major employer that would offer high-paying jobs.

Mayor Schmitt's acknowledgment, "This is a real opportunity for the people of Green Bay," is true; but, sadly, it was true 15 years ago when I was starting high school. Changes should have been made to Port Plaza Mall going back to when the Fox River Mall opened. Yet a lack of action and a series of poor decisions have brought us to the current state of debate.

What puzzles me is that people are still talking about downtown. The opportunity has come and gone and there is a much bigger issue to be concerned about.

I would love to see my daughter grow up in the city my wife and I grew up in and loved. I would love to have her grandparents be four minutes away, rather than four hours away. But the reality is that Green Bay is a shell of the city it was just 10 years ago. The people of Green Bay are great people with a terrific work ethic, but times have changed and working harder doesn't compete in today's economy. Competition requires adapting to the changing times and working smarter.

In the past, the paper mills were a staple of the city's economy; unfortunately, the heyday of the paper mills is behind us and there is a need for other sources of high-paying jobs. In spite of this reality, the options being pursued for downtown are low-paying retail positions. I would have loved to return to Green Bay with my engineering degree six years ago, but opportunities and salaries couldn't compete with the Twin Cities' market. Until something is done to bring employers offering higher-paying professional jobs, educated young people will continue to move away from the city.

I know I didn't move to the Twin Cities because the shopping at the Mall of America was so much better than Port Plaza or Bay Park Square. I moved because of the lack of good job opportunities in Green Bay.

So, Mr. Mayor, go ahead and move forward with your plans for retail and convention space, but be cognizant that you haven't addressed the real issue. In the end, there won't be people with money in the city to entice downtown.

Kyle Brunner is a 1996 graduate of Green Bay Preble High School. He has a bachelor's degree in chemical engineering from the University of Minnesota, and masters' degrees in chemical engineering and business administration from the Metropolitan State University in St. Paul, Minn. He is an engineer at Cypress Semiconductor in Bloomington, Minn.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061210/GPG06/612100599/1269

I was reading the newspaper on Sunday when I noticed this guest column from a former Green Bay resident. I actually knew the person, so I was quite interested in what he had to say – especially since it was regarding downtown. After reading it, (I have to steal a quote from the article), I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry.

I’m going to respond to each paragraph, so forgive me if this a long post. Plus, each it is easier to make a counterpoint this way, then one long-winded response. I am not a profession writer, so I may have lost one or all of you if I had done it any other way…

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry when I read the article on Mayor Schmitt's plans for redevelopment of the downtown. The options proposed by the mayor and fellow readers made me laugh and yet really scared me. None of the proposals brought any hint of attacking the real issue plaguing Green Bay: Use the land in an attempt to attract a major employer that would offer high-paying jobs.

I tend to disagree. The article from the Green Bay Press-Gazette regarding the Mayor’s Plans for Downtown Redevelopment does mention retail as a significant aspect of the redevelopment plans for the former Washington Commons site, however, the buildings that were shown on conceptual drawing did indicate mixed-use buildings. The last time I checked, mixed-use buildings can be used for a “mix” of uses. These uses can include retail, office, and residential components – all which are needed to aid in a redeveloping downtown. I have not seen too many 6-story buildings with retail on the upper floors except in malls. The redevelopment of the mall site will not be another mall. I’m sure we can all agree on that point. And again, these drawings were conceptual. I feel it is great that the City at the very least has a “conceptual” plan that says these are our thoughts on what could potentially be done, but what some people think is that if they see something on a board it will look exactly like what is shown. There aren’t any tenants lined up, nor is there a commitment from a large office user to locate to this site, or are there any plans to start demolishing the mall site. Plans, in my opinion, are used to act as a guide. Now does that guide need to be strictly followed? In some cases, but I don’t believe that is the case in this specific example. I’m sure certain elements such as the reestablishment of the street grid and attracting some type of retail to serve to the growing downtown resident base would be strongly suggested, but if a developer came in and had something else in mind that worked just as well – it would be strongly considered. At least I believe it would be. Ultimately, the plans did not specifically say large office user or research facility because who knows if that will ever happen? Would be nice though.

Mayor Schmitt's acknowledgment, "This is a real opportunity for the people of Green Bay," is true; but, sadly, it was true 15 years ago when I was starting high school. Changes should have been made to Port Plaza Mall going back to when the Fox River Mall opened. Yet a lack of action and a series of poor decisions have brought us to the current state of debate.

True, lack of action and poor decisions have brought us to this point. But it wasn’t the City or Mayor Schmitt that ran Washington Commons into the ground. This same type of scenario played itself out in so many other cities across this nation. People change and as they did so did where retail establishments located. High visibility and being surrounded by a sea of free parking is where most national retail establishments want to be. Plus the Fox River Mall was able to have other major retail establishments not part of the mall site locate around it which only added to the traffic as well as attractiveness of the location. That is something that couldn’t happen in a downtown mall location. Another point was access. Even though Hwy 41 is getting more and more congested which can be frustrating, more people pass the Fox River Mall in three hours then do the former Pot Plaza mall in an entire day maybe even every two days. I do believe, this is a real opportunity for the people of Green Bay. Some change will happen on the site, and although it may not be as grand as what some people want, or as far fetched as others, it will be a positive development for the City of Green Bay and downtown. I’m sure when the City reviews development proposals for the site, the failure of the mall will weigh heavily when reviewing each pitch.

What puzzles me is that people are still talking about downtown. The opportunity has come and gone and there is a much bigger issue to be concerned about.

This quote I could write a book about, but I will refrain. Why are people still talking about downtown? Obviously, Mr. Brunner has not been to many Good Morning Downtown Meetings lately, or as the article indicated not reading up on the other proposals that are taking place downtown. As many on this site have expressed and through many conversations I have had with others who do not frequent this site, the excitement is back. Not everyone is on board – but people are genuinely excited, skeptical, but excited about what downtown could look like in 5 years. More changes have occurred in downtown in the last 3-5 year period than in the 20 preceding years. It really takes a careful eye to see it, but for those of us that live, work, and visit downtown we know it is now more than it has been in a very long time. It has so much potential and as most know, a strong central core is a great quality to have for any city. So I am in complete disagreement that “the opportunity has come and gone”. That is a truly a scary statement. Are we supposed to give up on something just because the opportunity has come and gone? We are seeing what opportunity can do and present us with. Astor Place, River Center, Mall redevelopment, Larsen Canning, Daily Planet, Site 4, Broadway redevelopment, Olde Main Street redevelopment. I know we have listed those off again and again – but there wouldn’t even be a list if people didn’t see an opportunity in downtown Green Bay.

I would love to see my daughter grow up in the city my wife and I grew up in and loved. I would love to have her grandparents be four minutes away, rather than four hours away. But the reality is that Green Bay is a shell of the city it was just 10 years ago. The people of Green Bay are great people with a terrific work ethic, but times have changed and working harder doesn't compete in today's economy. Competition requires adapting to the changing times and working smarter.

The reality is Green Bay is not the shell of a city is was 10 years ago. I lived here back in 1996. And, yes much of it was happier times because that was the Super Bowl year and there was a level of excitement City wide that I had never seen before, but are you truly serious, Mr. Brunner? Broadway used to be a very seedy area, look at it now. The façade improvements along Main Street have brought back a more nostalgic look to a once dismal corridor. The I-43 Business Park is nearing capacity with plans for another business Park off of Hwy 54 and 57 which will add more jobs and commercial and industrial tax base to the City. A fourth hospital has been added to the City. The University of Green Bay has continued to grow and expand. Downtown, well see above. Non-profit groups have restored older homes in the core neighborhoods, which were in decline and brought home ownership to many people that couldn’t achieve those dreams. The population of Green Bay and its surrounding suburbs continues to grow. I believe Brown County added the 3rd most people in the state over the past 5 years behind Dane and Waukesha Counties. If the City of Green Bay is a shell of what it once was, then why are people moving here?

In the past, the paper mills were a staple of the city's economy; unfortunately, the heyday of the paper mills is behind us and there is a need for other sources of high-paying jobs. In spite of this reality, the options being pursued for downtown are low-paying retail positions. I would have loved to return to Green Bay with my engineering degree six years ago, but opportunities and salaries couldn't compete with the Twin Cities' market. Until something is done to bring employers offering higher-paying professional jobs, educated young people will continue to move away from the city.

I know I didn't move to the Twin Cities because the shopping at the Mall of America was so much better than Port Plaza or Bay Park Square. I moved because of the lack of good job opportunities in Green Bay.

Well, yes I agree with this statement mostly. But as I stated before, retail is only a component to the downtown conceptual drawing. Plus, retail jobs are needed here as well. Not everyone has a degree, but needs a job. Maybe we need to start looking at that issue. And with few retail jobs in and around the downtown area, many people would rather sit home than have to try and get from the central core out to Ashwaubenon or what not. Okay, so Green Bay isn’t exactly Milwaukee – but Green Bay and Milwaukee are in different leagues, as is Green Bay and the Twin Cities. Jobs are jobs. I would love to see high wage earning jobs come downtown, and they already have. I’m sure some of the corporate people in the banks that have opened downtown earn a pretty good wage. Smith and Barney employees probably make some nice jack – ditto with the Commercial Horizons team and Aon employees. Okay, so APAC employees aren’t living on Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous, but those are 800 – 1000 jobs now located back downtown that were not there before. And I am sure those 800 to 100 people are proud that they have a job and are making a difference every day they walk through the doors. We should not exclude these people from having an opportunity to work here in Green Bay because they don’t make $50,000+ a year. In addition, every City and I mean EVERY CITY around the Country is competing for the very few Corporations that may relocate every year. And in the day and age of merging, streamlining, and sending jobs overseas – that relates to very few that actually do relocate. Some of the reasons Boeing looked at when they relocated was quality of life, workforce, cost of living, and things to keep people occupied when they are not at work. Obviously if a corporation looked at downtown Green Bay and said what could our employees do over their lunch hour, or if we needed to hold a large business meeting, or what can my employees do over the weekend – would Green Bay stack up against the Twin Cities? No. But as we try to continue to improve downtown you need to start somewhere. Even if it is small. And in my opinion the plans for downtown Green Bay are not small when you look at similarly sized cities across the Midwest. I mean, we have our own “stickied thread” for crying out loud. I too found the opportunities in my field here in Green Bay lacking to other parts of the country when I graduated college. So I moved away, got experience, made myself a quality prospect, and when a job opened up back here I jumped at the chance. I didn’t move back for a more prestigious title or higher wages (if I wanted that I would have stayed where I was), I moved back because I saw the potential in Green Bay and this is the City I love and love to live in for better or worse. My kids will grow up here just like I did. Money wasn’t the only thing that factored into my decision. Other factors such as quality of life, cost of living, crime statistics, opportunities for my wife to work, schools, etc played a role. True educated young people do move from here. That is something that every city faces and is not exclusive to Green Bay. But some fields are more prevalent in other cities than they are here, just like if you really wanted to work in a paper mill, your opportunities would be pretty limited as well. I would love to do what I do I a small northwoods town where I could go fishing every day, but the reality is my field isn’t very prevalent up north. So I deal with it. I found it is easier to find a job and move somewhere and hate where you live, versus say I want to live here because I love it and then find a job. Easier said then done, words I live by, in my opinion… I looked through the classifieds after I read your editorial and I saw a good number of engineering positions available. They may not be for your exact discipline, but they are here. You NEED to have a mix of low paying jobs and high paying jobs available in every city. Can Green Bay do better? Yes. Could it be a lot worse than what you make it sound like? Yes. Is it? NO.

So, Mr. Mayor, go ahead and move forward with your plans for retail and convention space, but be cognizant that you haven't addressed the real issue.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion. And I am glad you found this topic so meaningful that you wrote what you did. However, I do not agree with your statements. As I am sure if you ever stumbled upon this rebuttal you would not agree with some of mine. As I said, the press makes more of what is going on downtown because it is a story, and living in Green Bay – when the Packers aren’t doing well anything becomes a story because it is hard to fill up 30 minutes of news every night. The news doesn’t report on the manufacturing grants that are available from the City to entice businesses to expand, stay, or relocate to Green Bay. It doesn’t report on how many times City Officials meet with corporations (maybe not major) and offer everything and the kitchen sink and they still move to a neighboring suburb or out of the area because they were using the City as leverage in negotiations (See AMS). Maybe the change shouldn’t be on the City to make; maybe corporations should start looking at themselves and their business practices. But is comes down to what the subliminal focus or your piece was about, money. There is so much more to enticing corporations or high wage earning positions to locate in a community. It is a lot harder than just sprinkling some magic beans and saying the magic words. Way more difficult. Ask the people in cities where corporations relocated to and see if they slept soundly at night when they looked at what the other cities had that they may not have had that were also in the running. You have to sell your City as well as have the other things to back it up.

I feel it is easier to be in a job that is not in the public eye. You don’t receive as much external criticism as you would being a public official or an employee of a municipality. But you choose your path and deal with the consequences. I’m sure there is not a day that goes by that the Mayor doesn’t wish he could announce that the “Acme Corporation and 2,500 high wage earning jobs are locating here”. But does that mean he isn’t trying? And then, why should you ignore the other details and opportunities (like redeveloping prime downtown real estate into something more worthwhile than what it is now) that are in your opinion not “real issues”. As Mayor, City Officials, and City employees you are charged with looking at every issues and opportunity as “real issues” and doing the best with what you have and what you could have.

In the end, there won't be people with money in the city to entice downtown.

Lastly, I take real offense to the last line of your editorial. It seems like you are so focused on money, which most Americans are. But I feel I am highly educated and make a pretty good living. I know my wife is very highly educated and respected here in the community and makes a heck of a lot better living than I do. And together we are just some of those highly educated and decent wage earners that choose to make Green Bay home. And if there are opportunities to take a short drive to Downtown Green Bay to a retail establishment than drive to Bay Park or Fox River Mall, then yes we will. And when I look at the person running the cash register, or mopping the floors, or serving me my beer – I will think of you. And how you felt that their job, which they take pride in, wasn’t important or the real issue. At that time, I don’t know whether I will laugh or cry.

[downtownVital.org]

^^ Dang! I guess that column really got you going! I have to say it got me thinking too. I pretty much agree with what you said. The downtown isn't being developed at the expense of economic development, or fighting crime, or anything like that, and everytime the Mayor addesses one topic he can't be expected to mention how important every other conceivable topic is. So to say that because the Mayor has plans for downtown means that he isn't focused on creating jobs is unfair. I've heard the Mayor talk on many occasions about the need to bring in good, high-paying jobs.

But what to do? You can't just take the mall site and zone it "high-paying jobs district" and magically the jobs appear. Of the types of high-wage jobs that could be located downtown, some are coming into or already exist in the area (banking, brokerage, etc) and there is a focus on creating additional commercial space for such uses. Other areas with good jobs such as manufacturing aren't generally good fits in a downtown, but the I-43 indurtrial park and the new industrial park on the far NE side will help attract some of those businesses.

With UW-Oshkosh's MBA center downtown, the UWGB paper technology center, and the new Business Assistance Center out on the NWTC campus, there are efforts being made to grow new business. Could/should there be more done? Sure, it's a very competitve world and creating and keeping good jobs is of the highest importance, but that doesn't mean you stop all other activities.

One could argue that the efforts to fight crime miss the point because if the criminals had good jobs they wouldn't need to resort to crime. By that logic, if the Mayor lays out a plan for more or better law enforcement, one could write an editorial about how the Mayor shouldn't be worried about that, he should be worried about creating jobs becuase that will reduce crime. Certainly, there is a connection between jobs and crime, but I don't think anyone would claim that worrying less about law enforcment is going to help with jobs. In the same way, yes, there is a connection between the downtown and jobs, but letting the downtown rot isn't going to help create jobs either.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

It just got me thinking. I know the guy who wrote it and he is a very smart individual, but it is easy to form an opinion of something without really knowing the facts and reading one article about one event while having lived somewhere else for 6 years.

I guess some could argue that my response may not be all that solid - but hey everyone is entitled to an opinion. I just think that people expect change to happen overnight. Well Green Bay didn't get to where it is now overnight and it sure won't get to where it is going overnight either. That is the interesting thing about cities. They are always going through periods of decline and rebirth and are always changing. It is easy to pick out one time period and say the City isn't doing enough to attract high paying jobs. Well maybe, but let's look at what it has done. Everything is interconnected so to speak. Jobs relate to crime which relates to property values which relates to taxes which relates to housing market which relates to the school district, etc, etc.

Show me a perfect city and I will show you one that's not. I didn't mean to slam Kyle and his opinion - I just feel strongly about Green Bay and the direction it is headed, not just in downtown but overall. I think it is going to be pretty amazing in 10 years to look at what has happened here.

[downtownVital.org]

That is the interesting thing about cities. They are always going through periods of decline and rebirth and are always changing.

Yes, in fact I'd say cities are continually going through overlapping cycles decline and rebirth. Depending on their perspective, someone can choose to focus on either or, but there's always positive growth in down times and some decay in up times. This is why cities are constant works in progress. If you work on one problem and fix that, there's inevitably something else in decline to work on. When cities finish a project and let themselves think they're "done," they set themselves up to miss other areas that are down, and by the time they realize there's a problem it becomes a crisis.

To me, this was the biggest failing with the mall. Cities all over built downtown malls, and they almost all failed. But not everyone's downtown failed. Here, it seems that after the mall was built people felt like the downtown was fixed and didn't react to changes until they became a crisis. Even recently, with the new plans for downtown, I've heard people (even some on the city council) say things to the effect of, "I hope when this is done we'll finally be finished and not have to worry about this downtown any more." This sort of thinking would be a disaster.

Even if the boardwalk is finished, all the riverfront sites are built up, and the mall site is successfully redeveloped, there will still be something that is in a cycle of decline. I hope the community will have learned from the past and keep pressing to improve.

[Bartles53]

Interesting article from MJS that deals with the topic mentioned in the previous posts. It's definitely an interesting proposal.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=540476

(I've cut and pasted some of the important pieces below.)

Free tuition for vow to stay?
Panel's idea: After college, you work in state for 10 years
By SCOTT WILLIAMS
swilliams@journalsentinel.com
Posted: Dec. 10, 2006
Would you agree to live and work in Wisconsin for 10 years after college if the state offered to pay your tuition costs for all four years?

As the theory goes, a captive work force of college graduates would attract new industry to Wisconsin, along with higher-paying jobs. Those workers, in turn, would pay more income taxes and sales taxes, providing the state with the millions of dollars needed to offer free tuition.

Proponents of the concept say it's modeled on a program in Ireland that cost more than $3 billion a year, but has been credited with helping Ireland become one of the fastest-growing economic forces in Europe.

Torinus likened the arrangement to tax-increment financing districts, which allow local governments to borrow to build new infrastructure then repay the debt by harnessing the increased property tax growth from the resulting real estate developments.

"Why the hell can't we do that with education?" he said.

For years, Wisconsin has struggled with a "brain drain" resulting in the loss of college graduates who are drawn not only to Sun Belt communities, but other markets perceived as having better qualify of life, such as Minneapolis, Boston and Seattle.

Fearing that industry and growth are following the new graduates and bypassing Wisconsin, government and business leaders in recent years have focused on various ideas for educational reform.

O'Connell said taking that concept one step further - making college free - could jump-start the economy so much that the state could afford to both pay off the tuition bonds and make quality-of-life improvements in Wisconsin.

"We will attract smart young people," he said. "They will stay here, and they will want their children to stay here."

It's interesting they mentioned cities not based on their caliber of jobs but on the quality of life (Boston, Seattle). It shows that a city that's considered cool or charming is more likely to retain or draw in the upper-tier talent.

[Puant]

Wow! I had to print these latest posts just so I could digest it all, and I'm glad I did because these were some really good posts.

GB4Life--I love your enthusiasm, keep it up! and I agree with most of your points.

Myself, when I first read the editorial by Kyle, I had some knee-jerk reactions especially to a couple of his sentences, including the "what puzzles me is that people are still talking about downtown...". However, I re-read his article and pondered some of his main points.

Kyle seems to think that the primary thing we're talking about revitalizing downtown is the retail aspect. Retail has been the most-publicized component of the city's downtown plans, perhaps because that's what stirs nostalgia (ye olde Washington St and even the port plaza mall in it's heyday) and therefore is deemed more 'newsworthy' by the press than the other land use goals. I think GB4life said this too.

Those of us closer to the situation know that retail is only one component of the whole effort. Obviously, downtown will never be the primary regional shopping center it once was. After thinking about it, I'm not sure if we should emphasize retail at all right now. Is it realistic to be talking about big stores like Crate & Barrel coming downtown? I doubt it. I'm not saying we should just give up on that part, but Kyle's probably right in that the city might be better off emphasizing jobs--As for downtown, the city should perhaps discuss office and residential developments as priority #1 and #1B, with arts, entertainment, and tourist destinations close behind. Whatever retail follows will likely be smaller shops that fill niches. The niches the retail fills will likely be the support of the larger commercial business and the residential components nearby.

The questions are, of course, will enough people ever come back downtown as a true shopping destination? Does the city have any realistic chance of attracting and keeping lots of small destination-type shops or even a few medium-large retailers? Does the downtown have any unique aspects that could allow it to compete with other retail centers? These things are worth exploring, but I hope the city doesn't completely "sell out" to try compete with the suburban shopping areas. We've already seen what happens when that occurs.

Don't get me wrong--I'd love to see all the retail stuff we've been talking about. --Is it just premature to be talking about it right now? Should it be any sort of focus at this time?

[Inside the Beltway]

Interesting idea...and definitely an issue that deserves attention. 10 years is an awful long time though, considering now a days staying at the same job for 2-3 years can be considered as "a long time."

[Puant]

I think some of you may be interested to read this article: article in the LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-op-postrel10dec10,1,6729865.story)

[Emerald City]

Puant en la Baye: I think some of you may be interested to read this article: article in the LA Times

I think this concept is very similar to the new Bayshore Shopping District in the Milwaukee area. I was able to get a glimpse of it this past weekend, and it is comprised of several buildings of various heights some 6 stories, some 4, some two, etc. It all melded very well and is a great addition. I think this is the type of redevelopment our downtown concept is looking toward. It offered a variety of shops, food, and off street level businesses which had a very urban feel to it. I believe this would be the best use of the old mall property downtown.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Here you go. Some have asked. These images were shown by Vetter at the last Good Morning Downtown meeting this past November.

I will withhold my reaction because it can be read in earlier posts just after the meeting...

http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r147/phatty_013/RC1.jpg

http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r147/phatty_013/RC2.jpg

http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r147/phatty_013/RC3.jpg

[Emerald City]

First I would like to thank you VERY much for posting the drawings! Second is my reaction. I really like the apartments on the North end of the building. Very nice looking with different color brick and a very urban yet historic feel to them. The other River Center areas on the other hand I'm not too excited about. I think the entire waterfront will look too similar in style and color. I would hope that instead of the flat projected roof line of all buildings Vetter would consider somthing different to break it up. (Although the flat top roof seems to be in all Vetter designs) I would also like to see a difference in glass colorations used. That would definately break up the similarity of designs. I like the fact that the commercial section seems taller and more robust, but was unhappy with the newest rendering of the condo section which looks too much like the outline of the old Yonker's tower. I would be nicer to sqaure it off, raise it up a few more floors and get rid of the little outhouse on top. Hopefully these are not the end designs. Just my opinion.

[titletown]

I am surprised as well. The brick building is really cool, too bad it isn't a little taller. It would be nice to add a few more floors to that building. I guess I will wait and see on the River Center, the real look can be different then the drawings. Vetter sure does like his flat roofs as that is a signature for his company. Maybe a century from now this will be the historic "Vetter district" where you can find several flat roofs from the 2007-2008 era. I would like to see a nice restaurant on the top of Astor Place if the top floors do not sell. Imagine the view. I remember when Gallaghers opened up their rooftop in the summer and you could overlook the downtown area. It was only 5 floors, but felt an atmosphere you have never felt in Green Bay listening to a Reggae band at the time.

[Puant]

I am surprised as well. The brick building is really cool, too bad it isn't a little taller. It would be nice to add a few more floors to that building. I guess I will wait and see on the River Center, the real look can be different then the drawings. Vetter sure does like his flat roofs as that is a signature for his company. Maybe a century from now this will be the historic "Vetter district" where you can find several flat roofs from the 2007-2008 era. I would like to see a nice restaurant on the top of Astor Place if the top floors do not sell. Imagine the view. I remember when Gallaghers opened up their rooftop in the summer and you could overlook the downtown area. It was only 5 floors, but felt an atmosphere you have never felt in Green Bay listening to a Reggae band at the time.

Right on! I used to love to eat up on the top of Gallagher's roof, live music and all, on a nice summer evening. And I agree about your restaurant idea on the top floor of Astor. I think that would go over well here, since we have almost nothing like that around here. Even the old restaurant at the top of the old Younkers kept on chugging right up until the end, didn't it?

As for designs---we've waited so long for somthing to happen. I suppose 'beggers can't be choosers'. I'll hold out hope for other, less flat/square designs for Site 4, the Daily Planet site, and even the mall site. I'd love to see some of those contemporary designs you see in other cities with the bold curves.

[GBSurveyor]

I really hate to complain, but untill we actually see some construction, I think that we shouldn't get too worked up. But since we are dropping down comments, I too would like to see the rental portion (north building) a little taller, not to much though. I also think that the middle portion of the building could be a tad taller, it looks to be 4 stories, because if I recall the commercial portion of the project is still in question and if that never gets built above the 4 or 5 stories that is proposed in phase 1 it will look a little vertically challenged.

Regardless, anything will be better then the monolith sitting there vacant and lifeless.

I am wondeing what type of lines are you guys looking for in the rooflines?What are some modern buildings or styles that you think would be an improvement over the flat roof? I just have a hard time visualizing what would look good sitting there in the river.

[Bartles53]

I'm beginning to detect a pattern here...

These drawings are making me long for the days when Juza had control of the site. I wasn't very fond of the exterior of the Riverfront Lofts building but I figured it would somehow fit in well with the surrounding buildings. I'm cool with Astor Place. It definitely could look better but overall I'd give it a thumbs up. But the RiverCenter makes me want to vomit. You know how apartment and some office buildings put up from the 60s through the 80s look so trashy whereas buildings put up pre WWII look so cool? Well I think RiverCenter has very little redeeming value at present and will look worse as the years pass. I'm just so disappointed in a building that's supposed to be a focal point of the city for decades to come. The place looks like a racetrack grandstand to me. I wish they'd emphasize the historic aspect of downtown. Having three buildings back to back to back that all look the same (waaaaay too contemporary) is not what I had in mind. It's tough to make a brick building look bad. Why not mix in some stone or brick? I really applaud Vetter for his optimism and his ambition in getting this ball rolling but his drawings are downright lame and his imagination is nonexistent.

I may have to join the GBMPhillips fan club. Thanks for posting, GB4L.

[Bay2Bay]

The sketches probably don't do justice to how they actually will look built. It would be nice to see some computer enhanced visualizations of what the buildings will look like with views of actual downtown buildings behind them. It's said that architecture should reflect the age that it belongs to. These buildings definitely do that. New buildings built to look old usually fail and look cheap when compared with the real thing.

As pointed out above by Puant en la Baye, it would be nice to see the other redevelopment sites with a less flat and square design. If another developer does that on those other mentioned sites the contrast could look quite attractive with what Vetter Denk is proposing.

[Bartles53]

One of my favorite modern structures is the Hyatt towers in San Diego.

http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:11IOG2-yOaGMWM:http://www.qando.net/wallpaper/2_SanDiego

http://www.abasg.com/blog_img/hyatt_san_06jun_01.jpg

It's tough to get a sense of how they look in person but they're really beautiful buildings. This just shows me that it's possible to make a modern building look cool. And there's nothing wrong with putting up a structure today that looks like it could have been built 70 years ago. I think one of the reasons lofts are so popular is that they tend to be in old-style brick buildings. This is all personal preference but the glass box look doesn't sit well with me--especially when it's sandwiched between two buildings that look exactly the same. Maybe Vetter should consult with the architects that put up the Nicolet Bank.

[titletown]

What I like would never go in Green Bay. The style here is just silly. I don't mind Astor Place, but River Center. Why not build a skyline that looks appealing? It doesn't have to be tall, but Vetter's designs for the River Center does look like a Grandstand. He might as well put a row of seats outside. I am a fan of glass condos and also a fan of brick buildings. Milwaukee and Chicago have some nice condos going up that look really cool and act like it is the year 2006, not 1930.

[Bartles53]

After looking some more I'm willing to admit that the finished product could look a great deal better than these drawings. And one other thing is that these drawings are focused only on the buildings. Sometimes landscaping can do wonders for a building. Maybe when the landscaping is mixed in to the site it'll soften things up a bit. I guess I should hold my judgement until the final drawings are made public but as it currently stands I have to give it a thumbs down.

[downtownVital.org]

My :2cents:

First, I still like Astor Place and think it will look great.

The north portion of River Center looks fine to me, as most of you have agreed.

The office portion of River Center is really unknown, as depending on the market the size would vary. The size of what is shown is at the big end of what it could be, but there will be something there.

The residential portion, well, I'm torn. I don't think it comes off well in the drawings. I think I'm about the only one who likes the building that is there now. Obviously it is in rotten condition, but I don't think it's a horrible building. When I was talking to Vetter I mentioned how I'd like to see the new building fit in more windows and things like that, obviously, but look in a way where someone could still see that the old building remained. That building is a big part of the history of the city. John told me that something along those lines was what he was going after (I hadn't seen the drawing at that point). So I think the yellowish panels are trying to reference the existing building.

In it's defense, we don't know what the materials will be (there could be some brick), and those elevations are pretty stale looking (Astor Place looks much better in some of the more refined renderings that it does in these drawings). Also, I don't know that what we see in these is set in stone, so it could be more polished as it gets ready for construction (or maybe not). I also am against trying to make something look 70 years old. That's not to say that there can't be bricks, but the craftsmanship that made some of the great old buildings no longer exists or is prohibitively expensive. Look at Port Plaza Towers and then look at Baylake Bank City Center to see how the same style looks when built 70 years ago and when built today.

So, I think the design has a chance, and may look good. At the same time, I see really no elegance in the design at all. And the irregularly spaced yellow panels remind be of some modernist, 60's, dated design that won't hold up. The best designs from any era tend to still have a classic quality and an elegance that, as I said, I'm missing here. The best designs can be square boxes and industrial looking, but there's still is a class and elegance that I hope is there but isn't coming out in these drawings.

I'm reminded of these buildings in Minneapolis, which while not a total horror, and not maitained as well as I'd expect River Center to be, aren't exactly the height of beautiful design. If someone from the Twin Cities area is lurking around here, or someone is familiar with these building in person, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on what this building looks like in person. Here's a photo:

http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/sixwm/2004/06/274712.jpg

[MareCity]

^^
Dan, funny that you posted a picture of that Minneapolis building. I thought of the exact same thing as soon as I saw the River Center images with those yellow panels and such, and was in fact, looking for a pic of those Minneap. buildings (I tried googling "ugly towers in minneapolis" :) but couldn't find any images at the time b/c I didn't know the name of the building(s).
I've always thought that these buildings in minneap. look trashy (I see them when I drive into the cities) and I'm afraid I feel the same way about this portion of the river center.
Oh well, as echoed before, these are just tentative plans...right?

I believe this style is supposed to be some kind of brutalist architecture...not a fan. If the goal is to create structures that create 'civic worth,' this look falls far short.

:gaah:

I do agree that the other buildings (astor place, the north brick building of river center, etc.) look nice.

[Puant]

I thought it appropriate to remind everyone what Juza's proposal looked like:

http://lh5.google.com/image/gBayPacker/RYM0jCpdopI/AAAAAAAAAX4/HIsbiTOefAY/s288/JuzaYounkersProposalGreenBayWI.jpg

http://lh3.google.com/image/gBayPacker/RYM0mipdoqI/AAAAAAAAAYA/e1umdrjwEYo/s288/VetterJuzaProposal.jpg

[Emerald City]

The 2nd drawing of Juza's plan I have never seen before. I really like the northern 1/2 of the property with the arched windows and slight wedding cake design. What I would like to see would be Vetter's Northern Half of the property (the apartments) as they are designed fitted with Juza's northern concept in place of Vetter's commercial section or better yet for the southern residential section of the property. This mix would give a GREAT variance in styles along the river front and would lend to a very pleasing picture. Is there someone that could take those 2 pictures and meld them together to see how that would work?

[Bartles53]

I think the Baylake Bank center argument doesn't really apply. That building seems to be the extreme of trying to make a building something that it isn't. I think we all agree that slapping (from what I understand) fake brick siding on a structure that was built in a different era doesn't lend itself to be very appealing to the eye. The "improvements" they made didn't mix with the style of the structure. That's not what I'm suggesting they do at the River Center. Take Lambeau Field. I've heard Bob Harlan say that his intent was to make Lambeau look like a throwback stadium. I believe the renovation was done in 2003 but you can definitely see that it hints back to a more historic era. I get the feeling that people are very nostalgic for the old downtown Green Bay. I just don't like the idea of making downtown something it's not. The northernmost building in Juza's drawing is along the lines of what I'm referring to. It's possible to design a new cool building that looks like it could have been part of downtown decades ago.

I was so high on Vetter until I saw these drawings. I understand that architects have their own style but it would be nice if every building didn't scream "Vetter"--especially when they're back to back to back. Basically I guess I'd like the centerpiece of Green Bay to better reflect the city and its history.

Thanks for posting, Puant.

[titletown]

I would really like to see something like Rock Bottom in Milwaukee along the riverfront. Maybe not that building, but something along the boardwalk. That would be neat to have a bar or outdoor cafe for the summer and sit outside and people watch. Especially the babes in bikinis...well thats what the boardwalk pictures suggest, lol.

http://www.boatnerd.com/news/newpictures04b/ROCK-BOTTOM-7-17-04-AL.jpg

http://www.planet99.com/pix/10571_1.jpg

[downtownVital.org]

^^ I agree to the point that three similarly styled buildings in a row probably isn't the best look, and based on those rather unpolished drawings I'm not crazy about what I see. But at the same time, we don't know what materials will be used for either building. We assume the red part is brick just becuase it's red, but that doesn't make it so, and at the same time we assume the south portion will have no brick, but it may very well. My impression from Vetter is that he's trying to keep some of the warehouse feel of that structure, so it might have some brick where those yellow/brown panels are. Now, I'm not seeing it from those drawings, but it's too early to say as well.

Compared to the Juza plan, I think this has more potential. The south portion of the Juza plan never quite did it for me, and the North part, well, I think it looks like a bloated cartoon of a classically styled building. In short, I really dislike that design.

To the larger issue, yes there can and should be brick in some designs (as I said, we don't know if there is or isn't on these). But to your point of "I just don't like the idea of making downtown something it's not," what exacly is downtown? I mean, take the Bellin Building and the Northern Building. One is Chicago style, and one is Art Deco. They are very different styles, and both modern when they were built. They only are part of the fabric of what downtown is today because they've have 70 or 80 years to become so. If we want to replicate that feeling for the future, the best we can do it build the very best buildings we can with the materials that we use best today. This is what they did in the past. Is River Center that? I need to be convinced that it is, but I don't think we should necessarily be rooting for certain materials just because the worked well decades ago.

Somthing like the Nicolet Bank building references more classic styles and comes off well because it is of today as well. If we get caught up in trying to re-create a style that's gone we're more likely to end up with a kitsch caracature of the past than an interesting downtown. At least that's how I see it, reasonable minds can disagree.

[Bartles53]

Dan, I've noticed in the past that you're the voice of reason on this forum and you're proving to take that role again on this issue. You're right, I'm definitely getting more fired up about this than I should since that drawing could mean nothing when all is said and done. I'm mainly concerned because that is the drawing that he used to show off his product at a presentation that is geared towards getting people interested about downtown. You'd think that if there was more to it he'd jazz it up a little. Actually I think the main reason I'm so down on that drawing is that renderings I've seen in the past were so much better. I wasn't able to post the picture here but the flash presentation on Dan's DowntownVital website shows an impressive drawing of the vision for the RiverCenter from a year or two ago.

http://www.downtownvital.org/html/designplanflash.htm

If RiverCenter ends up looking like that, I'll be relieved.

[downtownVital.org]

^^ haha, I think I'm going to send that "voice of reason" quote to my family and friends, I think they'd beg to differ! Thanks.

Yeah, the plan today doesn't seem as nice as the original plan for River Center. My guess is that the massing of the buildings will remain pretty close to these latest renderings, but I'm not sure too much thought was put into the facades for those yet either. I think those drawings are fairly preliminary. In any case, hopefully it will turn out better than it appears in those drawings, because if the public perception of how River Center looks is the same as the perception of Riverfront Lofts, that would be a problem for the success of the boardwalk.

[downtownVital.org]

Okay, so while the Packers game is on today, I though I'd take a hack at how I'd go about designing River Center if it was up to me, keeping the basic layout the same as what Vetter is using. Basically my goal was to keep the brick look of as much of the existing part as possible (I'm sure the brick would have to be replaced, but I'd use the same basic color), with more traditional windows in that part but still some balconies cut in. Then in any new parts I used a steel and glass look similiar to what Vetter has. The number of floors, and exact layout of the units is pretty hastily drawn in mine and not accurate, but that's not the point. I'm just trying to keep the industrial/warehouse (note that I kept the chimney) feeling of the old part and mix it with the more modern glass new portion.

Here's a re-post of one of Vetter's drawings, followed by the same view with my drawing overlaid, enjoy:

http://www.danillo.com/photos/RC1.jpg

http://www.danillo.com/photos/RCdan.jpg

[Puant]

^^Dan, I really like your design! I'd hope that Vetter would take some of this into consideration. I actually liked Vetter's original design as proposed a year ago the best of all. If I recall, that changed so that more of the existing brown brick buildiong could be used, right?

Here's the closest perspective (http://picasaweb.google.com/gBayPacker/Plans)I have of the existing site (brown brick warehouse building) (pics 3 & 8 from across the river) just for reference purposes for anyone else who might not know the site well.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Wow, lots of comments. I guess I'll throw in. Yes, these renderings are not the best quality - but I am not the least bit excited about what they look like. I was initially excited when I saw the first model displayed for Riverfront Lofts. The finished product not so much. I'm not saying the design for Riverfront Lofts is horrible, it just is the finished product wasn't really what I was expecting when I first saw the model. I think the same will be said for River Center, imo. The initial design shown over a year ago got me really excited. These drawings - not so much. They look too much like Juza's initial drawings that it was kind of like, seen this before. Not too earth shattering and at the same time, not the grand project that got us to this point in the first place. From these drawings you lose the 14 story condo element from the initial River Center drawings. I know height isn't the main importance, but it would offset the impact Astor Place will have on the skyline if the 14 story section was a hundred feet or so to the south. Now it is going to look like the Green Bay skyline is basically just flipping off the world - which in a way is cool, but I don't feel that the Astor location is the central part of downtown. Again, that argument is solely height based. 2nd, The other parts look to blah, especially the income restricted portion. I liked the hotel designed building in the Juza drawings much better. I guess from these drawings, I just expected a little more from the development team for River Center. Again, buildings tend to look a little different from what is shown on drawings, but in my opinion, most look a little less fantastic in real life than on paper. Maybe not Lambeau, that actually looked exactly like the rendering. I just have a feeling that Astor Place will be reduced in floors, River Center not making a "Town Center" feel that it initially did with the first drawings are just going to bring out a lot of negativeity. I hope I'm wrong. I guess we'll find out soon when the demo begins. My overall biggest disappointment is the view from the east (not the river side elevation). Wow this just looks like an afterthought. There should be a 360 degree design, not a 90 degree design.

[downtownVital.org]

My overall biggest disappointment is the view from the east (not the river side elevation). Wow this just looks like an afterthought. There should be a 360 degree design, not a 90 degree design.

I'm pretty sure that what the Washington St. side looks like in those drawings is indeed an afterthought. The first floor of that side is the Children's Museum and lobby space for the commercial portion. Above that is parking, then the commercial portion itself is above that.

The commercial portion is phase 2 of RC. Because they don't know what tenants, if any, will occupy that upon completion, they don't know the size and scale of that portion yet, and won't know until around June or so. Because of that, it's pretty hard to design what that space will look like because it could vary in size and be any of several uses. Therefore, I think almost no thought has been put into what that part will look like.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

I'm pretty sure that what the Washington St. side looks like in those drawings is indeed an afterthought. The first floor of that side is the Children's Museum and lobby space for the commercial portion. Above that is parking, then the commercial portion itself is above that.

The commercial portion is phase 2 of RC. Because they don't know what tenants, if any, will occupy that upon completion, they don't know the size and scale of that portion yet, and won't know until around June or so. Because of that, it's pretty hard to design what that space will look like because it could vary in size and be any of several uses. Therefore, I think almost no thought has been put into what that part will look like.

True, but then the same could be said for the commercial portion that faces the river as well. They show that designed w/o knowing possible tenants or if it will get constructed. Being that the parking area and Children's Museum are apart of Phase I, you would have thought a little bit more time would have been put into these renderings that show how that will look (Washington Street street scape). Again, these renderings were shown at the Good Morning Downtown Meeting, not sure if they have been altered or refined since then. Probably will not know until they get a website started for River Center.

[downtownVital.org]

I wouldn't say that the glass monolith that they have facing the river for the commercial portion is exaclty polished design either. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think a reason for creating there drawings was to help explain how the phases of the proposal work. At the RDA meeting where the phased plan was presented, there were similar renderings of these views showing what the site looked like from various angles now, after demo, and in various stages of construction. So it's possible that the drawings are only created to show the phases with very little thought put into how the actual facades look. If that's all he had for Good Morning Downtown, then I guess something would be better than nothing.

All that said, they still are Vetter's drawings, and obviously they wouldn't draw something that was the complete opposite of what sorts of things they would do. That might make this the perfect time to comment on them to say something like, "I know this is a preliminary drawing, but don't do this," before too much is invested in a poor direction.

[Puant]

Recently we've discussed passenger rail service, and although I thought it was worth a close look, I tried to make myself stop thinking about it and get real...

Then, this past weekend, I saw the article in the Press-Gazette about the $hundreds of $millions going into upgrades of USH 41 (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061217/GPG0101/612170659/1207) over the next few years. It made me think about the rail system again.

Just today I learned of a pretty strong initiative called the "Midwest Regional Rail System" or MWRRS) that's being pushed by nine midwestern state transportation agencies, railroads, and others. Basically, MWRRS is a high-speed passenger rail system that runs on mostly existing heavy-rail tracks shared by freight rail. One of these would run through the Fox Cities and up to Green Bay, some are optimistic this branch could be running by 2017.

If you're interested, take a close look at this and consider it. I haven't figured out the numbers yet, but I heard it may take only $60 million to get the train running between Milwaukee and Green Bay. Now think about that versus how many hundreds of millions of $$ it takes to continually do these upgrades to USH 41 and other roadways (see P-G article). Plus, you can travel in comfort at high speeds up to 110 mph on these trains. Express trains may allow us to go nonstop between Green Bay and Milwaukee, while others stop in Appleton, Oshkosh, and other cities along the way. The regional hub would be Chicago. You could go to many many major midwestern cities by rail on this system.Here's the DOT web site. (http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/state/docs/railmidwest.pdf) where you can check out the details. Pretty interesting stuff, makes a lot of sense.

Here's the map of what would all connect and where the stations are.

http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o52/Puant/MidwestRegionalRailSystem.jpg

[GBSurveyor]

Now that you bring it up puant, I guess that I am against the expansion of 41, I am all for the intersection improvements and the need to modernize the highway but expansion for 3 hours of heavy traffic a day IS A WASTE OF MONEY. I am sure I am in the minority here, but it has been proven over and over that all expansion does is encourage more sprawl. I laugh when people think there is a traffic problem here, hell Milwaukee barely has much traffic compaired to other sun belt cities, all highway expansion is going to do is suck even more $ out of everyones pocket books for CONSTRUCTION and MAINTANIANCE.

The midwest rail initiave has been around for a long time, I think Governer Thomson was a big proponent of the rail expansion. It has kind of slipped off the radar lately, but there are people who are working real hard to get this thing done. Although I really don't see it working untill we actully run into fuel supply problems, and who knows when that will happen.

Talking about trains bring out found memorys of mine, I think it was about 10 years ago that Titletown Brewing opened, and I have spent many nights there stareing out of the windows (much more time 10yrs ago), peering at the "Vonkers" sign (the Y was burnt out in Younkers) and we have always thought of ideas that would make our downtown cool, as you can imagine a few ales make people think. And in 10 years we have seen a new Main St. bridge get built, Port plaza shut down, Rev's Brass Rail bar (and many others) shut down on Broadway, Washington Street rebuilt 3 times, the KI center go up and fianlly last weekend when we were all gathered there like old times the old "vonkers" sign was no more. I started to really look over at the east side and wonder what it will look like in another 10 yrs????

[Bartles53]

Great find, Puant. I'd love to see that happen. A speedy train ride to Chicago would be a great addition to the Green Bay area. I think it could have a collateral economic benifit as well. Green Bay has a lot to offer but there's a reason that some people choose to live in large cities and it's not always about jobs. Giving people the option to take a quick, care free trip to the 3rd largest city in the US could really be a selling point to young professionals.

Dan, I like the concept of your drawing except for one thing. My favorite aspect of the original drawing of RiverCenter was the center section. That's the part that looked like one giant window that looked to be pushed inward a bit from the rest of the structure. I know my complaint with the new drawing is that it's too windowy but in the original drawing the sections to the left and right of the center section seemed to consist of more building materials than in the new drawing. What I really liked were what looked like steps stretching across the front of that section and leading up to that huge windowed facade. I'm not sure what was to be on the inside of that section but what I had assumed (probably incorrectly) was that it was to be a large open atrium. That part of the original drawing is what struck me as being so cool and inviting about the project. Actually, in front of that area in one drawing is where there there was situated an ice skating rink--another thing I thought was so cool about that area that's now not going to happen.

[downtownVital.org]

I find it frustrating when people talk about rail and how those systems are rarely able to pay for themselves without subsidies, and yet it's no problem to spend 100s of millions on highway expansions that don't exaclty pay for themselves either. I mean, infrastructure, whether it's roads or rails, is important and generally worth investing in, and if there aren't the passengers for a rail system then don't build it. But it just seems odd to complain about the cost of public transit, which is not only good for the environment but tends to be used most by the less wealthy, but then nobody complains about the huge costs to build/expand/maintain systems that generate no revenue, increase dependence on foreign oil, and are used the least by the less wealthy.

Then, yesterday in the paper there's talk about making US-41 into an Interstate. What a waste of time. 41 is currently up to interstate standards for the most part, the federal funding levels are the same for state, US, and Interstate highways, so basically all changing would accomplish is wasting the time and money to re-sign 100 miles of highway to blue and red signs with the number 41 on them instead of black and white signs with the number 41. Glad we have our transportation priorities in order.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

I find it frustrating when people talk about rail and how those systems are rarely able to pay for themselves without subsidies, and yet it's no problem to spend 100s of millions on highway expansions that don't exaclty pay for themselves either. I mean, infrastructure, whether it's roads or rails, is important and generally worth investing in, and if there aren't the passengers for a rail system then don't build it. But it just seems odd to complain about the cost of public transit, which is not only good for the environment but tends to be used most by the less wealthy, but then nobody complains about the huge costs to build/expand/maintain systems that generate no revenue, increase dependence on foreign oil, and are used the least by the less wealthy.

Then, yesterday in the paper there's talk about making US-41 into an Interstate. What a waste of time. 41 is currently up to interstate standards for the most part, the federal funding levels are the same for state, US, and Interstate highways, so basically all changing would accomplish is wasting the time and money to re-sign 100 miles of highway to blue and red signs with the number 41 on them instead of black and white signs with the number 41. Glad we have our transportation priorities in order.

I agree 100%. However, roads are a proven commodity. More people if had the choice, both being equal, still desire and would choose to get in their own vehicle and drive versus ride a train. Until people's perceptions change, it will be smooth sailing ahead for road expansions. Well maybe not smooth sailing as you are stuck in traffic jams. Plus the density of Green Bay is not that of places where passanger ridership on rails actually does make it a viable option. I would love to see more energy efficent, fuel saving alternatives begin to become more popular. I mean we can't even convince developers to build green elements into their buildings here, why would this area support a move to lessen the amount of vehicles on the road, thus eliminating the need to increase lanes. I mean how many examples from other urban areas are out there showing that increasing lanes isn't the only answer? Why don't we then concentrate on finding other alternatives? Maybe a growth boundary for the Green Bay area would be a good idea. Drive land values up, keep growth centralized, increase redevelopment to higher and better uses. No that would scare developers away from building in Green Bay.

The old saying goes, if you build it, they will come. Well yes, expand the lanes to meet current demand and more people will choose to travel that way that didn't before and live further out. It is a horrible cycle. Although I wonder if any impact will occur from Green Bay being served by two interstate highways? Not much in my estimation because 41 is basically an interstate save for overpass height and interchanges meeting interstate standards. What we need to do is get to work on the transporter from Star Trek so that we can eliminate the need for cars. Honey, beem me to work.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Well let's keep track of the progress of Astor. I'll update this every once in a while as they continue to update their sales chart on the website. There have been some increases in sales, pending offers, and reservations lately. Like I've said, once they start building, I believe the amount of units that are sold will increase dramatically. I'm sure interest in the upper units will increase as well. They better keep them in the plans and not shorten the tower, I'll be crushed. Who knows when I will win Powerball. I may just pony up for one of the penthouses...

http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r147/phatty_013/12-19-06APProgress.jpg

[Green Bay 4 Life]

A buddy of mine used to work with VK Development. He kept a .jpg picture of the proposal back in 2000 that was supposed to occur on Site 4 and the Nicolet Site. All I can say is D'OH!

http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r147/phatty_013/VK.jpg

[downtownVital.org]

I agree 100%. However, roads are a proven commodity. More people if had the choice, both being equal, still desire and would choose to get in their own vehicle and drive versus ride a train.

I don't disagree with your point. I was just saying that I'm annoyed when people's excuse against rail, not just in Green Bay but in larger cities as well, is that it doesn't make money. I don't beleive we're ready for commuter rail here yet either (though regional rail may be able to work), but that's becuase of the ridership/density issues you pointed out, not becuase it would need a subsidy.

Wow, haven't seen that boat design in a while. Almost everyone I know hated that design. Looking at it now though, it you lob off the northern half and built the southern half on the remaining site 4, that could look pretty sharp and not like a boat. Get rid of the crows-nest spire too. Oh well, development there is a way off.

[atrain5371]

I don't know how many boats traverse that particular segment of the fox river but back a few pages ago when you were talking about a resturant on the river I thought of a resturant in the Flordia Keys were they had boat parking and you could pull you boat right up to the resturant. That would be kind of cool I would think.

[Clashman]

http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r147/phatty_013/VK.jpg

What is that, the old "Prestige Place" design?

[GBFAN]

What is that, the old "Prestige Place" design?

If I recall the were a proposals from VK. One was an Amerisuites Tower and hotel and another for condos. Both were shot down by our progressive city council.

[titletown]

What is that, the old "Prestige Place" design?

That building was supposed to be the Fox Tower. In 1999-2000 the proposal was for 21 floors. At the time there was just not enough demand in condos like there is now. The right building at the wrong time.

The high speed rail for Green Bay has been kicked around for at least 7 years now. The Green Bay extension if they ever get it will be 79 mph. Other cities like Chicago, Milwaukee, Madison, and the Twin Cities will have up to 110.

[titletown]

Green Bay MSA surpassed 300,000 this year. Why is Oconto & Kewaunee counties considered part of the MSA now? I know the US Census changed their definition of this, but come on...I am sorry Townsend & Lakewood is nowhere near Green Bay. We must have the largest square mile metro area for a metro of only 300,000 people. You would think a county to be considered part of the metro should be urban or having majority of its population close to the metro area.

[Puant]

That building was supposed to be the Fox Tower. In 1999-2000 the proposal was for 21 floors. At the time there was just not enough demand in condos like there is now. The right building at the wrong time.

The high speed rail for Green Bay has been kicked around for at least 7 years now. The Green Bay extension if they ever get it will be 79 mph. Other cities like Chicago, Milwaukee, Madison, and the Twin Cities will have up to 110.

This "Fox Tower" (ship-shape building) is kind of cool, I think. It's definitely unique, and the design reflects local features--a ship plying the Fox River. I for one liked it much better than just a plain old box-shaped building. But, at the time, I knew this project was up shit creek w/o a paddle because it was too big & too radical of a design.

As for the rail line--
It would slow down to 70 mph or so in the cities like Appleton and such, but what I saw showed that it would run up to 110 mph between Milwaukee and Oshkosh.

Yes the proposal's been kicked around for a while, but back 7 years ago it was only a conceptual study. It's now moving forward into more detailed & more serious feasibility studies & cost estimates. I think the initiative is stronger than ever. It will take leadership from congress and local politicians. On the political front, the stars may be aligning to move it forward. It wouldn't hurt if these politicians heard some support from us citizens.

The online document mentioned that the goal is to keep subsidies to a minimum, or even eliminate them all together and perhaps even operate for profit. Nobody knows if this is realistic, of course. Again--the key to this rail line being different from other heavily subsidized ones you may have heard of is that this one runs on mostly existing infrastructure (rail lines, Right-of-way, etc). Some of the thus-far unprofitable light rail in other cities started from scratch and thus capital costs soared.

Ridership predictions are tough to make, but I think Green Bay and the Fox Cities do have enough of a popoulation density to make the line feasible.

Consider: Hwy 41's rural stretches carry close to 80,000 vehicles per day (according to the recent P-G article (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061217/GPG0101/612170659/1207)). Say on average there are 1.5 people per car...That's 120,000 people per day traveling on this roadway.

If only 3% of these people choose to ride the rail line along this corridor, that's still 3600 people per day / 1.3 million riders per year.

Say there are 6 trains arriving per day. These figures above would mean 600 people per train. Even if it's only half that number of riders, I'd say it would be a success.

I think that's realistic for the Fox Valley. These are all conservative numbers, based on the notion that the vast majority (97%) of folks will still drive their cars on USH 41. Keep in mind, how many of these 80,000 cars have got to be regional travellers--business travellers--who would be the sort to take a train, especially sine it serves cities too close to fly to and ust far enough away that a decent alternative to driving would be considered. It's speedy "downtown-to-downtown" travel where one could work on a laptop, relax, read, or whatever.

Based on what I've seen, the experts working on this have figured some numbers similiar to this for the Milwaukee to Green Bay line. And none of my figures above even accounted for traffic on Interstate 43, which is essentially the same corridor (GB to Milw).

This is all radical thinking, I know... But damn it makes so much sense in so many ways. At least someone's taking a hard, close look at it. I'll predict that by 2025 it will be a reality.

Correct me if you think I'm way off base here.

OK, there I'm done. I know it's probably not fun for some of you to have so much train talk. Maybe I'll pontificate about passenger rail over on my blog instead.

[sr22ger]

I would honestly love and use a semi high or high speed rail service between Milwaukee and Green Bay, and even Milwaukee to Chicago or Milwaukee to Minneapolis.
My wife and I are transplants from Green Bay and all of our family and a majority of our friends live in the GB/Fox Valley area. We drive to Green Bay 2-3 weekends a month and I travel to Green Bay for work even more often than that (although I do get paid nicely for business mileage, its still a pain).
My wife and I would definitely be among the 3% of Hwy 41 traffic using the trains if they were to be implemented.

I also read this sort of counter editorial to the one posted by the gentleman who lives in Hudson.

Guest column: Good jobs are here for quality work force

By Allison Swanson

As a young professional, I am optimistic regarding the future of greater Green Bay and our ability to attract good-paying jobs and people to the area. As Kyle Brunner certainly is aware, Wisconsin's "Brain Drain" afflicted our state well before we were born. But we don't have to accept it as the way things are going to be.

Brunner's primary contention is that the city's land should be used to attract major employers with high-paying jobs. The reality is, we're already doing it. Green Bay, under the leadership of our mayor, is going near and far to recruit businesses to the city and encourage expansion. We are filling our new east-side business parks at a rapid rate, including more than 4,000 employees just in our I-43 Business Park.

But Green Bay's economy cannot sustain itself on manufacturing alone, and the city has done much to diversify. There are high-paying jobs in Green Bay, and there are, in fact, high-paying jobs in our downtown. Green Bay is becoming a regional hub for health care and financial services. In the past several years, our downtown has seen a significant increase in jobs and investments by Nicolet Bank, Johnson Bank, Associated Bank and Baylake Bank, to name a few.

While I share Brunner's concern for the need to encourage the creation of high-paying jobs in our area, the solution does not lie in ignoring our downtown. The major employers in the Green Bay area share one concern: people. Employers need an educated work force and are working with the city to make sure we have a creative class that can fill their needs. People like Brunner need to return to Green Bay, because the jobs are here, but there are not enough quality people to fill them.

Young professionals want a livable community with ample recreational opportunities, cultural amenities and entertainment. Downtown needs to become the hub of these activities, so visitors and former residents can easily see that Green Bay can offer a lifestyle similar to that available in other major Midwestern cities.

The major employers in our area have also shared this vision, as they realize a vibrant downtown will improve their recruitment efforts. We are more than the Packers; we have much to offer, and a strong downtown district will help to attract the professional and technical work force.

I invite Brunner to return to his hometown to see what's really happening in Green Bay. I have walked in Brunner's shoes having lived, attended college and worked in the Twin Cities for 10 years. But I returned to Green Bay and I found higher paying jobs, a significantly lower cost of living, lower crime, shorter and less stressful commutes and most importantly, I found time. I will encourage my sons to go off to college and experience places and people, but I will also encourage them to come back home when they can appreciate all that Green Bay really has to offer.

Allison Swanson is a 1990 graduate of Ashwaubenon High School. She has a bachelor's degree in sociology from the University of Minnesota and a juris doctor from Hamline School of Law in St. Paul, Minn. She worked as an attorney in private practice in St. Paul before becoming employed by the city of Green Bay in 2001. She is director and general counsel for the city's Economic Development Authority.

I would think from the author's background that she would have a better grasp of the economic landscape in Green Bay vs a person who lives hundreds of miles away.

[downtownVital.org]

Puant, yes, it's only 3%, but it is still hard to get even that much to change. People would have to drive downtown, park there, and then take the train. Would someone from Ashwaubenon head downtown to get on a train to Appleton? I doubt it. Plus, what percent of that 80,000 are headed to a destination that's within walking distance of the destination depot? An effectice commuter rail between the two cities would need to have stops in, at least, Downtown Green Bay, Ashwaubenon, De Pere, Wrightstown, Kaukauna, Grand Chute, Downtown Appleton, Menasha, and Neenah. Otherwise it's too inconvenient for people to get to a stop to get on the train, and then be able to get off close enough to their destination (and even with those stops it still may not be enough to get 3%).

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it, but it'll be tough. I think the biggest beneficiaries in terms of commuting would be business people in either downtown who do business in the other downtown. These people would already be near the stations, and could catch a train back and forth instead of having to drive. But more than that, this system would really need to make it on people needing to cover longer distances. Green Bay/Appleton to Milwaukee, Chicago, St. Louis, etc, etc. I think it would need to work as a more convenient alternative to regional air travel, and to places that have the infrastructure to get you to where you need to go from a central rail depot. (It seems that sr22ger's example of how he'd use the rail illustrates this)

On a different note, yesterday I went to Bay Park to do some holiday shopping. I needed to go to two places, ShopKo, and Best Buy. So I parked in the middle and walked. From the enterance from ShopKo to the mall, over to Best Buy, I paced it off as about 660 yards (from ShopKo to the Younkers was about 350). How many places in the downtown don't have parking within a quarter mile? And people complain about parking downtown? A nice added touch was the the pedesrtian crossing signal to get across Pilgrim Way didn't work, so I had to dodge traffic there.

Of course, my logic here is a bit flawed. Everyone knows that the most efficient way to get from ShopKo to Best Buy is to park 200 yards from ShopKo in the giant surface lot, shop there, walk the same distance back to the car, circle back to Oneida, wait at two or three stop lights, finish the quarter-mile/five-minute drive over to Best Buy, drive around looking for a spot in another surface lot, then walk 60 yards from the car to Best Buy. What was I thinking making that long walk!

[Inside the Beltway]

I think you'd get a fairly high number of travelers who would fly into Chicago or Milwaukee and take the train up to the Fox Cities or Green Bay. It would sure beat attempting to transfer at MSP, DTW, ORD, or MKE.

[Puant]

Well I'm home today with sick kids so I'll post one more.....

^^I don't envision all that many passengers riding rail between GB metro and the Fox Cities. Mostly, I agree with others who've replied--passengers would be traveling to/from Milwaukee, Chicago, Infinity and beyond (sorry my son loves Buzz, had to throw that in). Remember the plan shows that some trains would stop at various points in Appleton, Menasha, etc but there may also be an "express".

I don't have the traffic counts for I-43 between Milw and GB, so I didn't include that in my theorizing above about ridership. I-43 isn't as obnoxious of a drive because it's usually not as busy, but it does have more poeple riding to Milwaukee & Chi. That's the road I usually take when going to Milw/Chi. Considering this, I would estimate that you could figure on couple hundred plus boardings/alightings per train. Ah well, the GB portion is Phase 3. We can wait and see how the regional system works for other parts of the midwest as they go online. It's so far off--just a pipe dream.



On other topics
GB4life: I like your spreadsheet of the Astor Place sales.

Dan, I like your story about shopping & parking. Nice. I often feel the same way.

All in all we have a pretty good GB thread/forum. I look at other threads of other cities from time to time, and many of those contain way too many personal attacks, "mine is bigger than yours" banter, and worthless posts. I really like the contributors here. Keep it up! Obviously I post here obsessively, and I'm trying to cut back a little by posting my crazy opinions on my blog instead of filling up this forum with my incessant blathering. Out.

[Green Bay roots]

"mine is bigger than yours" ?? what do they talk about on those other posts. haha sounds a little "personal" - literally. haha

[Bartles53]

Fox Tower: Now that's what I'm talkin' about! It's bold, it's different. I guess I'm in the minority but I think it's cool. I hadn't seen that one before. I guess I'm about 7 years behind the times.

I think you'd get a fairly high number of travelers who would fly into Chicago or Milwaukee and take the train up to the Fox Cities or Green Bay. It would sure beat attempting to transfer at MSP, DTW, ORD, or MKE.

There have been times when I waited too long to buy a ticket home and I tried to figure out a way where I could fly Southwest, AirTran or Jet Blue into Chicago or Milwaukee in order to save some money. The problem is finding a way up to Green Bay. If these trains existed my problem would be solved. But the train would have to be cheap for it to be worth my while. If a round trip to Chicago was under $100 they'd have me at "hello".

...filling up this forum with my incessant blathering. Out.

Do we have a clone in our midst?

[titletown]

Below is traffic counts in Blue for Hwy 41 (Green Bay & Appleton Metro) and 43 (Green Bay Metro) from 2003-2004, which is the latest data. Hwy 43 to Milwaukee is rather light traffic between 20,000-25,000 daily. I see Milwaukee broke ground in August for their new rail station. Also, Madison is proposely street cars now.. http://www.1kfriends.org/Transportation/WI_Transportation_Projects_/Streetcars.htm

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r3/GreenBayWI/GreenBayWI2.jpg

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

One last thing...Why doesn't Wisconsin just build a dang Toll Booth near the Illinois Border. Think of all the money this will bring in to at least pay for some of the roads. I agree, spending at estimated $671 Million on 2 sections of Hwy 41 is ridiculous. It is only busy at peak times. I have driven the best of Chicago, LA, and Miami and we do not know what traffic is up here.

[Puant]

Fox Tower: Now that's what I'm talkin' about! It's bold, it's different. I guess I'm in the minority but I think it's cool. I hadn't seen that one before. I guess I'm about 7 years behind the times.

If a round trip to Chicago was under $100 they'd have me at "hello".

Do we have a clone in our midst?

I run my own smack. But I agree--WAR the Fox FREAKIN' Tower!

I saw something that mentioned a round-trip ticket GB-Chi would be just over$100.

Titletown--Thanks for posting those traffic counts. It appears I had some bad numbers with my take that rural stretches of 41 had 80,000 v.p.d. Looks like it's only about half that. But, when you factor in I-43 counts and my "3%" theory, I have not changed my opinion that the MWRRS could be feasible and profitable.

[titletown]

Paunt- I totally agree with you, it would be a great idea to build this. They are saying 90% of the Midwest's population will be within an hours drive of a station or bus line. Heck if I move to Florida, I am sure that if I fly into Chicago I would rather take the train then to have to rent a car. I really dread the "puddle jumper" from Chicago to GB. Usually the flight is cancelled due to bad weather in Chicago. I wouldn't have to worry about driving as well.

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

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

[Geography Teacher]

Green Bay MSA surpassed 300,000 this year. Why is Oconto & Kewaunee counties considered part of the MSA now? I know the US Census changed their definition of this, but come on...I am sorry Townsend & Lakewood is nowhere near Green Bay. We must have the largest square mile metro area for a metro of only 300,000 people. You would think a county to be considered part of the metro should be urban or having majority of its population close to the metro area.

I believe the government places any county within a city's Metropolitan Statistical Area if a certain percentage of its residents commute to or from the principal city's county. I don't have the numbers, but I would guess that a large number of southern Oconto County residents (e.g., Abrams and Little Suamico) work in Brown County. Likewise I would assume that a large number of western Kewaunee County residents (e.g., Luxemburg-Casco area) also work in Brown County. Both groups of people must be significant enough to meet the official minimums for inclusion in the MSA.

I agree that most people in Townsend and Lakewood (and Algoma and Kewaunee for that matter) don't work in Green Bay. However, MSAs have always been delineated at the county level, so it's all or nothing for inclusion. I'd also add that Oconto County is unusual in size and shape, meaning that its northwestern reach is especially distant from Green Bay.

If you look at the list of MSAs, you would find many other situations in which areas very far removed from their principal cities are included in the MSA. Denver MSA has ten counties, many of which are separated from Denver by mountains or miles of ranches. Atlanta MSA has a staggering 28 counties; they cannot all contain people who consider themselves Atlantonians (I may have made that term up).

It is impressive to think that, if you combined the Green Bay, Appleton, and Oshkosh-Neenah MSAs, you would have a megalopolis of nearly 600,000 people. Certainly this would support our proposed rail line, but only if habits and perceptions (or fuel prices) change. I agree that it will happen someday, but it might be decades. But I'll ride that first train with the rest of you.

[titletown]

I believe the government places any county within a city's Metropolitan Statistical Area if a certain percentage of its residents commute to or from the principal city's county. I don't have the numbers, but I would guess that a large number of southern Oconto County residents (e.g., Abrams and Little Suamico) work in Brown County. Likewise I would assume that a large number of western Kewaunee County residents (e.g., Luxemburg-Casco area) also work in Brown County. Both groups of people must be significant enough to meet the official minimums for inclusion in the MSA.


Makes sense now, thanks Geography Teacher! I played around with Paintbrush to make a Green Bay riverfront. It is not perfect to scale, sorry...I tried. I sure hope that River Center will look 100 times better in real llife when its done.

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r3/GreenBayWI/River-GB.jpg

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

[sr22ger]

One last thing...Why doesn't Wisconsin just build a dang Toll Booth near the Illinois Border. Think of all the money this will bring in to at least pay for some of the roads. I agree, spending at estimated $671 Million on 2 sections of Hwy 41 is ridiculous. It is only busy at peak times. I have driven the best of Chicago, LA, and Miami and we do not know what traffic is up here.

I believe they will not do such a thing because it would hurt both commuters who live in Kenosha county and work in Northern Illinois (meaning less economic growth for that area) and also might affect tourisim from the Chicago Metro to Northern Wisconsin and Door County (although I believe this would be to a lesser extent). Although it would make the proposed rail transit system even more viable :)

I've always said that the DOT just needs to expand the 3 lanes portion of 41 north past Lombardi to the 29 interchange and rework the 29 interchange so you can go without traffic lights and 3 left turn lanes to west bound 29. I'm sure that would be a much cheaper alternative than expanding the whole thing.

[Inside the Beltway]

I'd gladly pay $50-something one-way from Chicago or Milwaukee and fly in on Jet Blue or Midwest (as long as K-Mart, I mean AirTran doesn't "acquire" them).

It's probably cheaper and less stressful than having Northworst lose your baggage and provide generally poor service. Plus taking the train is fun, you can see the landscape a little as you travel.

Alas, train travel does have its own issues though. Amtrak trains are more late than not along the NE corridor (most traveled in the US). Usually late, but it sure beats being stuck in traffic. We recently took a trip to Ireland and traveled the country by rail...it was fantastic.

I think it could work as proposed, and I agree that even if 2-3% of travelers would choose rail, it could mostly pay for itself (subsidies would never go away, but highways steal money from other forms of transit to pay for improvements, so that arguement is moot).

I guess you'll never get everyone out of their cars, especially guy's like that "the only thing green in Wisconsin is the Packers" who was running his mouth on here a week or two ago about how environmetalism/conservation is for sissies...

[Oshkosh49]

Below is traffic counts in Blue for Hwy 41 (Green Bay & Appleton Metro) and 43 (Green Bay Metro) from 2003-2004, which is the latest data. Hwy 43 to Milwaukee is rather light traffic between 20,000-25,000 daily. I see Milwaukee broke ground in August for their new rail station. Also, Madison is proposely street cars now.. http://www.1kfriends.org/Transportation/WI_Transportation_Projects_/Streetcars.htm

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r3/GreenBayWI/GreenBayWI2.jpg

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

One last thing...Why doesn't Wisconsin just build a dang Toll Booth near the Illinois Border. Think of all the money this will bring in to at least pay for some of the roads. I agree, spending at estimated $671 Million on 2 sections of Hwy 41 is ridiculous. It is only busy at peak times. I have driven the best of Chicago, LA, and Miami and we do not know what traffic is up here.

Okay, I know I'm going to stir up a hornets nest here, but here it goes anyway.

I assume we all agree that the Green Bay to Oshkosh corridor (metro areas) will continue to increase in population over the next 30 years and beyond. And those traffic counts figures are already outdated since they're from 3 to 4 years ago. Now, the 17 mile Hwy 41 section between Breezewood Lane and Hwy 26 isn't scheduled to be completed until 2014, and the 14 mile Hwy 41 section up around Green Bay is scheduled to be completed around the same time. Now we're 10 years beyond those 2004 traffic counts given in titletown's maps. These two sections by then will be even more crowded and hazardous to drive.

Other points to remember. It is an improvement of an existing roadway, where sprawl has already taken place for decades already. It is not a building of a whole new roadway further out into the nice farmland, inviting new commercial sprawl farther out. Also, these highway improvements hopefully have a lifetime of 30 to 40 years before more extensive improvements is needed. US Hwy 41 wasn't built until the very early 1960s, and I think all of us have gotten our money's worth during that time. I know it's a hell of a lot of money, but any rail system of any type will NEVER reduce the growth of traffic on Hwy 41 if the area's population continues to increase.

The longer the DOT delays the needed improvement of any road system, the more it always cost. Whether there's a train going to Milwaukee to carry 3% of the traveling public or not.

[downtownVital.org]

^^ I don't disagree, necessarily. I was just using the cost of the 41 expansion to show that driving in your car is a heavily subsidised activity, and yet people don't complain about that but expect that public transit will necessarily pay for itself. My feeling is that in the long term we're best off investing in mass transit because as energy become a greater concern, those cities/regions with effective public transport will be at a competitive advantage. I want to be one of those cities, though I don't see it happening soon.

I do questions whether or not a 3-lane road is faster or safer than a 2-lane road. I would presume it's faster, but I don't know that. But as things exist, we clearly need to maintain our highways.

[Bartles53]

Dan, did you post during the Packer game?? Isn't there some sort of law against that?

Couple thoughts on the train:

I believe it was in the LA Times where I read an article a year or so ago about amtrak passengers. Everyone interviewed spoke very highly of travel by train but the chief complaint was about the delays. The article made it sound rare that an Amtrak train will reach its destination on time. Supposedly the main reason for this is because Amtrak shares the tracks with freight trains and by necessity Amtrak will have to run at the freight trains' pace. I really like the thought of taking a train from GB to Chicago but if I say just went down for a Packer game and had to be at work on Monday and this train service has reliability issues I'd definitely think twice about it. In a few months I'm planning on taking a weekend trip up to San Luis Obispo by way of Amtrak. In that instance I'm taking the train as part of the experience. If I really had to be there or back home by a certain time I'm not so sure I'd take the risk. Beltway, you mentioned traveling by train in Ireland. Do you know if the passenger trains there share the rails with freight trains? Is freight the reason for the delays in the northeast or is there another issue?

Also, I'm with Oshkosh on the freeway thing. If 97% of the population decides to drive down 41, the freeway is where the bulk of the transportation money should go. And I for one am not pulling for higher gas prices to push people in a different direction.

I guess you'll never get everyone out of their cars, especially guy's like that "the only thing green in Wisconsin is the Packers" who was running his mouth on here a week or two ago about how environmetalism/conservation is for sissies...

Hate to say it but I'm with GBMPhillips on this one.

[Oshkosh49]

^^ I don't disagree, necessarily. I was just using the cost of the 41 expansion to show that driving in your car is a heavily subsidised activity, and yet people don't complain about that but expect that public transit will necessarily pay for itself. My feeling is that in the long term we're best off investing in mass transit because as energy become a greater concern, those cities/regions with effective public transport will be at a competitive advantage. I want to be one of those cities, though I don't see it happening soon.

I do questions whether or not a 3-lane road is faster or safer than a 2-lane road. I would presume it's faster, but I don't know that. But as things exist, we clearly need to maintain our highways.Yes downtown, having your own personal means of transportation via car, truck, motorcycle, etc. is subsidized. But it is subsidized by the owner of the individual vehicle through our high gas taxes, our title and registration fees, and our fines and tickets for breaking traffic laws. Basically, we our paying our own way as we go in using our public highways and roads. And that is where the revenue is obtained to build and maintain the highways. Therefore, the construction costs are already being paid back to the state, even if there is no construction planned or being done!

With a commuter rail system, 100% of the tax payers are paying for the 3% percent of the possible riders. Whereas 100% of the vehicles on the roads are paying for the 100% of the usage. Which to me seems more equitable.

You question whether a multi-lane highway is safer than a two lane road, am I correct? Did you ever drive down to Madison before Hwy 151 was a 4 lane divided highway? If you did, remember the crazy risks people took to pass another vehicle on that damn thing? I rest my case.

[Inside the Beltway]

With a commuter rail system, 100% of the tax payers are paying for the 3% percent of the possible riders. Whereas 100% of the vehicles on the roads are paying for the 100% of the usage. Which to me seems more equitable.

Ok, and train fares don't go to paying for a portion of the service? Riding the train isn't free! The Northeast is the only spot where Amtrak actually makes money.

Don't forget that an auto driver who's taxes go to pay for mass transit benefit by getting some people off the roads and making his/her commute a little easier. If the taxpayers in the DC area didn't help pay for metrorail, then 800,000 commuters a day would have to find another way to get to work...think of the mess on the beltway then!

Do you know if the passenger trains there share the rails with freight trains? Is freight the reason for the delays in the northeast or is there another issue?

CSX owns much of the rail line from Florida up the coast. So, they have first dibs on the rail, then Amtrak, then the local commuter rail (MARC in Maryland, VRE in Virginia). When the Amtrak train is late because of a CSX train, the MARC or VRE train is REALLY late because it has to wait for everyone else.

Hate to say it but I'm with GBMPhillips on this one.

Did the smog of LA get to a few brain cells of yours? :bash: What is so difficult with being energy efficient? Other than thinking shortsighted...recycling and finding ways to save energy actually SAVE YOU MONEY. And I'm not preaching from my yuppy east coast condo...

[exit_320]

With a commuter rail system, 100% of the tax payers are paying for the 3% percent of the possible riders. Whereas 100% of the vehicles on the roads are paying for the 100% of the usage. Which to me seems more equitable.


I don't drive or use freeways but the taxes I pay to the state and the goverment still go to freeway and road construction. You also forget that the only reason why so many people use roadways now is because of mass funding of those roadways at a time when most people did use mass transit. This was a result of heavy lobbying by the auto industry.

[Puant]

A couple quick points:

1) The MWRRS won't happen if it's got to be subsidized heavily. It will be primarily paid for in user fees.

2) It's being pitched as having a benefit-to-cost ratio of about 1.8, which means that for each dollar spent on the system, one dollar and eighty cents is returned in benefits. I don't know how they figured this. OF course, there will be up-front costs that will be "subsidized" in the form of loans (federal & state credits), but the loan is expected to be paid back in a relatively short period of time (less than the 35 years permitted by the federal loan program).

3) As far as delays caused by freight trains sharing the rail:
The GB-Milw route via the Fox Cities - West Bend route was selected because it would have far fewer conflicts with the CN freight service (in addition to being along a more populated corridor). In fact, part of this route is not even used by CN railroad at all right now.

[Oshkosh49]

I don't drive or use freeways but the taxes I pay to the state and the goverment still go to freeway and road construction. You also forget that the only reason why so many people use roadways now is because of mass funding of those roadways at a time when most people did use mass transit. This was a result of heavy lobbying by the auto industry.But I suspect the majority of times that you travel either by county transit, taxi, limo, bicycle, or with a friend, you are still using the streets, roads, and highways in order to get to where you need to be. So you are getting your tax dollars worth. All the mass funding in the world for mass transit will never convince the vast majority of people to give up the convenience and practicality of driving a car. Mass transit can not compete with personal transportation with the exception of maybe in places like NYC, Chicago, D.C., San Francisco, basically huge metro areas.

[Puant]

All the mass funding in the world for mass transit will never convince the vast majority of people to give up the convenience and practicality of driving a car. Mass transit can not compete with personal transportation with the exception of maybe in places like NYC, Chicago, D.C., San Francisco, basically huge metro areas.

Of course mass transit won't ever "do away" with cars. IT's sort of like saying that we shouldn't use airplanes because people won't give up their cars. NO! People choose one mode or the other , for different reasons. Rail would fill a different transporatino niche that cars and airplanes can't fill.

Don't generalize "mass transit". That could mean anything from city buses to the ill-fated Simpson's monorail. What I am promoting is the idea of one specific type: Regional rail--because I believe it would be much more practical and actually be used because it fills a unique niche. Enough people would choose it over other options and make it well-used. I don't think you'd see empty regional trains like you often see empty city buses.

Consider: I think I'm pretty typical in that I don't use city buses (also "mass transit" but totally different purpose)--for short trips, I'd much rather hop around town in my car beause I often have many different goals & destinations along the way.

However, for medium-long trips, such as a trip to Milw or Chi, I usually have one specific primary destination. It's too short and expensive to fly, plus airports are out on the fringe too far so you end up in a car anyway. These medium-long destinations are just far enough away that I don't want to drive my car, and deal with the heavy traffic, long sitting periods, stress, and unfamiliarity of the destination city, parking, etc. THat's where I'd be more apt to look to regional rail where I could travel closer to my destinatino in comfort and speed.

The regional rail system--even for the Fox Cities--is very practical in many ways despite our lower population. I tried to lay this out in the above posts, maybe you should read them more carefully so I don't have to repeat myself.

[exit_320]

But I suspect the majority of times that you travel either by county transit, taxi, limo, bicycle, or with a friend, you are still using the streets, roads, and highways in order to get to where you need to be. So you are getting your tax dollars worth. All the mass funding in the world for mass transit will never convince the vast majority of people to give up the convenience and practicality of driving a car. Mass transit can not compete with personal transportation with the exception of maybe in places like NYC, Chicago, D.C., San Francisco, basically huge metro areas.

I walk everywhere except for the few times I go to visit family. The only reason I use the roadways at that point is because there are no non-road mass transit options available. Using roads isn't a choice, it's unavoidable due to the goverment's subsidization of roads. I am hoping the METRA extension goes through to downtown, because then I won't have to worry about the street system.

[downtownVital.org]

I guess you'll never get everyone out of their cars, especially guy's like that "the only thing green in Wisconsin is the Packers" who was running his mouth on here a week or two ago about how environmetalism/conservation is for sissies...

To be fair, there are a lot of people here who, given the choice between saving a buck on their tax bill and taking a step to protect their environment will choose to save taxes in a minute. Like it or not, the "the only thing green in Wisconsin is the Packers" is a reflection of a large chunk of the voting population.

Dan, did you post during the Packer game?? Isn't there some sort of law against that?

Also, I'm with Oshkosh on the freeway thing. If 97% of the population decides to drive down 41, the freeway is where the bulk of the transportation money should go. And I for one am not pulling for higher gas prices to push people in a different direction.

Guilty as charged, though in my defense I was watching the game and using my laptop at the same time. I know it's hard to believe that I could turn away from the rapid-fire action of that game for even a moment, but I managed.

I agree we need to maintain the roads at an adequate level, but we also need to be investigating alternate modes of transportation where appropriate. I'm not sure this is an either/or proposition.

Yes downtown, having your own personal means of transportation via car, truck, motorcycle, etc. is subsidized. But it is subsidized by the owner of the individual vehicle through our high gas taxes, our title and registration fees, and our fines and tickets for breaking traffic laws. Basically, we our paying our own way as we go in using our public highways and roads. And that is where the revenue is obtained to build and maintain the highways. Therefore, the construction costs are already being paid back to the state, even if there is no construction planned or being done!

With a commuter rail system, 100% of the tax payers are paying for the 3% percent of the possible riders. Whereas 100% of the vehicles on the roads are paying for the 100% of the usage. Which to me seems more equitable.

Gas taxes etc. pay for the State, US, and Interstate highways in the state (combined with a federal match), but not for County Hwys and local roads. So the road system is a mix between user-funding (the gas tax and license fees) and public funding via municipal governments, and a theoretical train system would be a mix of gov't funds and rider fares. So it's not so simple, as you seem to suggest, that roads are all paid for by the users and trains are a burden to the masses for the benefit of the few. (Also, one could argue that the gas tax and license fees are highly regressive, but that's a whole other argument.)

But I suspect the majority of times that you travel either by county transit, taxi, limo, bicycle, or with a friend, you are still using the streets, roads, and highways in order to get to where you need to be. So you are getting your tax dollars worth. All the mass funding in the world for mass transit will never convince the vast majority of people to give up the convenience and practicality of driving a car. Mass transit can not compete with personal transportation with the exception of maybe in places like NYC, Chicago, D.C., San Francisco, basically huge metro areas.

As Puant points out, mass transit exists in many forms for many purposes. If anything is built, it obviously would need to be appropriate for our community and the needs thereof.

I tried to lay this out in the above posts, maybe you should read them more carefully so I don't have to repeat myself.

Take a deep breath, it's an Internet forum about a proposed system that's a long way off at best, everything is going to be okay. :)

[GBSurveyor]

Yes downtown, having your own personal means of transportation via car, truck, motorcycle, etc. is subsidized. But it is subsidized by the owner of the individual vehicle through our high gas taxes, our title and registration fees, and our fines and tickets for breaking traffic laws. Basically, we our paying our own way as we go in using our public highways and roads. And that is where the revenue is obtained to build and maintain the highways. Therefore, the construction costs are already being paid back to the state, even if there is no construction planned or being done!

With a commuter rail system, 100% of the tax payers are paying for the 3% percent of the possible riders. Whereas 100% of the vehicles on the roads are paying for the 100% of the usage. Which to me seems more equitable.

You question whether a multi-lane highway is safer than a two lane road, am I correct? Did you ever drive down to Madison before Hwy 151 was a 4 lane divided highway? If you did, remember the crazy risks people took to pass another vehicle on that damn thing? I rest my case.

You are correct that much of the construction costs are funded via registration and gas tax, however there are also maintance costs related to roads which are very expensive and often paid for by the local level of government, be it county, city, village or town, and I guess another point being is that our society (at least in NE wisconsin) has brought us to this point where we are slaves to our cars and the oil industry. If given the option I would ditch the car, but I really dont ever see that option occuring in my lifetime, not in Green Bay. (Just as I drive from Younkers to Shopko!!)

As for as the 2 lane highway vs 4 lane highway, No one is going to dispute that a 4 lane divided highway is safer then a 2 lane rural highway, I think at the time we were talking about the expansion of 41 from 4 lanes to 6 lanes and that 2 lanes of traffic is sufficient to handle the traffic volume 90% of the time, at least that is how I understood it.

[Puant]

T
Take a deep breath, it's an Internet forum about a proposed system that's a long way off at best, everything is going to be okay. :)

That sounded more harsh or frustrated in writing than the way I really meant it. Computer communications can do that, as we all know. I'd much rather hang out with you guys at Titletown or somewhere and pontificate about all of this stuff (mixing in some sports of course!) over some beers. Someday, maybe?

[gbmphillips]

I guess you'll never get everyone out of their cars, especially guy's like that "the only thing green in Wisconsin is the Packers" who was running his mouth on here a week or two ago about how environmetalism/conservation is for sissies... Never said it was for sissies, that is your spin. As for the rail, the reason it would not work is because it is not needed. There is not gridlock here, its easy to get to Milwaukee, Madison, Chicago, people here love their trucks and SUVS not going to surrender that just to ride a train with a few wholewheaters.

As for the cost of 41, not really out of line, however they should make it a limited access highway between Schering Road and Lineville, increase the speed to 70 and use the highways they way they are designed to be used, move traffic. Instead of going after the people who know how to use highways, go after those little puddle jumpers with SAVE THE WAHLE stickers doing 55, they are the real hazards.

[historybuffer]

Never said it was for sissies, that is your spin. As for the rail, the reason it would not work is because it is not needed. There is not gridlock here, its easy to get to Milwaukee, Madison, Chicago, people here love their trucks and SUVS not going to surrender that just to ride a train with a few wholewheaters.

As for the cost of 41, not really out of line, however they should make it a limited access highway between Schering Road and Lineville, increase the speed to 70 and use the highways they way they are designed to be used, move traffic. Instead of going after the people who know how to use highways, go after those little puddle jumers with SAVE THE WAHLE stickers doing 55, they are the real hazards.

It's not about displacing those that love their trucks and SUVs it's about attracting the type of people to your city that would ride that alternative.
Look at all the $development that took place in Little Rock because of
street cars. It's about alternatives not mandates, that's what spurs the development dollars.

[downtownVital.org]

As for the cost of 41, not really out of line, however they should make it a limited access highway between Schering Road and Lineville, increase the speed to 70 and use the highways they way they are designed to be used, move traffic.

I'm not sure what you mean. 41 is a limited access freeway. There are 10 accesspoints on that stretch, do you mean to limit it further? Here are the acces points on the stretch:

-Scheuring Rd.
-Main St. (De Pere)
-Oneida St./Waube Ln.
-Wis. 172
-Lombardi Ave./Hazelwood Ln.
-Mason St.
-Shawano Ave./Dousman St.
-Velp Ave.
-I-43
-Lineville Rd.

[Oshkosh49]

WOW! Great discussion.

[Bartles53]

go after those little puddle jumpers with SAVE THE WAHLE stickers doing 55, they are the real hazards.

Hahahaha. GBM for President!

I'd much rather hang out with you guys at Titletown or somewhere and pontificate about all of this stuff (mixing in some sports of course!) over some beers. Someday, maybe?

I'm in town from Christmas Eve to New Year's Eve. If anyone wants to say hello I'll be the white guy walking around with the Packer gear on. Actually I'll be the white guy in the Packer gear rolling around in my parents' Buick. But I could be talked into a SC City get together.

[downtownVital.org]

I don't know if I'm ready to have my mental image of any of you shattered! I won't be going anywhere though, so if there's a shindig, I'd probably be in.

Just posted a mini-photo-thread of pics from tonight. You can see it here. (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=11002850)

[Bartles53]

Nice work on those photos. Those babies are professional grade. You must have taken a photography class at one time. The wide shot of the city across the river looks nice. There's a lot of potential on that shore.

[titletown]

Great job Dan! First time I had a chance to see the Bellin Building lit up since they finished putting up the lights.

[downtownVital.org]

The wide shot of the city across the river looks nice. There's a lot of potential on that shore.

Thanks. There's been talk of housing there in the past, and once River Center and Astor Place are built that will be about the best perspective on downtown avaliable. I was thinking about this today as I stood there in a puddle of mud, and thought how that site really has all the potential in the world.

[Puant]

I was over on the Milwaukee thread and saw this proposal (picture below). What does this design remind you of? To me, the style is strikingly similiar to the latest River Center proposal in GB.

The more I look at this and the latest similiar River Center design, the more I hate it.

Maybe this sort of "style" won't be bad for MIlwaukee because it's "different" enough so as to provide some contrast to the many other large buildings they already have on the skyline.
But for Green Bay, this hideous design would BE the skyline and it would look nasty, especially after this little architectural style trend wears off.

http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/17/1792_large.jpg

I'm with most of you in that I still like Astor Place design, but hope that teh RiverCenter design can be improved before it's too late.

[Unionstation13]

I was over on the Milwaukee thread and saw this proposal (picture below). What does this design remind you of? To me, the style is strikingly similiar to the latest River Center proposal in GB.

The more I look at this and the latest similiar River Center design, the more I hate it.

Maybe this sort of "style" won't be bad for MIlwaukee because it's "different" enough so as to provide some contrast to the many other large buildings they already have on the skyline.
But for Green Bay, this hideous design would BE the skyline and it would look nasty, especially after this little architectural style trend wears off.

http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/17/1792_large.jpg



I'm with most of you in that I still like Astor Place design, but hope that teh RiverCenter design can be improved before it's too late.

Is the structure to the left a historical structure?

[Puant]

^^See page 8 on this thread for renders & pics of the Green Bay proposals which are built partially on historical structures

[Bay2Bay]

I was over on the Milwaukee thread and saw this proposal (picture below). What does this design remind you of? To me, the style is strikingly similiar to the latest River Center proposal in GB.

The more I look at this and the latest similiar River Center design, the more I hate it.

Maybe this sort of "style" won't be bad for MIlwaukee because it's "different" enough so as to provide some contrast to the many other large buildings they already have on the skyline.
But for Green Bay, this hideous design would BE the skyline and it would look nasty, especially after this little architectural style trend wears off.


Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I happen to like that design very much.

[downtownVital.org]

I was over on the Milwaukee thread and saw this proposal (picture below). What does this design remind you of? To me, the style is strikingly similiar to the latest River Center proposal in GB.

The more I look at this and the latest similiar River Center design, the more I hate it.

If all of River Center was to look like this, then there'd be a problem (and that's kind of what the River Center render looked like). But I actually like this design pretty well. We will see how it looks in reality once it's built. The River Center design is a more horizontal structure with the windows and panels seemingly randomly placed. The tower here is much more vertical, and the panels in this one conform to a pattern, and the way the panels get smaller and the windows get bigger as you move up the facade gives this design a certain lightness that I like.

Like I said, I don't think this would translate well to all of River Center, but I do think that if you made the exising portion of RC a warehouse-looking, brick building, then had the new commercial portion be a five or six floor tower above and behind (from the river) that, it could look really great.

In fact, to see what it would look like I ammended my earlier render so that the commercial part is basically a copy of the Ruvin building in Milwaukee. I really like it... so much so that I did a night version too. These types of designs tend to look better at night, and this is no different.

http://www.danillo.com/photos/RivCen2.jpg

[Markitect]

I was over on the Milwaukee thread and saw this proposal (picture below). What does this design remind you of? To me, the style is strikingly similiar to the latest River Center proposal in GB.


The similarities between the two projects most likely comes from the fact that the architects of Milwaukee's Ruvin proposal (Johnsen Schmaling) used to work for the architects of Green Bay's River Center proposal (Vetter Denk) before breaking away to start their own firm a few years ago. Both firms tend to work in that kind of contemporary architectural style.

[MareCity]

Dan, your latest designs turn the 'nasty' look into nice... I like your idea for that portion of the RC.
One thing though...In my opinion, I don't think River Center is the place for industrial/warehouse style. I think this little riverfront stretch should simply be bright, nice, modern (as in, the old RC design...sigh), and that there may be better sites for the industrial look. Brick already works well for that little northern RC building in the proposal, though it should be taller...maybe that would satisfy people who are into seeing brick structures.

[downtownVital.org]

^^ I see your point. Where I differ is in that the existing portion of Younkers is a brick warehouse type building. That building has been there for 50 years, and I think if it was cleaned up it would look great. Making it look like that is keeping true to the heritage of the site and the heritage of Green Bay. We're much more a brick and morter type town than a steel and glass one. While I'm not for making new things look old just for the heck of it, I am for making old things look old.

Why not mix that hertiage into the riverfront? Wouldn't the new more modern pieces look even better if a handsome brick loft building was mixed in? It's just a subjective preference, but I prefer a dynamic mix of styles.

[gbmphillips]

Would like to take a minute tonight to wish all of you Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays. May the joy and happiness of the Christmas Season be with you and your family this holiday season.

"And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the fields, keeping watch over their flocks by night. And lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the lord shone round about them, and they were afraid. And the angel said unto them, Fear not, for behold, I bring unto you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you this day is born in the City of Bethlehem, a Savior, which is Christ the Lord. And this shall be a sign unto you; you shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger.

And suddenly there was with the angel, a multitude of the heavenly host, praising God, and saying, 'Glory to God in the highest, and on Earth peace, good will toward men'".

That's what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Those who subscribe to the DGBI newsletter from Jeff Mirkes received this photo of a winter scene showing the boardwalk. Thanks to Jeff and Stoss for sharing this.

http://www.stoss.net

http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r147/phatty_013/GBsnowynight.jpg

[downtownVital.org]

Thanks, GBM. Merry Christmas to you and your family too.

Two things about that rendering that crack me up. First is the guy on the right, in front of Riverfront Lofts, who is cross country skiing, as though that would ever happen down there. Second is in the upper left where the Flatley statue is shown, it looks less like a statue and more like a naked guy to me. :nuts:

I can't wait to see this in person though.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Second is in the upper left where the Flatley statue is shown, it looks less like a statue and more like a naked guy to me. :nuts:

Well they have mentioned there will be entertainers on the boardwalk/pier/whatever... That may be somewhat entertaining. It could be deer hunting season in the scene maybe?

[Green Bay 4 Life]

From WBAY 12/26/06

Downtown Revitalization Plans Tackle Adams Street

By Chris Duffy

A street in downtown Green Bay that's sometimes forgotten may soon get some much-needed attention.

Adams Street is sandwiched right between the active entertainment district of Washington Street and the government district of Jefferson Street.

"I wouldn't say it's a forgotten little street, but for the past 30 years it's been a dead-end street," Jeff Mirkes of Downtown Green Bay Inc. says.

That dead-end is the former Washington Commons mall. It now sits empty, and its shortcomings have had a domino effect on nearby businesses. On one block of Adams Street alone there are five buildings with space available

"There's a lot of dead ends, one ways, and it's just not the way successful downtowns are designed today," Mayor Jim Schmitt says.

That's why the city has a plan to renovate the former mall and extend Adams Street through to Main Street.

"Having traffic going through, connecting Main Street to Adams Street is very significant," says Mirkes.

Mike Schwantes owns the Schauer and Schumacher building on Adams Street. "It's essential. It's absolutely essential," he says of the plan. "I think Mayor Schmitt's got the right idea, and I know he's working hard for that. Now that the legal issues have been resolved and that the city has more control in the direction in that grid and Adams Street, I think you'll see things happen a lot faster."

Schwantes's building has been vacant for four years, but he says businesses have approached him since plans for revitalization have surfaced.

"The most interest we've had are in specialty bars, restaurants, entertainment venues," Schwantes says.

Mayor Schmitt says this summer expect to see some concrete plans that would bring the street grid system back to downtown Green Bay. He says the more streets that are connected, the more opportunities will come about.

Kind of like, wow - slow news day. Gotta love Green Bay. Never lose faith, never lose faith.

[Puant]

Thanks, GBM. Merry Christmas to you and your family too.

Two things about that rendering that crack me up. First is the guy on the right, in front of Riverfront Lofts, who is cross country skiing, as though that would ever happen down there. Second is in the upper left where the Flatley statue is shown, it looks less like a statue and more like a naked guy to me. :nuts:

.

Well...I think this render should show some innebriated, shirtless, hairy fat guys running around in the snow with the Larry McCarren broken #1 foam finger. After all, Da Pack is talkin' playoffs again!

Weekend article
Another article ran this weekend in the P-G about Hwy 41 (here it is (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061223/GPG0101/612230499/1207)).
Here's a quote from the article that seems to reflect what a lot of us have been thinking/saying:
A new, disturbing trend has surfaced in 2006 statistics as traffic deaths on U.S. 41 skyrocketed in 2006.

Millions of dollars have been spent to upgrade the road, building freeway-grade interchanges and adding lanes on high-volume stretches. However, the nine deaths on U.S. 41 this year in Brown County are more than all the deaths on U.S. 41 in 2004 and 2005 — combined.
"That's what's scaring me the most," said (Capt.) Schultz, who oversees his agency's patrol section. "What are we doing to ourselves, and what's it going to take to get a hold of it?

"If somebody's got that answer, I'm listening."



Adams St
Nice to see Adams Street get a little attention (thanks 4life for posting that).
The reconnect to Main St will be great--but what else can be done to help refill some of those vacant buildings and bring some life back to them?

[downtownVital.org]

Adams St
Nice to see Adams Street get a little attention (thanks 4life for posting that).
The reconnect to Main St will be great--but what else can be done to help refill some of those vacant buildings and bring some life back to them?

Where there are people, there will be stores to sell them things. Where there are no people, there will be no stores. We need more people. It's getting better, the boardwalk/River Center/Astor Place will help further.

[Green Bay 4 Life]

Where there are people, there will be stores to sell them things. Where there are no people, there will be no stores. We need more people. It's getting better, the boardwalk/River Center/Astor Place will help further.

Agreed. I think the development along the riverfront will help in bleeding interest inward towards Adams Street. In addition, connecting the street back up to Main will be a start but it isn’t the end all solution to “if you connect it, they will come”. Perfect example is the Cherry Street ramp retail. Washington Street has been straightened to Main and connects with Walnut, which is pretty heavily traveled – yet it still sits vacant.

I hope with the combination of additional traffic and the increased residential base (with disposable income) you would believe you would see more interest in those buildings along Adams. There are just too many examples of great buildings to be continued to be underutilized and vacant. The Frankenthal Building and former Schauer and Schumacher Building could be redeveloped into some extremely upper class restaurants (okay so maybe not upper class). But just the idea of people either walking by or driving by could see people eating you begin to feel I think a little but more connected to downtown. So many buildings you walk by and have no idea of the activity going on inside. Granted, most are work related and most people would have no reason to enter – but places such as retail, coffee shops, or restaurants, I believe, would benefit from these older designed structures with the large expansive ground level windows.

Regrettably, again we turn our conversation back to our vehicles. Until we convince people that they can park and walk to these places – they may remain vacant even with the riverfront developed. I mean remember the good old days when you walked in freezing cold without a coat to go to a college house party or the bars, which were blocks away? Then you have the existing downtown restaurants yelling that the market is saturated and more restaurants will hurt their business. Until there is a common view for the greater good instead of an inward selfish look and a progressive stance to change our vehicular ways – Adams Street may regain its connection to Main – but will that be enough?

Lastly, the most important part is to start going on the Riverfront. Enough is enough. It is great to see this on paper on the computer, but the time is now and the players should be pushing hard to get these things started. Interest only lasts so long with paper plans. Excitement wanes with no activity. Everyone points to, soon. But set a date and time for soon. Vetter has talked the talk, but now he has to walk the walk. We have invested a lot of time and money and most importantly hope in these plans and visions. I know things take time to come together – but at some point and time you have to say – will this ever happen.

Hate to be so negative. I should be patient, right? That will be my New Year’s resolution. Be patient with downtown Green Bay redevelopment. :cheers:

On another note. Saw that the Days Inn has begun to replace the windows. Actually makes a pretty significant improvement, imo.

[Inside the Beltway]

Wow...I had no idea De Pere has moved down the Fox River!

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/assets/pdf/U0554911229.PDF

(see map inset in the lower right corner)

[Bay2Bay]

^^
We're talking Press Gazette graphic here. What did you expect? :lol:

[Puant]

Good, I was wondering if they'd find a way to save that charming old bridge. I mean, it's the symbol of the city. That old bridge is used as a logo for everything in that city.

Here's the existing logo (first image below).

I took the liberty to draw up their new city symbol based on that awe-inspiring new bridge design (bottom picture).

http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o52/Puant/Bridge.jpg

http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o52/Puant/NewDePeresymbol.jpg
Ain't she a gorgeous beeuuuty:ohno:

[Bay2Bay]

The new bridge certainly pales in comparison to the old one. But, considering what the state is willing to build and what De Pere can afford to go above that cost they're getting something that hopefully will be above average. Key word here is hopefully.

http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q28/westwinder/newbridge41.jpg?t=1167445340

[Puant]

The old bridge did not have any extravagant, expensive decorations. All aspects of it were purely functional. Yet, it had style and grace. It is function married to form.

I'm not suggesting the state or city tack on any useless grandiose decor to the new bridge. But I do think they could have been a little more creative in using the purely functional bridge materials to come together into a more aesthetically-pleasing form. The lighting they've added to try mask the ugliness is a joke, if you ask me. Cake some more makeup onto the hooker and she'll look better, right? Whatever, though. I guess I shouldn't care as long as it pumps the maximum volume of auto traffic across the river.

Later edit:
OK sorry, maybe I'm being too harsh & critical here w/o offering any solutions to the problem. I don't have the solution, but, if it were up to me, I would have tried to incorporate an arch (as a true support structure, not just a gimmick) that alluded to the old bridge. and also perhaps found a way to move the old actual bridge tender tower onto the new bridge. Or something like that. I think something more interesting could have been created w/o adding to the cost.

[Bay2Bay]

^^
Your ideas are great. I grew up in De Pere and know how iconic that bridge is for De Pereans. Alas, they're going with the plan they have. I'm just hoping for the best.