Although I in no way support the war, I would just like to point out that economically, the war is far from disastrous. I don't know the exact statistics, but almost all the money spent on the war goes straight to the economy. Everything needed to supply the war is provided from American companies and even the soldiers will spend their salary on items in the U.S. when they return. Here in Wisconsin, Oshkosh Truck gets a substantial part of its work from the army, which allows them to employ more people. Also, as shown on the front page of the business section a fews days ago, Marinette Marine relies on Navy orders. The article went on to say if they did not get the contract, 200 jobs could be lost. In somewhat different circumstances, WW2 helped pull us out of the Great Depression. I know that this probably wont change anyone's opinion, and I don't intend to take away from the overall negetives, but the idea that the war is economically "disastrous" just doesnt make sense.

But.... 'generational theft'! I kid. I kid. You are right. There are also arguments that overpaying for the goods helps provide more fulfilling wages and benefits as well.

One thing we cannot argue is that 'losing track of' 125 billion in Iraq helps few people except corrupt warlords.

Oshkosh Truck has been an amazing success story, not only for the military applications, but the civilian uses as well like their firetrucks. I'm wondering if some of the domestic stimulus money is also going towards vehicle upgrades. I know Johnson Controls in Milwaukee stands to gain a ton from the bill. Any other Wisconsin-based businesses looking to gain?

well in the private sector, if you're in the business of doing tax reports, you're making a killing this year with the new bill

Although I in no way support the war, I would just like to point out that economically, the war is far from disastrous. I don't know the exact statistics, but almost all the money spent on the war goes straight to the economy. Everything needed to supply the war is provided from American companies and even the soldiers will spend their salary on items in the U.S. when they return. Here in Wisconsin, Oshkosh Truck gets a substantial part of its work from the army, which allows them to employ more people. Also, as shown on the front page of the business section a fews days ago, Marinette Marine relies on Navy orders. The article went on to say if they did not get the contract, 200 jobs could be lost. In somewhat different circumstances, WW2 helped pull us out of the Great Depression. I know that this probably wont change anyone's opinion, and I don't intend to take away from the overall negetives, but the idea that the war is economically "disastrous" just doesnt make sense.

I won't continue to hijack this thread with debate, although I'd love to, as this is a very enlightening subject, but I'll give you a couple articles to read that counter what you're saying here. Its a pretty widespread misunderstanding and WWII, along with the 'broken window' analogy seems to be the basis of this fallacy.

-War and the Economy (http://mises.org/article.aspx?Id=1178)
-The Myth of the War Economy (http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0122-07.htm)
-Is War Good for the Economy? (http://religionnewsblog.blogspot.com/2007/07/is-war-good-for-economy.html)
-Audio Interview: Thomas Woods (http://antiwar.com/radio/2008/12/23/thomas-woods-3/)
-Are Wars Good for the Economy? (http://economics.about.com/od/warandtheeconomy/a/warsandeconomy.htm)
-Interview With Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz (http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,409710,00.html)
-Inverstor Says War is Bad for the Economy (http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=6070)
-A Revealing Window on the U.S. Economy in Depression and War: 1929-1950 (http://www.libertarianpapers.org/articles/2009/lp-1-4.pdf)
etc.

Any other Wisconsin-based businesses looking to gain?

One key industry for WI that is never talked about that should be more considered for some help would be the marine industry....mainly Mercury Marine and OMC. My brother, who used to work at Oshkosh Truck, has been at Merc for about 6 or 7 years now, and they started feeling the pinch of the economic downturn long before most others. Like the RV fallout in Terra Haute that was widely publicized during Obamas press conference, the marine industry is also going through troubling hardships. This is to be understood however, considering these are recreational industries, but Merc and OMC are both global companies that employ thousands throughout the state, country, and even the world. Luckily, my brother was spared the chopping block last summer, which can't be said for many of his co-workers (He is in the IT dpt). I would be curious to know if any tax breaks, which they are planning for motorcycle and RV sales, also applies to the boating industry.

My father knows all too well how this ends up working as he was a regional distribution manager for Chrysler Marine back in the 70's when they were shut down after taking a hard hit from the shape of the country as it was back then. He warned my brother of this very situation noting that said industry is usually the first to go in times of hardship. At the time he was hired, it seemed laughable, but now reality is set in and he is on thin ice. I just hope they aren't overlooked, as they are a major player in a multi-billion dollar industry that has a larger effect than most people seem to know (judging from the lack of attention it gets).

One key industry for WI that is never talked about that should be more considered for some help would be the marine industry....mainly Mercury Marine and OMC. My brother, who used to work at Oshkosh Truck, has been at Merc for about 6 or 7 years now, and they started feeling the pinch of the economic downturn long before most others. Like the RV fallout in Terra Haute that was widely publicized during Obamas press conference, the marine industry is also going through troubling hardships. This is to be understood however, considering these are recreational industries, but Merc and OMC are both global companies that employ thousands throughout the state, country, and even the world. Luckily, my brother was spared the chopping block last summer, which can't be said for many of his co-workers (He is in the IT dpt). I would be curious to know if any tax breaks, which they are planning for motorcycle and RV sales, also applies to the boating industry.

My father knows all too well how this ends up working as he was a regional distribution manager for Chrysler Marine back in the 70's when they were shut down after taking a hard hit from the shape of the country as it was back then. He warned my brother of this very situation noting that said industry is usually the first to go in times of hardship. At the time he was hired, it seemed laughable, but now reality is set in and he is on thin ice. I just hope they aren't overlooked, as they are a major player in a multi-billion dollar industry that has a larger effect than most people seem to know (judging from the lack of attention it gets).

For the RV industry you said the right state (Indiana) but wrong place (its Elkhart not Terre Haute). Elkhart is home to Jayco RV's and Coachman RV's in the general vacinity of that area. Terre Haute is the Home of Indiana State University and has some Asprin plants (pharmesuticals) and Mining jobs too.

Doh...I was wondering if I had that wrong...I was on lunch break and didn't spend the time to veify. I think I had just seen an update in the Terra Haute Development thread show up in the thread list which is what probablly had it pop in my mind. But yeah...Elkhart. Thanks MJ.

Kickass!

http://www.renewthevalley.org/files/pdf/MVPseeksDesignTeam.pdf

I don't know how long this has been around, but it's brand new to me, and could come in handy on some occasions:
http://wikimapia.org/#lat=43.034831&lon=-87.9350853&z=14&l=0&m=a&v=2

(Just move your cursor over it, you'll see.)

^^ Very cool! That's particularly helpful for people like me who are not from Milwaukee - to understand where all of these places are that are being written about on these pages.

Kickass!

http://www.renewthevalley.org/files/pdf/MVPseeksDesignTeam.pdf
I agree! that Hank Aaron State trail is something that Milwaukee needs.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/business/39957972.html

Only one response to county's Park East request
By Tom Daykin of the Journal Sentinel
Feb. 23, 2009 8:00 a.m.


Milwaukee County received just one response to its request for development proposals on a 2-acre site in downtown's Park East area.

The request for proposals was issued for the county-owned lot, bordered by N. Broadway, N. Water St., N. Milwaukee St., E. Lyon St. and E. Ogden Ave., after an earlier plan from Chicago-based RSC & Associates was dropped.

County officials aren't releasing information about the new proposal until an internal evaluation process is completed, said Fran McGlocklin, spokeswoman for County Executive Scott Walker. It will then need County Board approval before a purchase option is granted to the developer.

RSC's latest plan for the site called for 175 housing units and 185,000 square feet of commercial space before it was dropped last year. The County Board in 2005 picked the plan from RSC and its partners over a rival housing and retail proposal from a group led by New York-based Full Spectrum.

The county has struggled with landing viable development plans for the 16 acres made available when the Park East Freeway was demolished.

The only county parcel sold so far is 2 acres bordered by N. Milwaukee, N. Jefferson and E. Lyon streets and E. Ogden Ave., which RSC acquired in December 2007 for $2,725,000.

RSC's plans to build two hotels, apartments and retail space on that parcel were to begin construction last summer, but have been delayed by the nationwide credit crunch.

RSC President Rich Curto said he's continuing to negotiate with the project's prospective lender.

RSC also is rebidding the project to construction subcontractors in hopes of getting some lower-priced work bids because of the economic slowdown. Curto hopes to begin work this spring on the project's first phase.

Meanwhile, Dallas-based Gatehouse Capital Corp. in January dropped plans to develop a luxury hotel and high-end condominiums on another county-owned parcel, bordered by N. Old World 3rd and N. 4th streets and W. Juneau and W. McKinley avenues.

This is a bit different, but a development nonetheless.

They make decent vodka, but not quite smooth enough for the price. I haven't seen the gin yet.

Monday, February 23, 2009, 1:50pm CST | Modified: Monday, February 23, 2009, 1:52pm

Great Lakes Distillery launches line of artisan brandies
The Business Journal of Milwaukee

Great Lakes Distillery of Milwaukee will release three new brandy products this week, the first of their Artisan Series fruit brandies.

The clear, unaged spirits include: Kirschwasser, a traditional German drink made by distilling fermented cherries; Grappa, made from the skins, stems and seeds left over from the grape wine making process; and Pear Brandy Eau-de-Vie, produced from Bartlett pears.

All three products are 80 proof and will be packaged in 375 milliliter bottles. The products will produced in small batches, with only a few hundred bottles of each available for purchase, according to Great Lakes, which operates a distillery at 616 W. Virginia St., in Milwaukee’s Walker’s Point neighborhood.

“These are very expensive products to produce, but a small amount goes a long way,” said Great Lakes founder and distiller Guy Rehorst.

The Kirschwasser and Pear Eau-de-Vie are distilled from wine produced at the AEppelTreow winery in Burlington. The Grappa is produced from Wisconsin-grown grapes.

Great Lakes Distillery also produces premium vodka and gin sold under the Rehorst brand name.

http://www.hsidevelopment.com/Portals/8/RiverPointCommons_Left1.jpg

HSI Development is currently planning the 5-story 16 million dollar River Pointe Commons apartment complex located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The facility is being proposed on the former Pro Graphics printing facility at 1887 North Water Street on the Milwaukee River.

link (http://www.hsidevelopment.com/Services/Development/Multifamily/RiverPointeCommons/tabid/258/Default.aspx)

http://www.southwaterworks.com/img/bv/sww6genericsign.jpg

Columbia Sportswear is following through with plans to open a buyer show-room in the South Water Works development, although they've scrapped plans for other cities (San Fran, New York, Dallas and Toronto). They're also still planning on building on Chicago's Michigan Ave.

The SWW's development website has also been updated with new renderings, and construction status for commercial and apartment space.

South Water Works (http://www.southwaterworks.com/index.html)

By Tom Daykin of the Journal Sentinel
Feb. 20, 2009

Over a decade after it opened, Brewer's Point Apartments will be getting a public riverwalk.

The city Redevelopment Authority has approved a $250,000 construction contract for the public walkway along the Milwaukee River behind Brewer's Point, 1858 N. Commerce St. Work is to begin in early spring, and should be completed by mid-summer.

link (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/business/39870637.html)

^^ That is absolutely fantastic news, but does it really cost $250,000 to create a glorified sidewalk along the back of a single building?

With the prices these days on projects and estimates im suprised its not 2.5million :nuts: I thought that was actually cheap considering all the numbers i hear! But yes i mean you could get a nice home for that in many places!

Oddly the price of the Riverwalk is about $100k cheaper than had they built it last year. As for whatever reason it didn't get built last year and this year bid is well $100k less.

^^ That is absolutely fantastic news, but does it really cost $250,000 to create a glorified sidewalk along the back of a single building?

You have failed to take into consideration the extra little complexities that come with building a walkway along a river versus a regular sidewalk. Things like riverbank stabilization; regrading; walls and railings; furnishing and lighting fixtures; landscaped planters and flower beds; plus any ramps and stairs that may be needed to connect to the adjacent apartment building. It's a bit more involved than simply laying a slab of sidewalk concrete.

You have failed to take into consideration the extra little complexities that come with building a walkway along a river versus a regular sidewalk. Things like riverbank stabilization; regrading; walls and railings; furnishing and lighting fixtures; landscaped planters and flower beds; plus any ramps and stairs that may be needed to connect to the adjacent apartment building. It's a bit more involved than simply laying a slab of sidewalk concrete.

Thank you, I did not consider riverbank stabalization. Needless to say, this was a much needed improvement to the area.

Anyone else notice the "privacy wall" going up at The Moderne? Are they going to be digging a pool? har-har... :jk:

Given at the new Harley Museum.

Interesting points:
--The old tannery on 32nd & Hampton will be part of the Bishop's Creek development.
--This $205 million redevelopment of 'The Brewery' will be the first 'sustainable' LEED-certified neighborhood. (including new 'green' streets, sewers and sustainable public improvements.)
--Pushed for UWM's new school of freshwater services to be located on the lake. Also mentioned the Water Technology park.
--Announced that Veolia Environmental Services and MMSD will proceed on the construction of a 17-mile methane gas pipeline that will capture landfill gas in Muskego and deliver it to the Jones Island Water Treatment Facility.(Will convert to heat source)
-Stimulus funding areas of interest include: high-speed rail, KK channel and brownfield clean-up, workforce and infrastructure improvement.
--Homicides of young African American men plunged 65 percent last year-from 54 in 2007 to 19 in 2008. Violent crime is down in all categories.
--Need to support and pass the Regional Transit Authority legislation. Redirect interstate project money to fund and repair local roads.

Full Address (http://www.biztimes.com/blogs/milwaukee-biz-blog/2009/2/25/barretts-state-of-the-city-address)

Anyone else notice the "privacy wall" going up at The Moderne? Are they going to be digging a pool? har-har... :jk:

Hopefully a sign of construction. Anyone know anything?

http://www.campbellconstructionbbg.com/absoluteig/gallery/Pabst_Building_14_and_15/Pabst7.jpg

Waukesha-based Campbell Construction JD Inc. was recently selected to build the new downtown Milwaukee satellite campus for Cardinal Strich University in the former Pabst brewery complex. Cardinal Stritch will occupy about 21,500 square feet of space in one of a former brewery building owned by Bando Chmura Properties.

link (http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2009/2/25/new-construction)

City may add community benefits requirements to TIF projects

http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2009/2/25/city-may-add-community-benefits-requirements-to-tif-projects

Of all times to do something that would discourage development... why now??

Regardless of your personal thoughts on TIF's, you have to admit that this ordinance makes it just a little bit more challenging to create new development. Why would you do that when this recession is happening and it's difficult to get projects as is?

So I'm home sick from work, and I've had lots of time to look up information.


Restaurant/Retail

The Melting Pot is Coming to Third Ward (http://onmilwaukee.com/dining/articles/meltingpot3rdward.html) at 341 N. Milwaukee St., the former Milwaukee Antique Center.

Luxury boutique Lorena Sarbu, based in Beverly Hills, will also come to Third Ward (http://onmilwaukee.com/market/articles/lorenasarbu.html) in Spring.

Commercial

http://www.biztimes.com/nf/uploads/Image/reweekly1.7.09/everett.jpg
The newly converted Everitt Knitting building gained a new tenant (http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2009/1/7/deal-of-the-week) after advertising firm Street Crance moved it's headquarters there.

This month Zeon Solutions announced plans (http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2009/2/18/deal-of-the-week) to move to Chicago St. after purchasing an office condo for $1.3 million. Last month Bolter + Lincoln, an ad agency, announced they were moving (http://www.jsonline.com/business/37651424.html) their firm to Erie St.

http://www.sg-re.com/photos/153-N-Milwaukee-St.jpg
Construction continues on the mixed-use Catalano Place project on Milwaukee St.


Housing

http://www.eua.com/data/portfolio/jacksonsquare2.jpg
Jackson square apartments are still u/c with rent between $800-$1600.

Tomorrow the 'Point on the River' (formerly First Place OTR before Mandel took over) will have a re-launching party for the project and open a sales center. Last month (http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2009/1/21/first-place-on-the-river-re-named-the-point-on-the-river) 80% of construction was complete, and 40 of the 147 units had been sold. Mandel Group was quoted as saying, "We are very confident in the success of The Point, which has been attracting as many inquires as all of our other downtown properties combined."

Actual news this time.... A while back (last summer I believe) someone posted about a luxury car dealership on Green Bay featuring Maserati's, Aston Martins and eventully Ferrari. I drove past it a couple times after it was built to check out the cars but went past it recently and its completely empty. Curiously the showroom lights were still on. Anyone know what happened? Did this move or was it a miserable failure made worse by our economic downturn?
Timely news about that:

Friday, February 27, 2009
Maserati returns to WisconsinInternational Autos adds Italian brand in Waukesha

The Business Journal of Milwaukee - by Rich Kirchen

International Autos will open a Maserati dealership at its Infiniti/Porsche/Mercedes location in Waukesha this spring, the second time in less than a year that a dealer has launched a Maserati store in southeast Wisconsin.

The previous Maserati dealership was short-lived. Lake Forest Sportscars of Lake Bluff, Ill., in November 2008 closed its dealership, Maserati of Milwaukee, that opened in mid-summer 2008 in Glendale.

Lake Forest Sportscars cited “the unstable financial environment” as one reason for shuttering the dealership, which targeted luxury car buyers who otherwise would have gone to the Chicago area.

International Autos owner Ralph Mauro believes his new Maserati dealership will succeed where Maserati of Milwaukee didn’t, despite the current economic downturn.


As expected:

Friday, February 27, 2009
UWM, county agree on land priceSite would house engineering school
The Business Journal of Milwaukee - by Pete Millard


The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee plans a $150 million engineering school in Wauwatosa.

After months of haggling and political maneuvering, Milwaukee County and the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Real Estate Foundation have agreed on a tentative purchase price of $11.8 million for the 89 acres in Wauwatosa that will allow for the construction of a $150 million engineering school.

Milwaukee philanthropist Michael Cudahy is expected to pay for a major portion of the purchase of the site at the northeast corner of Watertown Plank Road and U.S. Highway 45 north of the Milwaukee Regional Medical Center in Wauwatosa. The project will be part of what will become known as Michael J. Cudahy Innovation Park.

The project is a key component of UWM Chancellor Carlos Santiago’s ambitious growth plan for the university and, if approved, will be one of the largest construction projects in the Milwaukee area in 2009.

David Gilbert, president of the foundation, said he expects private-sector developments to add another $150 million in value to the campus.


And a little exciement:

Friday, February 27, 2009
Astronautics’ HQ draws high interestThe Business Journal of Milwaukee - by Rich Kirchen


Dozens of southeast Wisconsin developers and communities have entered the derby to win what could be the Milwaukee area’s biggest economic development deal in these recessionary times: a new headquarters for Astronautics Corp. of America.

Developers and communities have offered everything from vacant land in Port Washington to existing structures such as the shuttered St. Michael Hospital on Milwaukee’s north side to the 440th Airlift Wing Reserve Base at General Mitchell International Airport.

The high-tech Milwaukee manufacturer, which has 700 local employees, announced in September 2008 that it wants to consolidate its three facilities at one site. The firm designs, develops and manufactures military and commercial electronics for air, space, land and sea applications.

The 50-year-old company has made it clear that a major factor in determining its new location will be incentives from both the private and public sectors. The company sought submissions that include development zones, low-interest loans and grants, infrastructure assistance and “lowered acquisition or occupancy costs,” according to its request for proposals.

I would highly doubt that Astronautics would locate at the former St. Michael's Hospital site or at the former 440th Airlift Wing. The area around St. Michael's hospital won't allow an industry building and the 440th Airlift Wing is going to become a future runway or storage for the airport. I could see them locate in Oak Creek. Some available sites that Astronautics would be an option to locate in Oak Creek are a 40 acre parcel for sale at Ryan Road (Highway 100) and Pennsylvania Ave. which has railroad access or a 50 acre site for sale near Howell and Oakwood.

If Astronautics is looking to stay in the City of Milwaukee, they will have to acquire land from a "brownfield" location. One site they should look at is a vacant parcel on the south side of Greenfield Avenue east of 1st Street. It has rail access and it is near I-43/94.

Why can't UWM just use some of the park east land for the expansion? Wouldn't it make much more sense both money and location wise?

That would make too much sense. I simply can’t understand why a University which so far has focused on being so consolidated and functional (I believe UWM is the second-densest University in the country) would all of a sudden open academic buildings that are probably half an hour's drive away from the main campus. I can't imagine what it would have been like if I would have had to take the bus half an hour away (or god forbid - drive) as an undergrad at Purdue. This is a huge mistake by UWM, and in no way helps to "expand their presence to other communities", which is what I’m sure the underlying thinking is. UWM would be well-advised to build directly on their existing campus (tear down old, dysfunctional buildings or acquire adjacent properties), or as a distant second option, build somewhere downtown; easily accessible by frequent and short bus rides.

I would highly doubt that Astronautics would locate at the former St. Michael's Hospital site or at the former 440th Airlift Wing. The area around St. Michael's hospital won't allow an industry building and the 440th Airlift Wing is going to become a future runway or storage for the airport. I could see them locate in Oak Creek. Some available sites that Astronautics would be an option to locate in Oak Creek are a 40 acre parcel for sale at Ryan Road (Highway 100) and Pennsylvania Ave. which has railroad access or a 50 acre site for sale near Howell and Oakwood.

If Astronautics is looking to stay in the City of Milwaukee, they will have to acquire land from a "brownfield" location. One site they should look at is a vacant parcel on the south side of Greenfield Avenue east of 1st Street. It has rail access and it is near I-43/94.

the 440th has about 40 acres of land that are not in the path of the runway expansion and would be ideal for a business location...especially one such as astronautics that does a lot of work in airline-related industries.

Why can't UWM just use some of the park east land for the expansion? Wouldn't it make much more sense both money and location wise?

you would think...that would make too much sense. why do that when you can split campus up into a half hour commute. that would be brilliant. i'll never get over this one for that reason alone.

UWM would be well-advised to build directly on their existing campus (tear down old, dysfunctional buildings or acquire adjacent properties)...

That would be ideal if there was room. The only available nearby land is a hospital that's already in negotions to sell to UWM. But it's too small for an engineering campus.

...or as a distant second option, build somewhere downtown; easily accessible by frequent and short bus rides.

Totally agree.

Urban core saw home development jump since mid-'90s

The Milwaukee area is among the regions that saw a large increase in residential development within its urban core since the mid-'90s, according to a new report from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Building permits issued in Milwaukee's urban neighborhoods accounted for 25% of all area building permits issued in 2007, compared with 16% from 2002 through 2007, and 6% from 1990 through 1995, the EPA report said.

link (http://www.jsonline.com/business/40431872.html)

That would be ideal if there was room. The only available nearby land is a hospital that's already in negotions to sell to UWM. But it's too small for an engineering campus.


Taking a quick look at the aerials, it seems that there are plenty of tree covered areas, parking lots, and so forth bordered by Edgewood, Downer, Hartford, and Maryland Ave. Are the tree-covered areas somehow protected from development?

The university could also consider moving some of its dorms to perimeter areas that are currently occupied by freestanding houses / flats, although it would kill me to see that housing stock destroyed. I'd actually have less of an issue with housing moving further away from campus, as long as all academic buildings stay on campus.

Finally from having driven by campus frequently, I see that there are some aging buildings on campus that can probably be replaced by modern, higher-capacity buildings.

I believe they could of built the Engineering campus on the hospital grounds. This idea that they need 60 - 90 acres is only true if you are building suburban style developments, with parking lots, freeway buffers, green buffers, huge setbacks and few floors.

Taking a quick look at the aerials, it seems that there are plenty of tree covered areas, parking lots, and so forth bordered by Edgewood, Downer, Hartford, and Maryland Ave. Are the tree-covered areas somehow protected from development?

Yes that area is protected. Its called Downer Woods, includes a trail, and is used by certain departments for research.

http://www.jsonline.com/business/38432309.html

6th paragraph down, does anyone know anything about that hotel development on Downer, other than what the article states? Also, i emailed the Park East people about any update on the proposed Marcus Theater complex and they said that there isn't any update on it right now. Hope that one still goes up.

http://www.biztimes.com/daily/2009/3/2/#developers-propose-76-million-project-for-park-east-corridor

some more info on that new Park East development

http://www.jsonline.com/business/38432309.html

6th paragraph down, does anyone know anything about that hotel development on Downer, other than what the article states?

If i remember, the hotel was first proposed about two years ago and it initially met with a lot of angry neighbors. It was proposed as more of a long term hotel or a rooming house than anything. You will probably have to go back a few hundred pages on this thread to find any reference to it... if it is in this thread at all and not stashed away in some distant archived Milwaukee discussion thread.

Developers propose 350 apartments on Park East site

By Tom Daykin of the Journal Sentinel

Posted: Mar. 2, 2009 5:42 p.m.

Two developers are proposing to build over 350 apartments, including some for moderate-income renters, on a 2-acre lot in downtown's Park East area.

Fair Market Development LLC, owned by Harry Drea, of Madison, and Robert Schultz, of West Linn, Ore., was the only development firm to respond to Milwaukee County's request for proposals for the county-owned lot, which is bordered by N. Broadway, N. Water St., N. Milwaukee St., E. Lyon St. and E. Ogden Ave.

Drea said Monday that the developers hope to obtain financing and begin development in early 2010, assuming the project is approved by the County Board. County officials are reviewing the proposal, which has not yet come before the board's Committee on Community and Economic Development.

The project would include 358 apartments and 13 townhouses, to be built in two separate phases, according to the proposal. Some of those units could be built with federal tax credits used to help finance affordable housing developments. Under that program, developers receive the credits in return for renting apartments to moderate-income people at below-market rents.

Drea is formerly a manager of New Russia Funds, an investment fund that raised money from people looking to invest in Russian companies.

Schultz, formerly of New Berlin, was a partner with CommonBond Communities of St. Paul, Minn., on the 115-unit Teweles Seed Tower Apartments, which opened in 2005 at 222 S. 3rd St. The apartments were created within a former industrial building in Walker's Point.

Schultz also was a partner in the 82-unit River Renaissance condominiums, which were completed in 2007 at 102 N. Water St., in the Third Ward. That project has been hurt by slow condo sales.

Schultz also proposed a large condo and hotel project on a site overlooking the Milwaukee River, north of S. Water St. and east of the N. Broadway bridge. It received conceptual city approval, but has not been developed.

The request for proposals was issued for the county-owned lot after an earlier plan from Chicago-based RSC & Associates was dropped because the firm couldn't obtain financing.

i hope the design of this project shows more promise than his last effort. the condo/hotel overlooking the river was ridiculous.

anyone have access to renderings?

Looks like they will be restoring the KK river to a more natural state: http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/40582192.html

The benefits are obvious for flood prevention and increased property values, but the article doesn't seem to sufficiently address the environmental impacts to more natural stormwater management.

Taking a quick look at the aerials, it seems that there are plenty of tree covered areas, parking lots, and so forth bordered by Edgewood, Downer, Hartford, and Maryland Ave. Are the tree-covered areas somehow protected from development?

See Above.

The university could also consider moving some of its dorms to perimeter areas that are currently occupied by freestanding houses / flats, although it would kill me to see that housing stock destroyed.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Finally from having driven by campus frequently, I see that there are some aging buildings on campus that can probably be replaced by modern, higher-capacity buildings

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

True, although private developers on the Isthmus have no problems buying up blocks of free standing homes to build apartment towers for the students, or the University replacing old buildings with new.

True, although private developers on the Isthmus have no problems buying up blocks of free standing homes to build apartment towers for the students, or the University replacing old buildings with new.

UWM's neighbors have some of the highest incomes and most expensive real-state in the city, and they've recently sent their alderman to pass ordinances to restrict new student housing to downtown.

It's a different game in Milwaukee.

anyone have access to renderings?

Rendering here with more info on project: http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2009/3/4/#proposed-park-east-development-has-heavy-community-benefits-emphasis

Rendering here with more info on project: http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2009/3/4/#proposed-park-east-development-has-heavy-community-benefits-emphasis

..."The project will also include several environmentally-friendly "green" elements, including a 20,000-square-foot green roof, and the developers expect Eco-Square to receive a LEED rating. Eco-Square at Park East will have photovoltaic cells that will be used to recharge electric cars."

Has anyone heard of that before?

Does anyone know if any stimulus money that's coming Milwaukee's way will be used to repair Milwaukee's streets? If not, I'm going to begin preparing my suicide note. These past two winters have been AWFUL on the pavement. Aren't we like 100+ years behind?

Does anyone know if any stimulus money that's coming Milwaukee's way will be used to repair Milwaukee's streets? If not, I'm going to begin preparing my suicide note. These past two winters have been AWFUL on the pavement. Aren't we like 100+ years behind?

Here is the full list: http://media.journalinteractive.com/documents/roads_030409.pdf

This year is as bad as I can remember for roads. We've had to many thaws and re-freezing. Almost every road I travel on daily could use repair.

Here is the full list: http://media.journalinteractive.com/documents/roads_030409.pdf

This year is as bad as I can remember for roads. We've had to many thaws and re-freezing. Almost every road I travel on daily could use repair.
Same here in Wausau and I'm sure all of the northern half of the US. Milwaukee is no worse then any other city in the north.

Rendering here with more info on project: http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2009/3/4/#proposed-park-east-development-has-heavy-community-benefits-emphasis
I really like these! I think they will work perfectly for the Park east.

Same here in Wausau and I'm sure all of the northern half of the US. Milwaukee is no worse then any other city in the north.

Sure, but we're also over a century behind on repairs. JSonline had a piece on this that I can't find. Also, I'd say we have quite a few roads here :).

Does anyone know if any stimulus money that's coming Milwaukee's way will be used to repair Milwaukee's streets? If not, I'm going to begin preparing my suicide note. These past two winters have been AWFUL on the pavement. Aren't we like 100+ years behind?I'm thinking that if the street is part of a county or state highway route, maybe. Otherwise, not likely. The list shown in the JS are pretty much highway type of projects rather than local city streets.

Sure, but we're also over a century behind on repairs. JSonline had a piece on this that I can't find. Also, I'd say we have quite a few roads here :).
Well, your local taxes are supposed to pay for those repairs, what is your city spending your money on besides what they are supposed to be spending your money on?

Well, your local taxes are supposed to pay for those repairs, what is your city spending your money on besides what they are supposed to be spending your money on?

Is there any truth to Milwaukee County employees getting some kind of bloated retirement fund?

Is there any truth to Milwaukee County employees getting some kind of bloated retirement fund?

Maybe, knowing Milwaukee, probably so. And the Milwaukee people want the feds to pay for their road repairs? How about getting your books in order and stop throwing money away?

Maybe, knowing Milwaukee, probably so. And the Milwaukee people want the feds to pay for their road repairs? How about getting your books in order and stop throwing money away?

The Milwaukee city/county budget faces unique challenges that no other city in Wisconsin faces due to the exodus of the middle class to the suburbs decades ago. These challenges include higher per capita judicial expenses (court/prison costs, etc), primary schooling expenses, public transportation expenses, expenses to repair, refurbish, or replace significantly older and more dated infrastructure (including the very streets and alleys we're talking about here), and other public services in place; all of which currently are disproportionately more costly in Milwaukee than other Wisconsin cities. And who is currently paying for all this? The relatively poorer populace who stayed in Milwaukee while the upper and middle class fled to the Suburbs. This is why Milwaukee should be more deserving of federal money than your typical Wisconsin city.

That all being said, I'm all the more deeply concerned when I do hear about wasteful spending in Milwaukee County, such as bloated pension plans for municipal employees, etc.

...nevermind

The Milwaukee city/county budget faces unique challenges that no other city in Wisconsin faces due to the exodus of the middle class to the suburbs decades ago. These challenges include higher per capita judicial expenses (court/prison costs, etc), primary schooling expenses, public transportation expenses, expenses to repair, refurbish, or replace significantly older and more dated infrastructure (including the very streets and alleys we're talking about here), and other public services in place; all of which currently are disproportionately more costly in Milwaukee than other Wisconsin cities. And who is currently paying for all this? The relatively poorer populace who stayed in Milwaukee while the upper and middle class fled to the Suburbs. This is why Milwaukee should be more deserving of federal money than your typical Wisconsin city.

That all being said, I'm all the more deeply concerned when I do hear about wasteful spending in Milwaukee County, such as bloated pension plans for municipal employees, etc.
And it was the bloated pension retirement fund that you brought up that caused me to make the comment I did. I mean sure, I already know about the rich's flight to the suburbs. My point is, if the county is so short of funds because of the flight to the suburbs by the rich, then quite raiseing the retirment funds of Milwaukee county employee's and then expect the whole nation to pick up the difference.

^^
It's a lot bigger than that - controversy regarding those 'bloated county pension benefits' (some retiring county employees cashed in with well over $1M in 'lump sum' benefits!) is what swept Scott Walker into office as Milwaukee County Executive in a recall election several years ago. He's been fighting against the County Board in trying to cover those benefits without increasing county tax rates ever since.

Mike

And it was the bloated pension retirement fund that you brought up that caused me to make the comment I did. I mean sure, I already know about the rich's flight to the suburbs. My point is, if the county is so short of funds because of the flight to the suburbs by the rich, then quite raiseing the retirment funds of Milwaukee county employee's and then expect the whole nation to pick up the difference.

Yeah, I guess you're right! Alright, let the streets continue to rot then. Carry on...

Yeah, I guess you're right! Alright, let the streets continue to rot then. Carry on...

So the only way to fix the streets in Milwaukee is to beg for the Fed to give the city money? You totally misunderstood my point. The way to do it is for the City to end the bloated retirement funds, end some more of their wasteful spending, because I'm more than sure there is more, and then the city will probably have the money to spend to fix the streets. I guess that is just too logical an answer though, so carry on....

The way to do it is for the City to end the bloated retirement funds
County... and pretty sure this is taken care of, but they can't go back and take away the retirement of the people already guaranteed the money.

And then you need to define wasteful spending. Some in government call transit wasteful, and mental health services, and care for the increasing homeless population.

Why is it that Milwaukee has to pay a disproportionate amount for freeways and freeway expansions when it it the suburbs which benefit the most from them?

Maybe, knowing Milwaukee, probably so.

Typical back-woods upstate attitude...

According to My City of Milwaukee employee handbook, 95 cents of every dollar of property tax the city collects go are for State, County, and School levies. So, our retirement benefits have little to do with streets being in disrepair. It's a large community, much larger that Wausau, and the scale of all the maintenance needs are large. Also keep in mind the depressed property values in a large part of our community and the large number of people in the city living below the poverty line. Inflation and construction expenses seem to have thus far outpaced the percentage of tax money allocated to road repairs.

I don't think that we are begging the Federal gov't for money to fix our local roads. We just wish that the Federal gov't would be allocating it's money for SE wisconsin towards existing roads in need of repair instead of spending it on adding lanes to a freeway that does not have congestion problems.

The City has already begun to take steps to increase funding for local road maintenance, by getting rid of most special assessment to property owners for street repairs and replacing that with a $20/year fee on all cars.

Milwaukee is a major tax generator for the state and its always disappointing when the rest of the state thinks that we are a drain. Somehow, no one ever complains about all of the money that madison gets for gov't and university buildings. That's always seen as an investment in the state's future, whereas sending money to Milwaukee is seen as throwing it in the garbage. Never makes sense to me.

Milwaukee is a major tax generator for the state and its always disappointing when the rest of the state thinks that we are a drain. Somehow, no one ever complains about all of the money that madison gets for gov't and university buildings. That's always seen as an investment in the state's future, whereas sending money to Milwaukee is seen as throwing it in the garbage. Never makes sense to me.

Agreed

Typical back-woods upstate attitude...
Hey, Milwaukee County had the bloated retirement funds, not Marathon.

According to My City of Milwaukee employee handbook, 95 cents of every dollar of property tax the city collects go are for State, County, and School levies. So, our retirement benefits have little to do with streets being in disrepair. It's a large community, much larger that Wausau, and the scale of all the maintenance needs are large. Also keep in mind the depressed property values in a large part of our community and the large number of people in the city living below the poverty line. Inflation and construction expenses seem to have thus far outpaced the percentage of tax money allocated to road repairs.
LOL, yeah, and there's no wasteful spending in your school budget? Every school district has wasteful spending.

Look, you do have a point, I'm just getting real disgusted by seeing so many in this country with there hand out as soon as they hear the president say there's going to be a stimulus bill. The stimlus bill was supposed to be for creating jobs. My point is, if Milwaukee County can't find the money to pay for road repairs then why is it an automatic thing to expect the Federal goverment to pay for it? Gee whiz, you people raised the sales tax a cent or two to build a $500,000,000 baseball stadium, if you can't raise enough money by cutting wasteful spending then raise the sale tax up a few cents, or even a quarter. The country is going broke! How on earth do you all expect the federal government to pay for all this shit? There is not enough rich people in this country to pay for everything that is on people's wish list.

Paule, I think the complaint is that so far all the road projects announced for the stimulus are for highways which while they connect regions, they do not directly benefit the cities. Look at the freeway expansion. A two lane freeway is plenty large enough to serve the needs of a city Milwaukee's size, but because of the number of commuters in the suburbs which use the freeway to drive a few miles it needs to be widened. The state ignores the fact that the widening for those select areas should be the suburbs problems since they induce the extra traffic with their poor land use patterns. There are numerous surface streets in Milwaukee that carry just as much if not more traffic daily than the surrounding highways but the state only is only helping subsidize extra width for traffic in the suburbs. Shouldn't Milwaukee get its fair share of aid, if our surface streets carry as much traffic as the suburban highways?

Paule, I think the complaint is that so far all the road projects announced for the stimulus are for highways which while they connect regions, they do not directly benefit the cities. Look at the freeway expansion. A two lane freeway is plenty large enough to serve the needs of a city Milwaukee's size, but because of the number of commuters in the suburbs which use the freeway to drive a few miles it needs to be widened. The state ignores the fact that the widening for those select areas should be the suburbs problems since they induce the extra traffic with their poor land use patterns. There are numerous surface streets in Milwaukee that carry just as much if not more traffic daily than the surrounding highways but the state only is only helping subsidize extra width for traffic in the suburbs. Shouldn't Milwaukee get its fair share of aid, if our surface streets carry as much traffic as the suburban highways?
The stimulus bill has no business putting money into highway projects either. Do you understand that? No road or highway projects should be in the bill period.

Poor beat-up roads were not the reason why this country loss over 4,000,000 jobs in the last year. Fixing the roads, especially city streets, is not going to bring those jobs back.

Hooowee!

Floating some big ideas
Group envisions infrastructure for water technology, research hub
By John Schmid of the Journal Sentinel

Posted: Mar. 7, 2009

Milwaukee, circa 2014: An executive from a water-purification company in Shanghai steps off a plane at Mitchell International Airport and is greeted by a sign that reads, "Welcome to the Freshwater Hub of the World."

He boards a light rail train that whisks him to the downtown lakefront, where he takes in the sight of the gleaming white Milwaukee Art Museum and Discovery World buildings, both flanking the newest gem on the Lake Michigan shore: the multimillion-dollar headquarters of the Milwaukee Water Council and portions of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee School of Freshwater Sciences. Among the features inside is a renowned library holding one of the nation's best collections of legal, technological and business books and documents about the management and protection of water.

Is this vision, brought to you by the newly incorporated Water Council, little more than a pipe dream? Perhaps. But the notion of building a water research and business center adjacent to Discovery World, where the shuttered Pieces of Eight restaurant sits, rapidly has gathered a come-from-nowhere momentum and is embraced by community leaders from UWM Chancellor Carlos Santiago to Mayor Tom Barrett and some of the region's most influential business leaders.

At the same time, a related proposal would transform UWM's satellite harbor campus, currently housed in an abandoned factory south of downtown, into a new research park and adjacent business incubator, along with more classrooms, labs and offices for the graduate School of Freshwater Sciences, which UWM is launching.

Both projects are meant to draw international investment, research and visitors. In the process, civic leaders say, the metro region has its best opportunity in decades to replace its Rust Belt identity with a growth-oriented emphasis built around the stable of water-technology companies that already are located in and around Milwaukee.

Planning is in the early stages. Anything built near Milwaukee's waterfront needs to clear multiple committees, hurdles and intense public scrutiny over aesthetics and land use. UWM and its partners also need to raise prodigious amounts of money and are lobbying for nearly $70 million under the nation's economic stimulus program to transform the harbor campus.

The incentives, however, are clear. Water technology and infrastructure represent a $424 billion-a-year market by some estimates, one that enjoys pockets of growth even amid the worldwide downturn. A full-blown technology race has emerged in pursuit of energy-efficient ways to clean, conserve, desalinate and pump an increasingly scarce commodity.

The economics of water "will define the region for the next 30 years," says Dean Amhaus, who runs the Spirit of Milwaukee, a civic promotion agency that coordinates efforts to craft a modern image for the metro region on behalf of the Milwaukee 7 economic development group.

"Water has positive connotations in many ways," Amhaus said. "It's environmental. It's economics. It's innovation. It's technology. It's biotech. It's big."

Flood of opportunity
The Water Council was formed in July 2007 as a loosely knit subcommittee of the M-7, which itself is the main venue for economic strategy in the seven counties of southeastern Wisconsin.

Since then, the scarcity of clean water has emerged as an urgent global issue. It also has become apparent that the Milwaukee region is home to scores of water engineering companies, including big water subsidiaries for the likes of ITT Corp., a Fortune 500 water group; Siemens AG of Germany; and Pentair Inc., the biggest of the region's water employers. There are also scores of smaller water-related firms.

On Jan. 29, the Water Council reincorporated itself as a stand-alone agency with its own board, which includes the chief executives of Badger Meter Inc., which makes water meters, and A.O. Smith Corp., a global manufacturer of water heaters. It aims to spur economic growth by linking local water-infrastructure firms with universities, federal research money, business attraction efforts and, ideally, a few venture capitalists. The council and its goals have gained support from both of the state's U.S. senators, local politicians, and the Greater Milwaukee Committee civic and business group.

"It's a departure from the Rust Belt mantra that has been saddled upon this community," said Barrett, a supporter of the Water Council and its lakefront ambitions.

"I've never seen a community initiative get this much traction and move this fast - ever," said Christian Bartley, chief executive of the World Trade Center Wisconsin. Bartley's trade-promotion agency belongs to a network of 326 World Trade Centers in 92 countries that Bartley said he uses to disseminate the city's new brand as a world water hub.

Bartley is willing to move his agency, currently cramped in the nearby War Memorial building, into the proposed water center, sharing the space with the Water Council; Marquette University's water policy and water law research fellows; and possibly, state environmental agencies or environmental nonprofits.

Much of the proposed building would house UWM's freshwater faculty and classrooms, although all the labs and wet research would stay in the existing harbor campus.

UWM has its own incentive to run with the idea. The university has languished for decades in the shadow of the state's flagship research campus in Madison, which for decades has garnered the lion's share of state university funding.

"This region has yet to transition into the 21st-century, knowledge-based economy," said Santiago, a board member of the Water Council.

Bare-bones research site
The first students in UWM's graduate freshwater program are expected to enroll next year.

For now, UWM's harbor campus is home to the Great Lakes Water Institute, an ecological research facility. It's housed in a windowless ceramic tile factory that closed in 1971. Its main research vessel was built in 1953 and was not initially designed for aquatic research.

UWM recently applied for $44 million in stimulus funding for the harbor campus, including $16 million to build a modern research ship. Aghast that visitors would drive through a seedy district of shuttered buildings to arrive at the institute, which lies adjacent to a mountainous heap of coal, City Hall also wants to revitalize that end of Greenfield Ave. with a new streetscape.

Separately, Barrett's administration is lobbying for $25 million in stimulus funds to build the business park for water-technology start-ups, to be adjacent to the existing UWM building.

"That will create a buzz beyond the frontiers of Wisconsin," Santiago said.

The most iconic architecture, however, is reserved for the downtown lakefront.

UWM's School of Architecture and Urban Planning has begun design concepts. And it's a safe guess that it will be gleaming white against the aquatic blue, Santiago quips, just like the architectural icons on either side. The new research ship would tie up at both sites.

Until the Water Council has $25 million to $30 million to build the new site, UWM might try to retrofit the Pieces of Eight building to jump-start the move.

UWM is in talks with donors for funding, most notably Milwaukee industrialist-turned-philanthropist Michael Cudahy. The school will need to apply to the city's Harbor Commission to gain control of a long-term lease on the land. The state Department of Natural Resources, the U.S. Coast Guard and the city's Common Council all need to approve the project.

"This is a marquee venue," the mayor said.

Paule, I will assume that you were against the reconstruction of the hwy 29 and I-39 interchange in Wausau. That project has to be one of the most ridiculous in WisDot history. To have a new 4-lane frontage road next to a 6-lane freeway in Wausau was completely unnecessary. Someone told me that interchange is the largest in the State outside of Milwaukee. Don't tell me Wausau doesn't have local roads where that money might have been better spent. I sure hope Milwaukee tax dollars didn't go to that!

Paule, I will assume that you were against the reconstruction of the hwy 29 and I-39 interchange in Wausau. That project has to be one of the most ridiculous in WisDot history. To have a new 4-lane frontage road next to a 6-lane freeway in Wausau was completely unnecessary. Someone told me that interchange is the largest in the State outside of Milwaukee. Don't tell me Wausau doesn't have local roads where that money might have been better spent. I sure hope Milwaukee tax dollars didn't go to that!
Yes, I think they over did the 29/39 interchange. We can all thank Dave Obey for that wasteful spending.

No I wont tell you that. But I would never expect the Federal government to pay for Wausau's roads to be fixed. In the last several years many of the streets in town have been rebuilt. How, local taxes with some state as well, as it should be.

I sure hope Milwaukee tax dollars didn't go to that!
Of course it did. Every time a Milwaukee citizen bought gasoline, they help pay for the road construction and maintenance projects throughout the whole state via the gasoline taxes. And the same is true for everybody else across the State of Wisconsin.

http://www.biztimes.com/nf/uploads/Image/3.6.09issue/park-lafayette.jpg

Construction halted on Park Lafayette, and Domus delayed indefinetly.

Biz Times (http://www.biztimes.com/news/2009/3/6/real-estate-market-correction-reshapes-downtown-condo-scene)

Fixing the roads, especially city streets, is not going to bring those jobs back.

Welcome to the new reality of America. Those jobs aren't just going to come back with anything the government could do. The stimulus is to provide jobs for Americans out of work -- doing anything so they can feed their families.

Hooowee!

Floating some big ideas
Group envisions infrastructure for water technology, research hub
By John Schmid of the Journal Sentinel

Posted: Mar. 7, 2009

Milwaukee, circa 2014:


ALLRIGHT 5 more years!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I hope all or some of this come to fruition.

http://www.biztimes.com/nf/uploads/Image/3.6.09issue/park-lafayette.jpg

Construction halted on Park Lafayette, and Domus delayed indefinetly.

Biz Times (http://www.biztimes.com/news/2009/3/6/real-estate-market-correction-reshapes-downtown-condo-scene)

Bah... Thats too bad... One of my buddies was doing plumbing work on Park Lafayette. :ohno:

The stimulus bill has no business putting money into highway projects either. Do you understand that? No road or highway projects should be in the bill period.

Poor beat-up roads were not the reason why this country loss over 4,000,000 jobs in the last year. Fixing the roads, especially city streets, is not going to bring those jobs back.

If you think of the stimulus bill as advanced payments on project that are:

A.) Ready
B.) Provide jobs
C.) We will need to do anyway

...then it makes more sense. The #1 goal of the stimulus is to smooth out the valley of demand in the marketplace. The private market is frozen, and only public money is available. Roads are essential lifeblood to the economy and many/most of these projects would involve federal money anyway. Every major economy in the world is doing essentially the same thing. It's a lesson learned from other recessions.

The stimulus bill also outlays tons of money for basic research, job training, and technology upgrades. Those will provide jobs over a 5-15 year period, but we also need the jobs in the 5-15 month timeframe -- that's where these projects come in.

If you think of the stimulus bill as advanced payments on project that are:

A.) Ready
B.) Provide jobs
C.) We will need to do anyway

...then it makes more sense. The #1 goal of the stimulus is to smooth out the valley of demand in the marketplace. The private market is frozen, and only public money is available. Roads are essential lifeblood to the economy and many/most of these projects would involve federal money anyway. Every major economy in the world is doing essentially the same thing. It's a lesson learned from other recessions.

The stimulus bill also outlays tons of money for basic research, job training, and technology upgrades. Those will provide jobs over a 5-15 year period, but we also need the jobs in the 5-15 month timeframe -- that's where these projects come in.

If Milwaukee ends up getting high speed or light rail, I don't care how much money it costs. Even though Milwaukee is small when compared to Chicago or New York, a downtown loop of light rail or street car (whatever) would do more to attract businesses to downtown than any other measure the city could enact. Now if they could somehow link the downtown loop with the high speed rail lines that hopefully connect Milwaukee, Madison, Chicago, and stops in between; that would provide an unimaginable regional benefit to this side of the lake.

Paule, I'm with you but playing the blame game on milwaukee isn't the answer. Of the $3.7billion going to wisconsin, only about 1 billion is going to the city of Milwaukee and Milwaukee County. There's a whole lot of bad spending around the state and the country.

If you think of the stimulus bill as advanced payments on project that are:

A.) Ready
B.) Provide jobs
C.) We will need to do anyway

...then it makes more sense. The #1 goal of the stimulus is to smooth out the valley of demand in the marketplace. The private market is frozen, and only public money is available. Roads are essential lifeblood to the economy and many/most of these projects would involve federal money anyway. Every major economy in the world is doing essentially the same thing. It's a lesson learned from other recessions.

The stimulus bill also outlays tons of money for basic research, job training, and technology upgrades. Those will provide jobs over a 5-15 year period, but we also need the jobs in the 5-15 month timeframe -- that's where these projects come in.

Of course, there needs to be opposing views to the "stimulus" plan in order to make this a worthwhile thread. So, as we all know by now, there's less than half of the $800 billion-plus in this tax-a-thon that will do anything to help the economy. Face it, much of this debacle is meant as pay back to special interest groups. Sorry, but as a taxpayer, that pisses me off more than you can imagine. Talk about an immoral act!

The kind of jobs that will come out of this spending boondoggle are strictly government/special interest jobs that do nothing to generate revenue. With the exception of some research-related jobs, they are "make-up" jobs to give to people otherwise unable to positively contribute to a free market society.

You are dreaming to think these wasteful-spending jobs will last up to 15 years. I hope they die in less than a year, otherwise, we need to support them indefinitely with our taxes. I'm pleased to see you say that ROADS are the life blood to the economy -- IOW, rail is archaic and a waste of valuable resources. In short, we better slow down and examine what's going on with respect to this tax-and-spend hell before it's too late.

Paule, I'm with you but playing the blame game on milwaukee isn't the answer. Of the $3.7billion going to wisconsin, only about 1 billion is going to the city of Milwaukee and Milwaukee County. There's a whole lot of bad spending around the state and the country.

Do you have any figures on how much of this money is going to Dane County/Madison?

Of course, there needs to be opposing views to the "stimulus" plan in order to make this a worthwhile thread. So, as we all know by now, there's less than half of the $800 billion-plus in this tax-a-thon that will do anything to help the economy. Face it, much of this debacle is meant as pay back to special interest groups. Sorry, but as a taxpayer, that pisses me off more than you can imagine. Talk about an immoral act!

The kind of jobs that will come out of this spending boondoggle are strictly government/special interest jobs that do nothing to generate revenue. With the exception of some research-related jobs, they are "make-up" jobs to give to people otherwise unable to positively contribute to a free market society.

You are dreaming to think these wasteful-spending jobs will last up to 15 years. I hope they die in less than a year, otherwise, we need to support them indefinitely with our taxes. I'm pleased to see you say that ROADS are the life blood to the economy -- IOW, rail is archaic and a waste of valuable resources. In short, we better slow down and examine what's going on with respect to this tax-and-spend hell before it's too late.

Skyking, I really do like to debate these issues, but please try to be a bit less theatrical in your responses.

I do think that you are misunderstanding the bill a bit. Quite a bit of the bill is in grants and loan guarantees to growth industries that allow the addition of private-sector jobs. About 40% of the bill is direct consumer tax cuts, which really don't provide a good bang for the buck -- but they help people in the short term. The next largest chunk is to extend unemployment assistance, which has a very positive return (http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/Economic_Stimulus_House_Plan_012109.pdf). The other short-term money is to assist states with budget shortfalls due to a down economy. That, and it's percentage, is a tough spot -- but states do not have the ability to run a deficit, so hard times would be much harder if they federal government could not assist.

Now, as it pertains to this thread and our local and state communities, there is quite a bit of good research money coming to Wisconsin. The large increases in spending for the NSF and the NIH will help our strong genetic research and health care industries. The investment on alternative energy research and water technology could disproportionately help Wisconsin due to our local expertise in those areas. And the investment into healthcare technology directly will be very beneficial to our strengths in those areas.

So, in the short term we don't have to lay off as many people, people have more in their pockets to spend, and we can offset the losses in private construction with some needed public projects. In the long-term, we have created an investment into growth industries that can return greater on the investment.

And I think you need to realize that many people who are being laid off right now are not just "people otherwise unable to positively contribute to a free market society." There are millions of good hard-working talented people who get caught up in this. This isn't some sort of anthropology experiment for survival of the fittest.

The expense is a legitimate concern, but you have to weigh it against the cost of doing less or doing nothing. Even the congressional minority had a 500 billion dollar plan -- but it was just supply-side economics, no investment.

Skyking, I really do like to debate these issues, but please try to be a bit less theatrical in your responses.

I do think that you are misunderstanding the bill a bit. Quite a bit of the bill is in grants and loan guarantees to growth industries that allow the addition of private-sector jobs. About 40% of the bill is direct consumer tax cuts, which really don't provide a good bang for the buck -- but they help people in the short term. The next largest chunk is to extend unemployment assistance, which has a very positive return (http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/Economic_Stimulus_House_Plan_012109.pdf). The other short-term money is to assist states with budget shortfalls due to a down economy. That, and it's percentage, is a tough spot -- but states do not have the ability to run a deficit, so hard times would be much harder if they federal government could not assist.

Now, as it pertains to this thread and our local and state communities, there is quite a bit of good research money coming to Wisconsin. The large increases in spending for the NSF and the NIH will help our strong genetic research and health care industries. The investment on alternative energy research and water technology could disproportionately help Wisconsin due to our local expertise in those areas. And the investment into healthcare technology directly will be very beneficial to our strengths in those areas.

So, in the short term we don't have to lay off as many people, people have more in their pockets to spend, and we can offset the losses in private construction with some needed public projects. In the long-term, we have created an investment into growth industries that can return greater on the investment.

And I think you need to realize that many people who are being laid off right now are not just "people otherwise unable to positively contribute to a free market society." There are millions of good hard-working talented people who get caught up in this. This isn't some sort of anthropology experiment for survival of the fittest.

The expense is a legitimate concern, but you have to weigh it against the cost of doing less or doing nothing. Even the congressional minority had a 500 billion dollar plan -- but it was just supply-side economics, no investment.

With all due respect, NeuBrew, despite your calm and thoughtful response to my rant, your naivete is showing. This stimulus plan continues to grow warts the more time people have to examine it. More and more Democrats are even questioning the wisdom in much of it. Not even counting the sinful, wasteful earmarks in this thing (and, yes, there are also plenty of moronic Republican lawmakers joining in the unprecedented Democratic spending frenzy), there is far too little infusion planned to help business -- the creators of jobs. Remember, government and agency jobs do nothing to add to the economy. It's no wonder the stock market continues to slide into oblivion as professional money-makers watch this new administration take this country deeper into a socialistic hole. And, stimulus 2 is just around the corner...:ohno:

:bash::cheers:

Meanwhile:



UWM likely to pay more for engineering campus site
County Board proposal would raise sale price to $13.55 million
By Tom Daykin of the Journal Sentinel

Posted: Mar. 9, 2009

The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee likely will pay a higher price than the original $11.8 million offer for county-owned land it wants for a new engineering campus.

But a revised proposal, including environmental protections, might win County Board support for the land sale - which university officials say is needed to create a job-generating research-and-development facility in Wauwatosa.

Last fall, the board approved negotiating a sale of the tract, which is on the Milwaukee County Grounds, east of U.S. Highway 45 and north of Watertown Plank Road. A UWM affiliate made the $11.8 million offer of privately raised funds for 89 acres.

The board's Economic & Community Development Committee voted unanimously Monday to hold the item until some changes, including an increase in the sale price, can be made. The proposal could return to the committee later this month.

UWM would pay $13.55 million for the land under an amendment proposed by Supervisors Jim Schmitt, whose district includes the County Grounds; Toni Clark, committee chairman; and Lee Holloway, board president.

Attorney Bruce Block, who's representing the university, said the higher price probably would be acceptable.

UWM Chancellor Carlos Santiago told committee members that creating a modern R&D facility would draw more research funding for the engineering college, which in turn would help create jobs throughout southeastern Wisconsin. He and other university officials said Milwaukee should emulate Pittsburgh, where increased university research funding has helped attract companies such as Intel and Google.

"How many companies are moving to Milwaukee right now?" asked Mike Lovell, dean of UWM's College of Engineering & Applied Science.

Santiago and Lovell said the Wauwatosa site was chosen mainly because it's close to the Medical College of Wisconsin, where the engineering college would pursue research partnerships. People who've interviewed for new faculty positions have said they want lab space and joint appointments at the medical college, Lovell said.

"They need those clinical opportunities," he said.

Location debated
Opponents of putting the college in Wauwatosa said downtown Milwaukee would be a better location because it's near Marquette University, the Milwaukee School of Engineering and companies such as Johnson Controls Inc. Opponents also said having the college in Wauwatosa would make it difficult for students to travel back and forth from UWM's main campus on Milwaukee's east side.

But Santiago said UWM has plans for other building in or near downtown, including an academic health center near the former Pabst brewery and a School of Freshwater Sciences on Lake Michigan near Discovery World at Pier Wisconsin.

The Wauwatosa campus largely would be for graduate students, who would not be traveling a lot between that location and UWM's main campus, Lovell said. Similar satellite campuses exist at other urban research universities, he said, including University of Pittsburgh, where Lovell was an associate dean before coming to UWM in August.

Some county residents also said UWM would develop too much land.

The proposal does set aside 56 acres for park-like open space, and past preservation efforts include a nearby 67-acre state forest. But environmental activists said additional open space, including areas used as a monarch butterfly migration stopover, should be preserved.

University officials would work to preserve the butterfly areas, said Tom Luljak, UWM vice chancellor for university relations. Committee members said they want that assurance written into the proposal.

Of the 89 acres that would be sold to UWM, just over 17 acres would be set aside for Highway 45 improvements tied to the reconstruction of the Zoo Interchange, with additional parcels reserved for storm-water detention and other purposes. The university plans to build three buildings, totaling 450,000 square feet, and hopes to attract commercial development, including offices, a hotel and restaurants.

While the land purchase would be privately funded, including a donation from philanthropist Michael Cudahy, state funds would pay for constructing the engineering buildings. That funding has not yet been approved by the state Legislature.

http://www.biztimes.com/nf/uploads/Image/Corcoran.jpg

Milwaukee-based Mandel Group Inc. will break ground on March 15 for its Corcoran Lofts apartment development in the Historic Third Ward, according to chief operating officer Robert Monnat. Milwaukee-based Jansen Construction Inc. will be the general contractor for the project.

The six-story Corcoran Lofts building will have 76 apartments and 3,400 square feet of retail space. The retail space will be located at the corners of East Corcoran Avenue and Jefferson and Milwaukee streets. The building will be located on the north side of East Corcoran Avenue and adjacent to Mandel's Gaslight Lofts development

link (http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2009/3/4/corcoran-lofts-to-break-ground-on-march-15)

With all due respect, NeuBrew, despite your calm and thoughtful response to my rant, your naivete is showing. This stimulus plan continues to grow warts the more time people have to examine it. More and more Democrats are even questioning the wisdom in much of it. Not even counting the sinful, wasteful earmarks in this thing (and, yes, there are also plenty of moronic Republican lawmakers joining in the unprecedented Democratic spending frenzy), there is far too little infusion planned to help business -- the creators of jobs. Remember, government and agency jobs do nothing to add to the economy. It's no wonder the stock market continues to slide into oblivion as professional money-makers watch this new administration take this country deeper into a socialistic hole. And, stimulus 2 is just around the corner...:ohno:

With all due respect Skyking, that was not a refutation of anything I said.

Just because I don't get worked up into a populist rage about any action by the government, doesn't mean I am naive. So, besides having 'warts', being 'sinful', 'wasteful', and a 'socialistic hole', is there anything specific in the plan that you think is bad for Milwaukee's development (sticking with this thread ;) )?

There were a number of specific items that were included to aid businesses -- http://projects.nytimes.com/44th_president/stimulus/tax-cuts-for-businesses

Are you saying that you would simply double or triple this and eliminate any direct government investment? I'm asking because I simply do not understand what the Republican position is in all of this. As far as I can tell, they only proposed a 500 billion dollar tax cut. So, slightly smaller overall, but no investment.

But, as it pertains to this thread, it's tough to argue that the package is anything but good for Milwaukee's development.

If Milwaukee ends up getting high speed or light rail, I don't care how much money it costs. Even though Milwaukee is small when compared to Chicago or New York, a downtown loop of light rail or street car (whatever) would do more to attract businesses to downtown than any other measure the city could enact. Now if they could somehow link the downtown loop with the high speed rail lines that hopefully connect Milwaukee, Madison, Chicago, and stops in between; that would provide an unimaginable regional benefit to this side of the lake.
Hey, we agree on something!

Jeez, I'm going to move right on down to Milwaukee if there is rail transit. I will faithfully use it every day. Even if it costs $$$$ and more $$$$ and even more $$$$..... Blah Blah Blah.....

Of course, there needs to be opposing views to the "stimulus" plan in order to make this a worthwhile thread. So, as we all know by now, there's less than half of the $800 billion-plus in this tax-a-thon that will do anything to help the economy. Face it, much of this debacle is meant as pay back to special interest groups. Sorry, but as a taxpayer, that pisses me off more than you can imagine. Talk about an immoral act!

The kind of jobs that will come out of this spending boondoggle are strictly government/special interest jobs that do nothing to generate revenue. With the exception of some research-related jobs, they are "make-up" jobs to give to people otherwise unable to positively contribute to a free market society.

You are dreaming to think these wasteful-spending jobs will last up to 15 years. I hope they die in less than a year, otherwise, we need to support them indefinitely with our taxes. I'm pleased to see you say that ROADS are the life blood to the economy -- IOW, rail is archaic and a waste of valuable resources. In short, we better slow down and examine what's going on with respect to this tax-and-spend hell before it's too late.

Don't get me wrong; I know the "pork bill" is full of wasteful spending that our grand children's kids will have to pay. However, if it costs $700 billion to get a light rail system in Milwaukee, than so be it. At least my tax dollars will get put to use (kind of) in Milwaukee.

I have to say, I hope to god they fix the main surface roads in Milwaukee. I just recently bought a brand new, fully loaded Ford Fusion, (Like the car and the idea of supporting American business) and I blew out my front left tire the other day after hitting a pot hole about 3 feet deep. I feel like calling my lawyer because I've found out my little encounter with the pot hole has done front end damage to my car. Thank god for my insurance, but the city should really have to pay for this!!! I'm outraged and hope some of the stim money is put to fixing our surface roads.... (Not just pot hole paving, but entire road bed replacement). What the hell has MKE been doing with my tax dollars all these years!!!!

http://www.biztimes.com/nf/uploads/Image/rew3.11.09/211wisconsin.jpg

They're finally leasing the first floor of 211 Wisconsin. Remember when the Cadillac Ranch chain backed out.

link (http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2009/3/11/kaplan-university-to-open-downtown-milwaukee-instructional-site)

Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett announced this morning that the Federal Omnibus Budget Bill that was signed into law this week includes a provision to spend the $91.5 million that has been on hold since 1991 on transportation in Milwaukee.
The provision for Milwaukee dedicates spending 60 percent of the remaining $91.5 million to for Barrett's downtown streetcar rail project and 40 percent of the funds for new energy-efficient buses to operate on Milwaukee County's bus rapid transit routes.
The funds had been allocated for Milwaukee but could not be spent because the federal government previously had required the Milwaukee mayor, the Milwaukee County executive and the governor of Wisconsin to each agree on how the transit dollars would be allocated.
Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker refused to compromise with Barrett on the use of the funds. So, even though the feds had allocated the $91.5 million, it could not be spent.
Barrett, a former Congressman, then bypassed Walker's objections by convincing key members of Wisconsin's Congressional delegation to alter the stipulations of the funding in the new federal bill.
"It was approximately two years ago that I said, 'It's obvious we're not going to agree on this. Let's do what kindergarteners do and cut the pie in half,' and he (Walker) said, 'No,'" Barrett told BizTimes Milwaukee today.
"Mayor Barrett made it quite clear that if the county executive would not sign off on an agreeable solution for spending the $91.5 million, the mayor would ask our Congressional delegation for assistance," said Patrick Curley, Barrett's chief of staff.
Barrett said he worked with Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Milwaukee) and Rep. David Obey (D-Wausau) to change the terms of the Milwaukee transit allocations to bypass Walker's objections.
"I thought, 'I gotta move at some point.' We approached the Congressional delegation and said, 'We need your help,'" Barrett said.
The new Milwaukee provision in the $410 billion bill originated in the House, was reaffirmed in the Senate and was signed into law by President Barack Obama on Wednesday.
Barrett said the timing of the bill is "opportune," because Obama's economic stimulus bill allocates $8 billion in funding for intercity rail that could connect Chicago through Milwaukee and Madison to the Twin Cities, and the Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee (KRM) commuter rail project also is moving forward.
With the downtown rail project and new bus rapid transit routes, passengers will be able to move around the city and the county once they arrive in Milwaukee from the intercity and KRM trains, Barrett said.
"Our intent is to continue working with the FTA (Federal Transit Administration). We want to accelerate things," Barrett said.
For more information about Barrett's downtown rail transit plan, visit www.city.milwaukee.gov/transit.
Fran McLaughlin, director of communications for Walker, said this morning she was not aware that the omnibus bill included the provisions to bypass the county executive and allocate the funds for Milwaukee. Walker was not available for comment.


BizTimes Milwaukee may update this story later today.

Fina-fricken-ly! Milwaukee will finally have a transportation system than isn't just limited to INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES.

what a huge victory for the City of Milwaukee!!! take that, Scott Walker. can't wait to ride the rails!!!

Excellent news for Milwaukee. (And a nice bit of politicking by Barrett as well.)

wahoo!

Sounds pretty nice. If we ever wanted Milwaukee to be attractive to Chicago-ans taking the train, this should help. Will this get a dedicated lane or will it have to share lanes with cars?

I'm definitely excited about this. I have a couple questions.
How much of the cost for these streetcars will the $55mil cover?
Is the other 40% of the money actually going towards full-fledged BRT and does that mean that BRT is definitely happening?
I hope that Milwaukee can get enough of the rest of the money it needs to get both of these things going.

I'm definitely excited about this. I have a couple questions.
How much of the cost for these streetcars will the $55mil cover?
Is the other 40% of the money actually going towards full-fledged BRT and does that mean that BRT is definitely happening?
I hope that Milwaukee can get enough of the rest of the money it needs to get both of these things going.

I don't think 55 million will cover much. I remember hearing that systems like this cost about 25 million a mile, but I might be way off.

Good news on the streetcar system, which will provide rails for future light rail expansion!!!!!!!!!!! hopefully!!!!!!!

I don't think 55 million will cover much. I remember hearing that systems like this cost about 25 million a mile, but I might be way off.

That sounds about right, since the streetcar is proposed to be about a 2.5 mile loop.

Alright, now that everyone is so excited about the free money coming to Milwaukee, take a deep breath and expalin who will pay the annual cost to sustain this massive rail system. 50 million per year? More? Did you budget that in all of your excitement? Who will pay that cost? Remember this does not go away and only gets bigger and bigger each and every year.

^ More taxes, I guess?

I don't mind. I have never objected to taxes if they paid for things I believe in.

Anyhow, I'm glad that the area of the country in which I will live shortly is making good decisions.

Good decisions = The Urban Politician sticks around
Bad & annoying decisions (ie South Carolina & Texas) = bye bye losers

@Boatnurd massive rail system? The streetcar system is a 3 mile loop! Nothing massive about it at all... And I think the annual operating cost will be significantly less than $50 million.

I am now officially a full-fledged Barrett supporter. Looks like he's learning something from Mr. Daley.

Construction will resume next week on Park Lafayette (http://www.jsonline.com/business/41240992.html) towers.

@Boatnurd massive rail system? The streetcar system is a 3 mile loop! Nothing massive about it at all... And I think the annual operating cost will be significantly less than $50 million.
Agreed, I think this will be money well spent.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

"In recent years, Barrett has advocated spending part of the money on streetcars and part on express buses, while Walker insisted all of it should be spent on express buses. The connector study is reviewing both plans.

At one point, Barrett proposed splitting the money 50-50, which would have provided $45.75 million each for streetcars and express buses. Walker rejected that idea and instead suggested spending half on express buses and putting half aside for some future use. Barrett refused.

Now Barrett has $54.9 million to spend on streetcars and Walker has $36.6 million for buses, in addition to the $25.7 million that the federal stimulus package is pumping into the bus system.

County Board Chairman Lee Holloway said he was "disappointed that the county executive's inability to negotiate a compromise reduced the county's share by more than $9 million," because the 50-50 split "would have been a better deal for Milwaukee County."

:bash::ohno:

The intransigent ideology (or stubborn arrogance) of this guy is just amazing!

http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/41218767.html

How much does it cost to ride one of these things in other cities that have them? Would it be enough, or at least contribute a significant amount, to cover many of the long term operating and maintenance costs?

The annual operating costs wouldn't be anywhere near $50m. It is much closer to $5m. This can be covered in any number of ways: parking fees, the RTA sales tax, advertising, sponsorships and fares.

So, I assume this wouldn't extend to Miller Park at all?

I know it's wishful thinking, but this will improve Downtown most if there are no fares to ride. This small starter system is about building a constituency for rail and connecting Downtown Milwaukee. The more suburban riders this can draw from visitors to Downtown, the more people that will support an expansion while making parking much easier in busy areas.

I just watched a YouTube video of Portland's modern streetcar system. And honestly, I think a similar system would be a nice asset to Milwaukee.

But I do have a few basic ridership questions.

How long of a wait would it be for the next streetcar to come along if you missed the last one that just left? That might be an important question if it's 20 degrees below zero with the wind-chill factor.

Is the streetcar route going to be limited to a 3 mile loop in downtown, or will it branch off over to the 3rd Ward, Miller Park, Maier Festival Grounds, etc.?

Will it be limited to running in the day time only, or will it operate until after a sports event at the B.C. for example?

Really though, the Portland system does look pretty nice,

^ In Mayor Barrett's plan, it looks like they would come by every 5-10 minutes...

It will start off as a loop. It is meant as a starter system with future expansion upon being successful. I really think it will be.

http://www.ci.mil.wi.us/ImageLibrary/Groups/MayorAuthors/issues/FINAL_Barrett_Comprehensive_Transit_Strategy.pdf

Jesse, I agree with you on the no-fare thing. Ideally, you would at least be able to ride it for free with an amtrak, mcts or other transit pass/transfer, since the streetcar will help you get to your final destination. Since the county opposes the streetcar entirely, that probably isn't an option and that's a shame.

However, with something like this, sometimes the time and cost of collecting a fare isn't worth it. There are plenty of ideas out there for how to cover operating expenses.

^ In Mayor Barrett's plan, it looks like they would come by every 5-10 minutes...

It will start off as a loop. It is meant as a starter system with future expansion upon being successful. I really think it will be.

http://www.ci.mil.wi.us/ImageLibrary/Groups/MayorAuthors/issues/FINAL_Barrett_Comprehensive_Transit_Strategy.pdf

I love these plans, but my question is are they potential ideas or finalized plans... What im really saying is, as of right now, what needs to be done to put these plans into action. (Sorry if i sound ignorant but i have been out of town and out of touch for a few weeks.)

double post

I love these plans, but my question is are they potential ideas or finalized plans... What im really saying is, as of right now, what needs to be done to put these plans into action.

This approval merely broke the stalemate between the City's and County's dueling transit plans. It's splits up what the $91.5 million is to be used for, but it is not a final approval for any transit plans.

The transit plans themselves--the streetcar loop and the BRT lines--still have to make their way up the approval process ladder. Environmental impact statements, route definitions, engineering studies, costs have to be finalized, local funding sources must be identified, and they'll still have to submit everything to the FTA to be approved before either one can move forward.

So while it's a "win" in terms of breaking through the impasse, there's still work to be done before getting a "green light" to build anything.

[I

So, I assume this wouldn't extend to Miller Park at all?
Nor will it extend to the parts of the county where Walker's support base is. Remember that he does represent people who live in places (including municipalities) other than just the 'East Side' and the other near-downtown neighborhoods - and they do vote in healthy numbers.

Mike

Umm, for the amount of money available, the streetcar can't get any closer to "walker's support base". There isn't even enough money to get to the east side.

The hope would be to have extensions go off of the loop, such as west on Wisconsin, south on Water, north on Prospect and northwest on Fondy or King, but that will be in the future. Need to start somewhere.

http://www.biztimes.com/nf/uploads/Image/route.jpg

Is it me or is that just a modified, expensive, and fancy bus? One that cannot go everywhere a bus can. Why not save the taxpayer money and run a bus on that exact same route that cost 25 cents. Or, make it free which would be far cheaper than spending all this money and screwing up the streets. Is something called a streetcar or light rail just more sexy sounding than a bus?

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

"In recent years, Barrett has advocated spending part of the money on streetcars and part on express buses, while Walker insisted all of it should be spent on express buses. The connector study is reviewing both plans.

At one point, Barrett proposed splitting the money 50-50, which would have provided $45.75 million each for streetcars and express buses. Walker rejected that idea and instead suggested spending half on express buses and putting half aside for some future use. Barrett refused.

Now Barrett has $54.9 million to spend on streetcars and Walker has $36.6 million for buses, in addition to the $25.7 million that the federal stimulus package is pumping into the bus system.

County Board Chairman Lee Holloway said he was "disappointed that the county executive's inability to negotiate a compromise reduced the county's share by more than $9 million," because the 50-50 split "would have been a better deal for Milwaukee County."

:bash::ohno:

The intransigent ideology (or stubborn arrogance) of this guy is just amazing!

http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/41218767.html

Perhaps, if you paid taxes, you would better understand. Personally, I'm disappointed that we're being taxed out of our minds, and the worst is yet to come. Walker has tried to do the fiscally responsible thing ever since he took office, and that is counter to what most politicians do. And, I'm also disappointed that Holloway isn't in jail where he belongs. The fact that he has a voice at all is a sad testimony to the type of people this county is electing to office.

The annual operating costs wouldn't be anywhere near $50m. It is much closer to $5m. This can be covered in any number of ways: parking fees, the RTA sales tax, advertising, sponsorships and fares.

:ohno: It will be interesting to see just how close you are to that $5 mil figure.

5 million dollars will barely pay the annual salaries and benefits needed to support this effort. Never mind the station upkeep, insurance, infrastructure maintenance, and repairs to keep the trolleys rolling.

5 million dollars will barely pay the annual salaries and benefits needed to support this effort. Never mind the station upkeep, insurance, infrastructure maintenance, and repairs to keep the trolleys rolling.

Where's your proof or at least your source of info for your uneducated guess?

As for your last question asking why not have a bus: The problem with a bus or rubber-tired trolley is that their routes can be changed on a whim and the routes can easily be eliminated. Developers and everyday people know this and don't invest like they do with rail.

Yes, busses are more flexible in their route, but that is exactly the problem with them.

I'm anxious to hear about how this develops and what type of system is built.

I think Boatnurd's criticism is valid. We need to see a 10, 20-year plan for outlays on maintenance, etc. However, I would extend the same criticism to the bus proposal.

Any way you shake it, transportation is subsidized. However, I think as it pertains to downtown development, this type of system could provide a PR multiplier effect for development within the loop. With the expansion and modernization of the amtrak lines into the intermodal station, combined with the streetcar the city could gain a much larger share of tourism.

I do share the opinion that this should be integrated into some shuttle services to Miller Park.

5 million dollars will barely pay the annual salaries and benefits needed to support this effort. Never mind the station upkeep, insurance, infrastructure maintenance, and repairs to keep the trolleys rolling.

Well, there would be about 6 streetcars. So, conservatively, let's say 15 drivers at $50+$25k in benefits, that's $1.125m. Add in a couple of mechanics/maintenance guys....let's say 5 at the same pay = $375,000.

So, now you are up to $1.5m. I don't think the maintenance of the streetcars and stations will cost more than $3.5m/year. I don't think it would even be close to that.

I think $5m is a reasonable, and actually conservative estimate.

Here are Cincinnati's operating estimates for a larger, 3.9 mile system: $2-2.8m/year (not including any revenue sources, just operating costs).

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/city/downloads/city_pdf16341.pdf

Where's your proof or at least your source of info for your uneducated guess?



No proof, just another uneducated guess! I am sure however your guess is very educated and filled with proven facts about a process one has yet to develop. Time will only tell. I will always lean towards government costs being far greater than ever projected.

Yes, buses are more flexible in their route, but that is exactly the problem with them.
The real problem with buses is that they are fucking miserable transportation.

Aside from the riffraff that you share them with, buses will make you sick from the lousy drivers and horrible suspension/shock absorbers that must break the first time out.

Bouncing back and forth from the stops and starts, some guys slam on the brakes and then punch the gas, swerving side to side and bouncing off every defect in the road. I have vomited at least twice in my life because of it.

Doyle proposes $240 million for UWM expansion

By John Schmid of the Journal Sentinel

Posted: Mar. 16, 2009 2:00 p.m.

Gov. Jim Doyle announced $240 million in state-backed financing Monday to allow the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee to expand its land-locked campus with satellite research facilities that will specialize in engineering and science, public health and water technology.

UWM argues it can serve as an economic piston by expanding its role as a research campus and an incubator of new ideas and graduate students. The state's financing package, which includes an assortment of bonding instruments, will stretch over six years.

"Our universities have always been the engines that drive Wisconsin," Doyle said in a statement. "This initiative will support UWM's efforts to grow the economy in southeast Wisconsin. Even in tough times we must continue to invest in education and research so that we can get through this in a way that will make us stronger in the years ahead."

For UWM, the size of the funding is significant. The figure exceeds the $122 million that UWM raised in 2006-2007 under its chancellor, Carlos Santiago, who is the architect of the school's expansion.

The funding belongs to Doyle's capital budget, which often centers on construction projects and is negotiated separately from the state's operating budget that he unveiled last month. The state building commission will begin hearings on the capital budget this month. The commission will then forward its recommendations to the Joint Committee on Finance as an amendment to the state's 2009-'11 budget.

UWM's efforts to expand have been thwarted for decades, mainly because it lacked funding and land. The state's second-biggest school after UW-Madison has been landlocked on a cramped east side campus since its founding in 1956.

Doyle will provide more details when he appears at UWM's Great Lakes WATER Institute Monday afternoon. The funding will create a pool of money for UWM's expansion.

UWM has not formally announced the projects that it will advance first. But it has signaled that it wants to proceed most quickly with the reconstruction of its existing Great Lakes WATER Institute, which is located in the Milwaukee harbor. That project will create the research facilities for UWM's proposed graduate-level School of Freshwater Sciences. UWM already owns the land, and civic backers support the project, allowing UWM to move most quickly on that harbor campus.

It also wants to replace the research ship Neeskay, which it notes is the only academic research vessel on the Great Lakes. That project also doesn't require land acquisition.

"Gov. Doyle's bold move to commit funding from the State of Wisconsin to further the development of UW-Milwaukee's new School of Freshwater Sciences is a major catalyst in ensuring that we progress from being a water hub to a global economic accelerator in water," stated Julia Taylor, president of the Greater Milwaukee Committee and treasurer of the Milwaukee 7 Water Council Board.

The governor's action demonstrates that Wisconsin is serious about establishing Milwaukee as an emerging global leader in freshwater technology and research, she added.

But UWM also has other projects that it has promoted under the banner of economic growth.

They include the construction of headquarters and administrative offices of the School of Freshwater Science at a more central location on the Lake Michigan shoreline near the Discovery World and the Milwaukee Art museums. The facility could also host the Water Council, a newly created water industry trade group, and provide meeting and exhibition space to showcase services and products related to water technologies.

Separately, in Wauwatosa, UWM aims to build a new engineering campus with a research park for faculty, grad students and senior scientists that would focus on biomedical engineering and advanced manufacturing.

Additionally, UWM wants to locate a facility for the School of Public Health in downtown Milwaukee. The school would feature doctorate programs in environmental health, epidemiology, health administration and policy, and social and behavioral science, as well as a master's degree in public health.

UWM also would construct on its main east side campus a research and classroom facility. The space would include dry and wet instructional labs, research labs and classroom space.




I hope this happens

I may sound like a broken record here but "State backed financing". I thought this state was broke! Thought we were asking for a 6 billion dollar bailout. Now we are backing a 250 million dollar UW project. Not to mention the 100 million dollar transportation project. If this thread keeps going, we will spend another billion dollars we don't have in no time. Oh yea, this is federal and increased tax money. Not like it is coming out of our pockets. Good grief... I love new construction and that is why I like this forum. But, if I don't have the money in my household, I have to put things on hold and scale way back.

'tis the way madison has been built for years, about time Milwaukee starts to get some of the state tax money we pay back in the form of investments in our region.

Here the state is simply investing in its own future through education. Whatever it may costs to modernize our Universities, it will cost more in the future in lost opportunities if we don't. Right now education and research is our best export as a nation, and unlike other industries, we are still world leaders in it.

This is analogous to a broke college student continuing to pay for his education, despite having to take out more loans and go into deeper debt. The student has the option to discontinue his education, begin working, and relieve his debt. However it would be an ill-advised long term solution to his problem if he were to not invest in his own education while he still has the chance.

States are perpetually in the same dilemma. They may not always have money sitting around, but choosing to not invest in educating their residents always has harsher long-term penalties.

Doyle is far from a model governor, but I approve of his choice for investments. This is one of the smartest things we can be doing. The state of Wisconsin has some really unique opportunities to become a national and international leader in some areas. We need to capitalize on that. It's not too different from the business world. When you see a clear opportunity, you seize it -- you don't make excuses.

'tis the way madison has been built for years, about time Milwaukee starts to get some of the state tax money we pay back in the form of investments in our region.

:applause:

Great news about funding the UWM expansion

Doyle makes me sick and half the responses to what he wants to do makes me want to throw up. In others words no comment.

^^^

Good comment for a no comment Paule !

Perhaps, if you paid taxes, you would better understand. Personally, I'm disappointed that we're being taxed out of our minds, and the worst is yet to come. Walker has tried to do the fiscally responsible thing ever since he took office, and that is counter to what most politicians do. And, I'm also disappointed that Holloway isn't in jail where he belongs. The fact that he has a voice at all is a sad testimony to the type of people this county is electing to office.

Who doesn't pay taxes? I pay property, business and personal income taxes in Wisconsin...and yes Skyking I understand well. I understand that you share Walker's ideology and thus do not see any reason for compromise on your position. It is unbelievable to me that the city and county were at loggerheads for so long and wasted the opportunity and money that they did. When Barrett offered a compromise to split the money in half, Walker was still too stubborn and blind to take the money.

The more development there is in Milwaukee the more taxes can be shared by businesses and residents and reduced for all. To do this takes a combination of private investment and public investment. I have seen the impact progressive policies on transport (i.e. not buses but lightrail) have had in Portland OR and Seattle WA. Economic development (i.e. private development) has cropped up along the routes (that took public money to produce) as people like living on a route near such transport (buses are nowhere near the same quality of transport). It is the same in Chicago. The suburbs that are desireable to live in have Metra transport to the city and many of the desireable neighborhoods in the city also have the EL.

Where's your proof or at least your source of info for your uneducated guess?

As for your last question asking why not have a bus: The problem with a bus or rubber-tired trolley is that their routes can be changed on a whim and the routes can easily be eliminated. Developers and everyday people know this and don't invest like they do with rail.

Yes, busses are more flexible in their route, but that is exactly the problem with them.

And, that, my prehistoric friend, is what's wrong with a trolley -- it is stiff, unflexible and archaic. Invest in light rail? Really? Like donut and coffee stands and what esle? Perhaps a sandwich shop? Besides these types of businesses that cater to a transient consumer, there is little, if any, proof that any development of substance goes up at, or along, train stops. You want government to dictate where devlopment occurs? First, that's a scary lot to be hitching your star to. Second, once you allow political hacks to start telling us where we can work, live, shop and play, you're done.

Here's an interesting dilemma: if a bus route is not a success, you can alter the route at little cost -- if a train has no riders, YOU CANNOT CHANGE THE LOCATION OF THE TRACKS!! Do you not see how locked in you become with such an old-fashioned mode of transportation?! Let the market determine growth, not government and a handful of people who had a sip of kool aid. You can take questionable ridership figures from other cities and mold them however you wish all day long.

The bottom line is this: rail transit is far, far too expensive, unwarranted for the miniscule number of projected users and a long lasting leech on taxpayers -- a serious drain on any economy for a city like Milwaukee that does not need it.

@skyking "there is little, if any, proof that any development of substance goes up at, or along, train stops" Funny.. Go to Charlotte, NC and you can see with your own eyes the TOD projects springing up along the line. I've been and I've seen them (condos, midrise, highrise, apartments...).

Further the market has not determined where people live in well a long long time. The GI Bill, Highway Funding, the mortgage deduction, government advertising (yup really) and hmmmn zoning, have all played a role in changing the market and therefore encouraging people to live in certain places. As do rail installations, rail influences the market by creating certainty which in turn encourages dense development. Which is you know exactly what a city wants.

And, that, my prehistoric friend, Is that necessary?

Invest in light rail? Really? Like donut and coffee stands and what esle? Perhaps a sandwich shop? Besides these types of businesses that cater to a transient consumer, there is little, if any, proof that any development of substance goes up at, or along, train stops.

Wrong. A quick trip to Chicago's suburbs or the suburbs around DC, NYC, or in the Bay Area will show you that plenty of commuter transit stops have spawned large amounts of recent development. The case is more variable in Chicago city proper, where ward politics & NIMBYism play a greater role in blocking development, but even in the city there has been some TOD.

You want government to dictate where devlopment occurs?

Of course I do. I don't hate the Government. I don't pay heed to those Republican talking points because they're empty. People should not just be allowed to build anything anywhere, no matter how inefficient its use of land, and then expect me to spend tax dollars supporting it with infrastructure. Government should regulate that development makes the best use of existing infrastructure, thus reducing our tax burden--if Republicans actually thought along those lines, their arguments wouldn't be so self-contradictory to me.

First, that's a scary lot to be hitching your star to. Second, once you allow political hacks to start telling us where we can work, live, shop and play, you're done.

Oh come on, that's exaggerating. Nobody is telling you what you should do with your life. But I wouldn't mind Government having a greater say in how our infrastructure and built environment is arranged, since, well, they're the ones paying for all the roads, highways, sewers, garbage collection, mail delivery, police & fire services, and mass transit.

The bottom line is this: rail transit is far, far too expensive, unwarranted for the miniscule number of projected users and a long lasting leech on taxpayers -- a serious drain on any economy for a city like Milwaukee that does not need it.

^ Then leave. There are a lot of people who think like you, and they actually run the show in places like Texas & South Carolina. I for one have no qualms letting my tax dollars go into a "leech" like a rail system, and would much rather see it used in that way than in dumb useless wars and tax breaks for corporate CEO's

I agree with Sky king Milwaukee shouldn't have light rail or a trolley.
Milwaukee is too small as a metropolitan area (1.5 million), and conservative (Scott Walker and co.) to consider that form of transportation.

@historybuff I'm guessing your kidding but if not. These cities have light-rail and/or streetcars. Charlotte, Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, New Orleans, and I believe Milwaukee is comparable in population density, and actual population to all of those cities. Further cities like Dallas, Houston, and Phoenix might be "bigger" but their population densities are much much lower because they are sooo spread out.

Additionally what does anyone mean by "support" rail? Hit its ridership predictions? What does that mean?

A quick TOD Example
Not my favorite building that I've ever seen but directly across the street from a new station on the Charlotte, NC Blue Line is what clearly (read the street names) was developed because of the light-rail line. It actually amazing to follow the blue lines as it downtown because it quickly got into some neighborhoods in need of new development, and there were new builds following the tracks.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2261/1753383488_f9af66b69d.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/davereid/1753383488/)

I think we're losing some perspective on the streetcar. It's only a small 3-mile loop in an already developed area. It connects the intermodal station to the larger downtown loop. This is not some sort of massive boondoggle transforming the community. It's modest and (small c) conservative.

I think it could certainly increase retail development in the downtown area, which is one thing that we have seen struggle to grow.

That said: "Monorail monorail monorail..."

http://www.griffindor.org.uk/cutenews/data/upimages/monorail.jpg

Neubrew. Agreed yes the streetcar is a very small c conservative plan, currently, but it does connect to the Park East which is very much not developed and could help with that over the long run.

Kenosha, WI has seen TOD along its trolley route.

Cleveland has seen a lot of development along its "health line" BRT.

I think Milwaukee is better served using the trolly money to repair the city roads and slowy work to upgrade outdated sewer systems. Our city roads are shameful! When money is more available and our budgets move back in the black we can revisit trollys. Our current population does not support this type of spend and it is not urgent at this juncture. We always justified paying some of the countrys highest taxes by what we thought were some of the finest roads.

Is that necessary?



Wrong. A quick trip to Chicago's suburbs or the suburbs around DC, NYC, or in the Bay Area will show you that plenty of commuter transit stops have spawned large amounts of recent development. The case is more variable in Chicago city proper, where ward politics & NIMBYism play a greater role in blocking development, but even in the city there has been some TOD.



Of course I do. I don't hate the Government. I don't pay heed to those Republican talking points because they're empty. People should not just be allowed to build anything anywhere, no matter how inefficient its use of land, and then expect me to spend tax dollars supporting it with infrastructure. Government should regulate that development makes the best use of existing infrastructure, thus reducing our tax burden--if Republicans actually thought along those lines, their arguments wouldn't be so self-contradictory to me.



Oh come on, that's exaggerating. Nobody is telling you what you should do with your life. But I wouldn't mind Government having a greater say in how our infrastructure and built environment is arranged, since, well, they're the ones paying for all the roads, highways, sewers, garbage collection, mail delivery, police & fire services, and mass transit.



^ Then leave. There are a lot of people who think like you, and they actually run the show in places like Texas & South Carolina. I for one have no qualms letting my tax dollars go into a "leech" like a rail system, and would much rather see it used in that way than in dumb useless wars and tax breaks for corporate CEO's

You are the perfect specimen for this new socialism we're headed for: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdDjOHYyCSg
We're praying for you, brother.

I seriously have not heard of a single city in the US whose people do not constantly bitch about potholes or awful road conditions. Maybe the problem isn't the roads, but the fact that they are the option!

Roads are incredibly expensive to repair and/or build. They are expanding a small section of 41 up here in Oshkosh and its going to cost over 400 million dollars!

Who doesn't pay taxes? I pay property, business and personal income taxes in Wisconsin...and yes Skyking I understand well. I understand that you share Walker's ideology and thus do not see any reason for compromise on your position. It is unbelievable to me that the city and county were at loggerheads for so long and wasted the opportunity and money that they did. When Barrett offered a compromise to split the money in half, Walker was still too stubborn and blind to take the money.

The more development there is in Milwaukee the more taxes can be shared by businesses and residents and reduced for all. To do this takes a combination of private investment and public investment. I have seen the impact progressive policies on transport (i.e. not buses but lightrail) have had in Portland OR and Seattle WA. Economic development (i.e. private development) has cropped up along the routes (that took public money to produce) as people like living on a route near such transport (buses are nowhere near the same quality of transport). It is the same in Chicago. The suburbs that are desireable to live in have Metra transport to the city and many of the desireable neighborhoods in the city also have the EL.

This is very funny and predictable stuff. Whenever someone disagrees with a liberal agenda, they are branded as unreasonable and stubborn. Guess what? That's called debating an issue. Believe it or not, not everyone has to agree with liberal viewpoints -- just like not everyone has to agree with conservative viewpoints. (Although, it sure would make things better :) ) You see, just because you support an idea doesn't make it right.

Walker has been turning a deaf ear to this "gift" of money because he knows it means having to spend much, much more money to make the choo choo run. And that, my friend, means more and more and more and more and more and more taxes. Barrett is a nice enough guy, but he's no mayor.

As for citing Portland and Seattle as examples of rail transit success stories...please. While I admittedly don't know much about Seattle's situation, I've been in Portland four times in the past three years and, believe me, the locals are not happy about the cost overruns, heavy tax subsidies and high ridership fees. And, only one of the lines actually carries some people on a regular basis! The Metra is heavily used -- and it loses money!
As for development, it occurs anyway in spite of an obtrusive rail line.

The Metra is heavily used -- and it loses money!

Same as I-94 or any transportation route/segment in the entire country.

I think Milwaukee is better served using the trolly money to repair the city roads and slowy work to upgrade outdated sewer systems. Our city roads are shameful! When money is more available and our budgets move back in the black we can revisit trollys. Our current population does not support this type of spend and it is not urgent at this juncture. We always justified paying some of the countrys highest taxes by what we thought were some of the finest roads.

I'm sure there are others who can answer this in more detail than I, but If I'm not mistaken the money that has been sitting around for 17 years from the feds can't be used in the ways you outline. It doesn't necessarily have to be spent on trolleys, but within certain parameters it does have to go to transit improvements. I don't think resurfacing streets or repairing sewers (both worthwhile things to do) qualify.

Danillo, you are correct. But also, trolley is not the correct term to use, we aren't talking about old-fashioned streetcar trolleys, we are talking about modern streetcar vehicles as shown in the video here: http://urbanmilwaukee.com/2009/03/14/streetcars-coming-to-milwaukee/ There is quite a big difference in ride quality and appearance.

Same as I-94 or any transportation route/segment in the entire country.

Agreed. Transportation is expensive, but money should be spent in direct proportion to which people use it. In other words, for the tiny amount of potential rail commuters in the Milwaukee Area, very little should be spent on rail. How about a nice Lionel model train running on a nice oval track under the Christmas Tree?

Danillo, you are correct. But also, trolley is not the correct term to use, we aren't talking about old-fashioned streetcar trolleys, we are talking about modern streetcar vehicles as shown in the video here: http://urbanmilwaukee.com/2009/03/14/streetcars-coming-to-milwaukee/ There is quite a big difference in ride quality and appearance.

...for a handful of users. A pig is still a pig whether you put a bow on its tail or not.

Boatnurd, FYI the money can ONLY be used for transportation, not any other infrastructure such as the sewer system you mentioned above.

Skyking, these issues really do not fit into this broad dichotomy of 'liberal' vs 'conservative'. Most of us are trying very hard not to call names or make this some sort of proxy battle for 'the movement'. Quite frankly, these are small practical issues on public use. Fortunately, these are also issues that can be easily debated using factual data instead of emotional personal attacks. You and I did that a few pages back. I think that is much more helpful for everyone to understand the scope of the debate and our choices. Most of us support any solutions that have long-term benefits to the growth of Milwaukee. Calling people socialist because they support *some* rail projects along with road projects isn't really approaching reality -- and frankly it's mildly absurd. Let's stay on topic.

Same as I-94 or any transportation route/segment in the entire country.

This is something of a key point. Roads/rail are not designed for profit.

Simple point, but still useful. We need to start any debate with the assumption that all transportation systems are a public service.

Does anyone have maps of Milwaukee's fixed-rail streetcar and electric 'trackless' trolley-bus transit networks circa 1946-1950 that they can post so that we can all see what the city once had? Those routes covered the city and literally went EVERYWHERE.

(Where were the transit advocates back then???)

One of the big problems with the streetcar network back then was that the city simply outgrew it (this was before private cars really caught on BIG), with more and more new development going up beyond the ends of the lines - requiring more and more people, people who were fully accustomed to using various modes of public transit to get around, to have to inconveniently transfer to other modes of conveyance in order to complete their routine city travels.

Mike

Boatnurd, FYI the money can ONLY be used for transportation, not any other infrastructure such as the sewer system you mentioned above.

Thanks for the clarification Jshmuck. I am enjoying this conversation. As a conservative thinker, I don't agree with some of the comments but do respect the various opinions.

Oh my God the world as we know it is ending!! Run for the hills, they are going to take away our cars!! I am never going to have another enjoyable second on this earth if the trains move in, it can’t be!!! They are going to drain us for every red cent until we won’t have enough to pay for our own funerals!!!

OK, but seriously, some food for thought, not saying this will necessarily happen, but I have been developing the concept in my head for awhile, and I am a believer: Does a modern, sophisticated, intermodal transit system “weed” out the unsophisticated, tight-wadish, groups of people (Milwaukee is known notoriously around the Midwest as being the cheapest group of people to walk the face of the earth) that essentially bring a community down with their narrow minded assumption that life as they know it should remain unchanged without progress. They are content with the average status quo, or, “if it ain’t broke (in their mind) don’t fix it.” The people that do not understand, or appreciate the importance of vibrant, interesting, exciting urban areas. Do these people actually leave a community for a less sophisticated slower pace of life, where they would trade the perception of a “tax hell” for a lower quality of life? (move to Toledo if you don’t like it, have a great life)

If so, I welcome the concept, knowing in return the city will be populated by the creative, sophisticated, movers and shakers that understand the concept of an urban vibrant lifestyle. Companies and people that crave an urban setting where a modern, fixed transit system is just simply a given and understanding, they don’t think about how much this “travesty costs”, they just use it because it is there to use and it makes their exciting lifestyle possible. Let the city be a city, a modern transit system is a natural for any city serious about moving forward above the status quo. Milwaukee development has been OK, but nothing compared to other cities who have passed us by, or were always ahead.

You are the perfect specimen for this new socialism we're headed for: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdDjOHYyCSg
We're praying for you, brother.

^ If having mass transit connecting our cities and giving me an option to get around besides the automobile is Socialism to you, then sign me up for Socialism!

You see, my friend, labels like that are your burden, not mine.

It's really nice that there are so many people who would rather see Milwaukee wallow in the depths of being a second class city.

Light rail has had to fight this argument in every city which has built it, "Oh, no one will ride it"................. but the riders come and ridership is increasing almost every year. And in the next 5 - 10 years when our cities will become more populated and gas prices will go up as they are predicted to, what is MCTS going to do, raise fares to $5 to cover fuel expenses.........???????
Light rail is a smart way to one, cut down on the county's contribution to pollution, and to create a viable means to continue public transportation well into the future... we cant be short sighted on the issues of public transportation.

My question, coming from someone who rides the bus consistently, is what makes the streetcar or light rail better than buses for the average rider? I have never riden on one. Will these things come more frequently, move faster, and not have to stop at every red light? If yes, then I would support it. If they provide basically them same service with the main difference being merely an "alternate" to taking the bus, I probably would not support spending all that money on it.

I'm a marketing geek.

Can those involved (and browsing) complete this quick survey to help me, and others, understand your POV?

Please answer the following questions:

1) Do you live in the City of Milwaukee? (If No, please specify current location)

2) Do you use Mass Transit? (Specify frequency and purpose)

3) If yes to #2, Explain current experiences on Mass Transit, elaborate on strengths and weaknesses of the system: If no, leave blank.

4) What are your opinions on expanding Mass Transit in the City of Milwaukee through rail alternatives?

5) What are your opinions on expanding Mass Transit in the region of Milwaukee through rail alternatives?

6) Do you support Mayor Barrett's Transit Plan (http://www.city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibrary/Groups/MayorAuthors/issues/FINAL_Barrett_Comprehensive_Transit_Strategy.pdf), specifically his Downtown Street-car Proposition?

I'm a marketing geek.

Can those involved (and browsing) complete this quick survey to help me, and others, understand your POV?

Please answer the following questions:

1) Do you live in the City of Milwaukee? (If No, please specify current location)

2) Do you use Mass Transit? (Specify frequency and purpose)

3) If yes to #2, Explain current experiences on Mass Transit, elaborate on strengths and weaknesses of the system: If no, leave blank.

4) What are your opinions on expanding Mass Transit in the City of Milwaukee through rail alternatives?

5) What are your opinions on expanding Mass Transit in the region of Milwaukee through rail alternatives?

6) Do you support Mayor Barrett's Transit Plan (http://www.city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibrary/Groups/MayorAuthors/issues/FINAL_Barrett_Comprehensive_Transit_Strategy.pdf), specifically his Downtown Street-car Proposition?

1) Yes, for 6 years. Neighborhoods including Eastside, Downtown, and Bayview.

2) Yes. Bus used previously to attend UWM and work, currently exclusively for work. Recently sold car.

3) I work corporate downtown, and I bus it 5 days a week. I have no problem with the bus arriving on time, but it's often full when I get on. I have a lot of friends who are in the same boat as me: Car-less young professionals. We can afford cars, but it's inconvenient in the neighborhoods we live in. I wish the time intervals between pick-ups would be lower, and it could get to where I'm going quicker.

4) I'd support building rail alternatives in the City. The buses on the east side and downtown are often full, and I want some space to breath.

5) I support it. I prefer the neighborhoods in the city over the burbs. I hate that without a car my job search only extends around the downtown area because I'd prefer not to sit on the bus for hours on my way to work in the burbs. It bugs me that the residents of Burbs have their freeways funded, but I can't get quicker alternative options for me to commute. Long commutes on buses get stuck in rush hour traffic and are also environmentally damaging. I like clean air.

6) I support it. I work downtown, and it would be nice to jump on a street car during lunch. Knowing where it stopped, I could use it to get errands done. Buses cover some areas but you can't loop downtown exclusively. When I lived downtown I'd use it to go out or get groceries, everyday things. I'd love to be able to point out the street cars to conventioneers or tourists, instead of drawing them a map to the Calatrava or Third Ward. I'd also take pride in knowing they didn't think the two blocks around the convention center were the epitome of Milwaukee.

My question, coming from someone who rides the bus consistently, is what makes the streetcar or light rail better than buses for the average rider? I have never riden on one. Will these things come more frequently, move faster, and not have to stop at every red light? If yes, then I would support it. If they provide basically them same service with the main difference being merely an "alternate" to taking the bus, I probably would not support spending all that money on it.

As a fellow transit rider who's also been on light rail, I have to say that the main difference for us is a MUCH smoother ride, better travel times, and knowing that a train is coming.

I can't count the number of times I've seen a bus get off route and miss a few stops. It's really maddening.

I'm a marketing geek.

Can those involved (and browsing) complete this quick survey to help me, and others, understand your POV?

Please answer the following questions:

1) Do you live in the City of Milwaukee? (If No, please specify current location)

2) Do you use Mass Transit? (Specify frequency and purpose)

3) If yes to #2, Explain current experiences on Mass Transit, elaborate on strengths and weaknesses of the system: If no, leave blank.

4) What are your opinions on expanding Mass Transit in the City of Milwaukee through rail alternatives?

5) What are your opinions on expanding Mass Transit in the region of Milwaukee through rail alternatives?

6) Do you support Mayor Barrett's Transit Plan (http://www.city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibrary/Groups/MayorAuthors/issues/FINAL_Barrett_Comprehensive_Transit_Strategy.pdf), specifically his Downtown Street-car Proposition?

1) Yes.

2) Yes. Every day.

3) Our system some very effective routes. While a lot of cities have one large hub, ours allows you to take numerous routes between places. The downside of that buses are rarely on time, and sometimes they're EARLY which is frustrating beyond belief. The buses are incredibly old and loud. I wish they'd list the route numbers on the backs and had bike racks on the front. And lastly the frequency on most routes is just absurd. I simply cannot understand why I have to wait 30 minutes on some routes during rush hour.

4) Rail is a vast improvement and I fully support any rail measures.

5) I don't really care about the suburbanites, but again I support any and all rail measures. High Speed to Madison would REALLY be helpful.

6) Absolutely. Every segment of it makes sense. I'd hope that the downtown loop is free or not more than a quarter. And I personally think that link between downtown and Midtown Center is the most important route. Unfortunately I don't think development will occur along Fond Du Lac Ave without rails in the street. BRT is just not permanent enough to lure developers.

Answering a question earlier on how the road money is allocated across the state (from jsonline.com):

Federal formulas guarantee that the Milwaukee area will get $38.7 million for road and bridge work, as part of a total $158 million dedicated to local projects. Madison will get $9.8 million and western Kenosha County will get $586,000; other areas of the state will have to compete for the remaining money.

I agree with Sky king Milwaukee shouldn't have light rail or a trolley.
Milwaukee is too small as a metropolitan area (1.5 million), and conservative (Scott Walker and co.) to consider that form of transportation.

How come sky king has responded to everyone except for me?

I agree with Sky king Milwaukee shouldn't have light rail or a trolley.
Milwaukee is too small as a metropolitan area (1.5 million), and conservative (Scott Walker and co.) to consider that form of transportation.


^ I sort of figured the people's representatives could decide that. If the people elected guys like Barrett and Gov Doyle, both rail supporters, then that kind of disproves your assertion that Milwaukee is too "conservative" for light rail.

That's like me saying that Chicago doesn't deserve a mass transit system because of suburban Republican X who doesn't support mass transit, and thus Chicagoans are too conservative for mass transit.

Is it me or is that just a modified, expensive, and fancy bus? One that cannot go everywhere a bus can. Why not save the taxpayer money and run a bus on that exact same route that cost 25 cents. Or, make it free which would be far cheaper than spending all this money and screwing up the streets. Is something called a streetcar or light rail just more sexy sounding than a bus?

Yes

Streetcars are quieter (this is not just a benefit to riders, but people walking by or people with offices/apartments near the route as well), smoother, more comfortable, more attractive, have low floor boarding, better for ADA...the list goes on and on.

The point is to provide people an enjoyable experience so that choice riders use it, thus taking cars off the road and providing more open parking spaces for anyone who is driving.

Just when one starts up again, another stops.

http://www.biztimes.com/nf/uploads/Image/reweekly3.18.09/downtownstaybridge.jpg

Construction of a 14-story mixed-use building including a Staybridge Suites hotel, being built by Park Ridge, Ill.-based Economou Partners at the southeast corner of Water Street and Juneau Avenue in downtown Milwaukee has been halted for weeks. Economou recently shifted the 31 condominiums in the project to apartments and is adding a few suites to the hotel. Completion of the construction project has been delayed several times.

link (http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2009/3/18/franklin-staybridge-suites-is-open-construction-on-downtown-location-halted)

http://www.mandelgroup.com/data/properties/web-one-kitchen-sm.gif

ONE at North End:
...Amenities include a 24hr state of the art fitness center; clubroom with gourmet kitchen and theater seating entertainment lounge; and outdoor public square with a fountain that morphs into a fire pit in the winter just to name a few.

Occupancy April 09

link (http://www.mandelgroup.com/apartments/apartment_detail.cfm?n_id=92)

http://1.gvt0.com/ThumbnailServer2?app=vss&contentid=656074652cfdd411&offsetms=1&itag=w160&hl=en&sigh=emWH-RqbYIcNM2ECoUh9L4dLQlM

I just came across a time lapse video on You Tube that follows the Lake Express ferry through the Harbor, Third Ward, and the valley.

It's worth the 2 minute length. Check it out HERE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usPih0oPZIg)

1) Do you live in the City of Milwaukee? (If No, please specify current location)

Yes.

2) Do you use Mass Transit? (Specify frequency and purpose)

Yes. I use it on days I can't ride my bike, which essentially means I ride it during snowstorms, or if I my bike is in the shop for repair. I rode the bus about five times this last winter.

3) If yes to #2, Explain current experiences on Mass Transit, elaborate on strengths and weaknesses of the system: If no, leave blank.

The bus system in Milwaukee is solid. I have two routes within walking distance of my house that get my downtown within 30 minutes. During peak times I have a "freeway flyer" within walking distance that can get me downtown in 15 minutes. I rarely encounter late or missing buses, unless there's a blizzard or something. Riding experience is usually positive.

4) What are your opinions on expanding Mass Transit in the City of Milwaukee through rail alternatives?

If we're going to do rail, let's go all out and do it to cover the whole city, or not do it at all. I would rather see our bus system expanded and extended then to see one rail line or rail loop. If there was only one rail line that extended east-west on Wisconsin Avenue, I would never use it, because it wouldn't serve my needs any more than the bus would.

5) What are your opinions on expanding Mass Transit in the region of Milwaukee through rail alternatives?

When I do drive (which is about once a month) it's usually because I'm going somewhere in the suburbs or outstate. It would be nice to have the option of not driving to Waukesha or Madison when I have meetings there. As it is, the lack of that option is the only thing keeping me totally 100% car free.

6) Do you support Mayor Barrett's Transit Plan (http://www.city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibrary/Groups/MayorAuthors/issues/FINAL_Barrett_Comprehensive_Transit_Strategy.pdf), specifically his Downtown Street-car Proposition?

No. I'm the biggest transit advocate there is, but this streetcar proposal is a tourist train. It will be used by tourists, people going out on the town Downtown, and the occasional Downtown office worker who wants to get to a meeting or lunch somewhere else Downtown quickly. I will never use it. It won't get me to work, and when I'm at work it likely will not be any more convenient to use than walking places. It will add a "cool" factor to Downtown, but it won't be any more useful than buses.

http://1.gvt0.com/ThumbnailServer2?app=vss&contentid=656074652cfdd411&offsetms=1&itag=w160&hl=en&sigh=emWH-RqbYIcNM2ECoUh9L4dLQlM

I just came across a time lapse video on You Tube that follows the Lake Express ferry through the Harbor, Third Ward, and the valley.

It's worth the 2 minute length. Check it out HERE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usPih0oPZIg)

That's great! Thanks!

^^ That is a sweet vid, I made sure to share with my friends/family from out of state.

I agree with Sky king Milwaukee shouldn't have light rail or a trolley.
Milwaukee is too small as a metropolitan area (1.5 million), and conservative (Scott Walker and co.) to consider that form of transportation.

How come sky king has responded to everyone except for me?

Your position on this issue is similar to mine. Therefore, I didn't find reason to respond. I try to save my energy for disagreeing with the trolley zealots. But, it is a welcome sight to see an occasional person on this site displaying some common sense. So, for that, thanks. The vast majority of people who participate on this site are of the same ilk. And, I think we're getting an even clearer profile of them as they answer Eastsider's six-question, transportation-related survey.

Your position on this issue is similar to mine. Therefore, I didn't find reason to respond. I try to save my energy for disagreeing with the trolley zealots. But, it is a welcome sight to see an occasional person on this site displaying some common sense. So, for that, thanks. The vast majority of people who participate on this site are of the same ilk. And, I think we're getting an even clearer profile of them as they answer Eastsider's six-question, transportation-related survey.

For the life of me I cannot understand how you go through life with such a tribalist disdain for everyone around you. We're talking about trolleys.... *trolleys*.

I do love that video with the bridges, it makes me feel that there is still so much potential for our river.

Any conservative on this site, obviously loves skyscrapers and wants to see Milwaukee have more of them.

However, the reason more aren't built in downtown Milwaukee is because they all need to self-park themselves and currently a structured parking space costs apr. $25,000 to built. The parking rates in downtown Milwaukee are not high enough to allow a developer to recover their costs. Therefore, here are the options to get more skyscrapers built (and probably a combination of these is needed):

- Have the City subsidize every office development to pay for its parking
- Increase the price of parking by reducing the supply or raising fees so that parking spaces begin to pay for themselves
- Increase transit options to downtown so that fewer spaces are needed for new office development
- Make downtown so desirable that companies will eventually accept the parking costs and pay for them (doing so would cost additional money on streetscaping, subsidizing shopping, making the parks nicer, etc.)

None of those options are great from a conservative perspective, but that's the reality if you want office skyscrapers to be built in Milwaukee.

Right now, all we are doing is the first and last points. If we don't work on the other points, we aren't going to get very far. To me, that is the greatest argument for enhanced transit.

Any conservative on this site, obviously loves skyscrapers and wants to see Milwaukee have more of them.

However, the reason more aren't built in downtown Milwaukee is because they all need to self-park themselves and currently a structured parking space costs apr. $25,000 to built. The parking rates in downtown Milwaukee are not high enough to allow a developer to recover their costs. Therefore, here are the options to get more skyscrapers built (and probably a combination of these is needed):

- Have the City subsidize every office development to pay for its parking
- Increase the price of parking by reducing the supply or raising fees so that parking spaces begin to pay for themselves
- Increase transit options to downtown so that fewer spaces are needed for new office development
- Make downtown so desirable that companies will eventually accept the parking costs and pay for them (doing so would cost additional money on streetscaping, subsidizing shopping, making the parks nicer, etc.)

None of those options are great from a conservative perspective, but that's the reality if you want office skyscrapers to be built in Milwaukee.

Right now, all we are doing is the first and last points. If we don't work on the other points, we aren't going to get very far. To me, that is the greatest argument for enhanced transit.

Exactly. I don't understand how Skyking is such a fan of skyscrapers, but doesn't quite grasp that extremely simple concept. Show me a city with tall 50+ story buildings that doesn't have some form of rail mass transit. And his veiled personal attacks/labels are annoying and childish.

If I understand MilwaukeeD's point, if there is a reason why Milwaukee is lacking more high-rise skyscrapers, it is because Milwaukee doesn't have a light-rail system.

Well, let's take Minneapolis as an example. The first portion of the Twin Cities's light-rail system didn't come on line until 2004. And the tallest skyscrapers built in Minneapolis were all built at least 12 years before that. No tall skyscrapers have been built in Minneapolis since 2004. So based on that example, MilwaukeeD's point is not valid.

If Milwaukee had a light-rail system, would Manpower and Northwestern Mutual had built new towers downtown? Maybe, but I don't think light-rail would have been THE deciding factor. Then again, we'll never know will we.

Would the proposed new USBank Tower had been built if Milwaukee already had a light-rail system? More specifically, would the new USBank Tower been able to find a tenant to lease 250,000 sq. ft. because Milwaukee had a light-rail system?

Actually a new fully developed light-rail system in Milwaukee would be a very nice amenity for the city. But I seriously doubt the light-rail system would magically spawn a new batch of 40 and 50 story skyscrapers in downtown. And based on the Minneapolis example I gave, a city I think that is headquarters to more major corporations than Milwaukee, light-rail won't do that.

And MilwaukeeD, if I misunderstood your point from your post, I apologize.

dbl post

If I understand MilwaukeeD's point, if there is a reason why Milwaukee is lacking more high-rise skyscrapers, it is because Milwaukee doesn't have a light-rail system.

Well, let's take Minneapolis as an example. The first portion of the Twin Cities's light-rail system didn't come on line until 2004. And the tallest skyscrapers built in Minneapolis were all built at least 12 years before that. No tall skyscrapers have been built in Minneapolis since 2004. So based on that example, MilwaukeeD's point is not valid.

If Milwaukee had a light-rail system, would Manpower and Northwestern Mutual had built new towers downtown? Maybe, but I don't think light-rail would have been THE deciding factor. Then again, we'll never know will we.

Would the proposed new USBank Tower had been built if Milwaukee already had a light-rail system? More specifically, would the new USBank Tower been able to find a tenant to lease 250,000 sq. ft. because Milwaukee had a light-rail system?

Actually a new fully developed light-rail system in Milwaukee would be a very nice amenity for the city. But I seriously doubt the light-rail system would magically spawn a new batch of 40 and 50 story skyscrapers in downtown. And based on the Minneapolis example I gave, a city I think that is headquarters to more major corporations than Milwaukee, light-rail won't do that.

And MilwaukeeD, if I misunderstood your point from your post, I apologize.


Transit isn't magic but would sure improve the business climate!!!!!! Not to mention create a viable means for people to get from one place to another not just to work.

TRANSIT AND SKYSCRAPERS..... WHAT A CONCEPT!!!!!!!!!!!!

If I understand MilwaukeeD's point, if there is a reason why Milwaukee is lacking more high-rise skyscrapers, it is because Milwaukee doesn't have a light-rail system.

Well, let's take Minneapolis as an example. The first portion of the Twin Cities's light-rail system didn't come on line until 2004. And the tallest skyscrapers built in Minneapolis were all built at least 12 years before that. No tall skyscrapers have been built in Minneapolis since 2004. So based on that example, MilwaukeeD's point is not valid.

If Milwaukee had a light-rail system, would Manpower and Northwestern Mutual had built new towers downtown? Maybe, but I don't think light-rail would have been THE deciding factor. Then again, we'll never know will we.

Would the proposed new USBank Tower had been built if Milwaukee already had a light-rail system? More specifically, would the new USBank Tower been able to find a tenant to lease 250,000 sq. ft. because Milwaukee had a light-rail system?

Actually a new fully developed light-rail system in Milwaukee would be a very nice amenity for the city. But I seriously doubt the light-rail system would magically spawn a new batch of 40 and 50 story skyscrapers in downtown. And based on the Minneapolis example I gave, a city I think that is headquarters to more major corporations than Milwaukee, light-rail won't do that.

And MilwaukeeD, if I misunderstood your point from your post, I apologize.

You did misunderstand. I didn't say that we don't have new skyscrapers because we don't have rail. I said we don't have new ones because of the cost of parking. I offered up better transit as one of four possible options to addressing the parking/cost situation.

For the life of me I cannot understand how you go through life with such a tribalist disdain for everyone around you. We're talking about trolleys.... *trolleys*.

I do love that video with the bridges, it makes me feel that there is still so much potential for our river.

It's not the trolleys -- it's the TAXES. Don't you get it? Perpetual taxes on something that is very questionable. You can lay as many tracks as you'd like...just don't ask me to pay for it.

If I understand MilwaukeeD's point, if there is a reason why Milwaukee is lacking more high-rise skyscrapers, it is because Milwaukee doesn't have a light-rail system.

Well, let's take Minneapolis as an example. The first portion of the Twin Cities's light-rail system didn't come on line until 2004. And the tallest skyscrapers built in Minneapolis were all built at least 12 years before that. No tall skyscrapers have been built in Minneapolis since 2004. So based on that example, MilwaukeeD's point is not valid.

If Milwaukee had a light-rail system, would Manpower and Northwestern Mutual had built new towers downtown? Maybe, but I don't think light-rail would have been THE deciding factor. Then again, we'll never know will we.

Would the proposed new USBank Tower had been built if Milwaukee already had a light-rail system? More specifically, would the new USBank Tower been able to find a tenant to lease 250,000 sq. ft. because Milwaukee had a light-rail system?

Actually a new fully developed light-rail system in Milwaukee would be a very nice amenity for the city. But I seriously doubt the light-rail system would magically spawn a new batch of 40 and 50 story skyscrapers in downtown. And based on the Minneapolis example I gave, a city I think that is headquarters to more major corporations than Milwaukee, light-rail won't do that.

And MilwaukeeD, if I misunderstood your point from your post, I apologize.

Thank you for shooting huge holes into the silly assertion that trolleys=high rises. Actually, the higher our taxes get, the more businesses -- and people -- look to move out. That's a large part of what's preventing construction of major buildings downtown, not the absence of a train.

Thank you for shooting huge holes into the silly assertion that trolleys=high rises. Actually, the higher our taxes get, the more businesses -- and people -- look to move out. That's a large part of what's preventing construction of major buildings downtown, not the absence of a train.

So you are completely avoiding my argument? Again, I did not say that lack of fixed rail is the problem, I said that the cost of parking spaces needed for skyscrapers is the problem. Better transit is one of many options to address that. What suggestions do you have to deal with the parking issue so that we can all get the skyscrapers that we want?

It's not the trolleys -- it's the TAXES. Don't you get it? Perpetual taxes on something that is very questionable. You can lay as many tracks as you'd like...just don't ask me to pay for it.

Well yes, whenever there is a non-rival and non-excludable service it generally falls on the public to share the cost because there isn't a reasonable or justifiable profit model. So, for that I don't mind paying a tax. The true question that we are all trying to get at is return on investment. If economic development were to increase in that loop even mildly, I think the additional tax base would offset. Does anyone have any estimates for economic impact?

What I don't understand is the position that any and all money for roads is a boon to the economy, but a small amount of money for rail is some sort of extremist position to throw away taxpayer money on a pipedream. It's not like rail is some new unproven platform.

Bus systems cost a lot of money as well - 'perpetually' if you will.

There is actually an over abundance of parking downtown... thats why the cost to lease parking is so low compared to other cities. However, if a company wants their own parking to move downtown they will demand that parking be free for their workers like it is in the suburbs. Thus, they can not use existing parking because that is owned and operated by organizations that charge...thus the need to build new parking just for the new construction.

If we build more downtown and cause a greater demand on parking (and perhaps even eliminating surface lots) then the supply will drop relative to the demand, parking fees will increase, and it will make better business sense to build more parking without city assistance.

Ofcourse that is all in a perfect world where downtown doesn't have to compete with the likes of not only other cities but also the suburbs within the very same metro area.

(We can probably expect some good architecture from MIAD)

The Milwaukee Institute of Art & Design is looking for developers to provide a residence hall for 250 freshmen students near the school’s Jane Bradley Pettit Building in the city’s 3rd Ward.

MIAD president Neil Hoffman estimates the school, 273 E. Erie St., Milwaukee, will need at least an 80,000-square-foot building that can accommodate 65 two-bedroom apartments. MIAD will release a request for proposals later this month outlining the school’s housing needs.

Given the current economic downturn and its slowing of most real estate development, it is likely MIAD’s project will receive a lot of interest from Milwaukee-area developers and real estate firms.
link (http://milwaukee.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2009/03/23/story1.html)

What suggestions do you have to deal with the parking issue so that we can all get the skyscrapers that we want?

Lower taxes for businesses to locate downtown and build parking ramps. Very simple. Works all the time.

Lower taxes for businesses to locate downtown and build parking ramps. Very simple. Works all the time.

^ Are more parking ramps really what you want to see downtown? Big, giant concrete behemoths dominating the streetscape everywhere you go? Why even care about downtown Milwaukee if just becomes another suburban office park?

I know that some of you here don't think it's worth it to pay for mass transit, but, all due respect, I have to differ. A tax incentive may lure a company or two, but several municipalities can play that game. A real investment in a system that has the capacity to bring large numbers of people into a relatively small space is an investment that will give Milwaukee's downtown a real, tangible advantage over its suburban hinterland that simply can't be replicated--and that, frankly, is even better for a company than a tax break.

Anybody who disputes the need for a major investment in rail should simply look around the world. Any major city with a significantly large core of densely built structures and a significant service employment base has trains serving it. That's not 'socialism' in a way any different from how we all spend tax dollars towards highway maintanance, as people like Skyking are so hell-bent on believing--it's just reality.

I'd like to know who is going to ride this proposed trolly or LRT if you prefer to call it that?

If this proposal is just a downtown loop then really what is the use?

Does Milwaukee really need this mode of transportation if nobody is inclined to use it?

Is the city of Milwaukee going to build parking ramps at some of the stations used for this mode so the people who use this mode have a place to park their cars to use this mode?

^^^
I know it is a convoluted question but then it needed to be asked.

Since the city of Milwaukee is going to pay to have this mode what will happen to all the empty parking lots in downtown because of all the use of the new parking ramps being used to support the new mode being used to bring workers to work downtown?

So these empty parking lots will be sold to developers to build new towers or will they end up being deserted plots of land?

So when will the decision be made to increase ridership that another line or three be added (so this money trap as some may refer to this mode of transport) will make some money?

Will the city add some parking facilities at those new stations too?

I know these questions are convoluted. But really has anyone even thought about the other costs associated with building a mode of transport that may not even be used that much?

I just thought I'd ask.

Why are you so convinced that no one will ride it? Over 77,000 people work downtown everyday, 20,000 people live downtown and millions visit downtown each year. The Bradley Center and Summerfest Grounds each attract over 1 million people a year alone. There are about 800,000 hotel night stays in downtown every year.

All of these people, whether they arrive downtown without a car or they park their car somewhere downtown, have a need to get around downtown. Just because downtown may not be a part of your daily life and you are unlikely to use transit downtown on a daily basis, doesn't mean that there aren't easily over one hundred thousand people that would be positively impacted by a streetcar (whether they ride it themselves, or whether additional parking is made available downtown because other are riding it).

Regarding what will happen to surface parking lots. Of course they will be sold for development. That is one of the greatest benefits: land becomes more developable, thus bringing more residents/workers downtown, thus increasing the tax base and vitality of downtown, etc.

Regarding lowering taxes for businesses to move downtown: The city only really controls one tax, the property tax. Few downtown businesses directly pay the property tax, instead they pay for it indirectly through their rent. Thus, the easiest way to attract a business is by reducing their rent. The main way this can be done is through TIF, typically to pay for parking, because downtown office rents are not unreasonable at all compared to the rest of SE Wisconsin. It's the parking that detracts companies.

So again, you either pay for parking, you pay for transit or you pay for both. Without going back to research all of the most recent Minneapolis office towers, I would say that it is very likely that the city assisted in paying for those towers (or really, their parking decks). I know for sure that Target received pretty generous assistance.

I'd like to know who is going to ride this proposed trolly or LRT if you prefer to call it that?

I just thought I'd ask.
I know I will when in Milwaukee! :wave:

^ Are more parking ramps really what you want to see downtown? Big, giant concrete behemoths dominating the streetscape everywhere you go?


Yes! If done properly and architected into the structure, one will not even know a parking structure exists. We have plenty of examples currently in our city. These can be complimented with street shopping and other pedestrian friendly accompaniments. Believe it or not, people enjoy driving their cars door to door from where ever they originate. Individuals relying on mass transit are the vast minority in a city our size. Another poster brought up a great point; will you lobby for large surface parking lots next to the trolley substations on the perimeter of the downtown? Is this now ok so long as one gets their personal and highly subsidized transportation?

I'd like to know who is going to ride this proposed trolly or LRT if you prefer to call it that?



I too will take it for a ride. Seems like it will be a lot of fun. I like riding the roller coaster at 6-Flags too but don't want one as major transportation and don't want to pay for that either.

The main question I forgot to ask is...

If this is such an important and necessary mode of inner city transportation why not put it up for a public referendum and let the public vote (citizens of the city) to see if this a project that is worthy of the investment needed to put in this mode of transportation from the drawing board to a working mode of transport?

I too will take it for a ride. Seems like it will be a lot of fun. I like riding the roller coaster at 6-Flags too but don't want one as major transportation and don't want to pay for that either.

It seems to me that a lot of people will be taken for a ride:lol::lol:

It seems to me that a lot of people will be taken for a ride:lol::lol:

Good one!

@Boatnurd

"Yes! If done properly and architected into the structure, one will not even know a parking structure exists. We have plenty of examples currently in our city."

No we don't. 1000 N Water is ok I guess (little streetlife) but generally a developer will build the cheapest garage they can get away with, because parking garages are expensive. And please don't think we're going to see any significant underground garages built anytime soon, because that is really really expensive. (like 50k per spot)

"Believe it or not, people enjoy driving their cars door to door from where ever they originate."

Not everyone. And quite frankly that should not be a goal for any city.

"Individuals relying on mass transit are the vast minority in a city our size. "

Could that be because we've cut service and raised fares? Could it be we don't have many options? Uh yes it is. Other cities have shown you can change the percentages.

"Another poster brought up a great point; will you lobby for large surface parking lots next to the trolley substations on the perimeter of the downtown?"

No! We already have massive lots all over downtown. With some luck these will be reduced. Downtown has plenty of parking.

@MJinOshkosh Are road projects put up for referendum? Of course not.

"I'd like to know who is going to ride this proposed trolly or LRT if you prefer to call it that?"

I am. I'm one of those 20,000 downtown residents.

"Does Milwaukee really need this mode of transportation if nobody is inclined to use it?" huh? Just because you might not be inclined to use it doesn't mean that residents of Milwaukee aren't.

"So these empty parking lots will be sold to developers to build new towers or will they end up being deserted plots of land?"

Parking lots are deserted plots of land..

"So when will the decision be made to increase ridership that another line or three be added will make some money?" No form of transportation makes money. None. And hopefully it would be expanded eventually.

@MJinOshkosh Are road projects put up for referendum? Of course not.



"I'd like to know who is going to ride this proposed trolly or LRT if you prefer to call it that?"

I am. I'm one of those 20,000 downtown residents.

"Does Milwaukee really need this mode of transportation if nobody is inclined to use it?" huh? Just because you might not be inclined to use it doesn't mean that residents of Milwaukee aren't.

"So these empty parking lots will be sold to developers to build new towers or will they end up being deserted plots of land?"

Parking lots are deserted plots of land..

"So when will the decision be made to increase ridership that another line or three be added will make some money?" No form of transportation makes money. None. And hopefully it would be expanded eventually.

1. My reply is why not have a referrendum on the (LRT if you prefer). Why put in this system if no one will have the access to use it except those with in this proposed loop. And yes I realize that most public use projects aren't put up to referrendums ( Schools being an exception) but maybe they should be.

2. What about those who live in West Allis? Maybe they want to ride it too. But wait.... they have to ride in from West Allis... and find a place to park.... then pay the fee to ride this LRT.
Now this loop might be fine for those 20,000or so people who live in the downtown area but isn't Milwaukee city limits go's up to the Waukesha county boarder in the Northwest side of the city and they too will have to drive a distance to use this LRT as well.

3. I never did say that if I lived within the area this loop will be built that I wouldn't take the occassional ride (I live in Oshkosh) or even as a visit from the afformentioned place. But there is more land area in the city of Milwaukee than just the downtown that would have access to the LRT that have to use other forms of transportation to get to the downtown area and have no more access to this new LRT than someone from say Oshkosh.

4. Well.... Is Park East being developed as fast as would like?
And some of those lots are used for parking. Let's see parking rates down in the Loop in Chicago run as low as $20 to more than $40+ per day. Like to see those rates in Milwaukee too?

5. Can anyplace afford an extavigence that only a few will use for maybe just the summer for those of us that only go to Downtown one or maybe twice a year.
Mean, I would think that if you are going to invest in something that you would have a good return on your investment.

Now, don't get me wrong Skyking I am not opposed to a better form or mode of transportation. But I also want to look at a broader picture than to just build something. I don't care if the money put forward was granted through a federal pork barrel spending measure or if there was another form of financing that was put in place to make this mode happen. Questions have to be asked and some of those questions have to be answered. I don't believe that the people in this country or state or county or city have the money to waste on something that questions as to how this mode is going to benefit the whole community. Milwaukee is more... much much more than just a small loop around downtown Milwaukee where they plan to put this LRT in.

Again, I just thought I would ask. :)

sorry, I meant Twoaday not Skyking. again I appologize for the wrong name.

1 Funny this is only brought up for rail, when we start doing that for roads / freeways then sure.

2 Did you miss the fact that 77,000 people work downtown as well (look at MilwaukeeDs numbers)?? Further the point isn't that it will go everywhere and serve everyone (directly), it doesn't have the funding for that. But it is a start, with the hope of lines coming off it. Now this won't ever go to West Allis (its a streetcar) but to other parts of the City of Milwaukee, yes.

3 Yup it doesn't connect to the entire city, county, or state either. It is a start. But what is lost on this "it doesn't help everyone discussion" is that if you build a stronger core that helps the entire city and the county it resides in which incidentally is what they've done in Portland and Seattle.

4 Yes I'd like to see parking rates in Milwaukee start at $20 a day, instead of $6. That would mean the area is being developed, with some luck most of the surface lots would be gone. Milwaukee County (go figure) has done its best to slow development of the Park East. Interestingly enough though the streetcar could encourage development in the PE. Further I don't believe any of the actual land from the former Park East is being used as parking. There are some lots in the PE redevelopment area, but those existed when the freeway was there.

5 With the amount of money allocated you can't build a full system, so to spend it on a downtown system, or one that went up to the East Side, or one that went down in Third Ward are the most likely to get the best return. The return in this case is increased density, economic development, enhanced tax base, reduced vehicle miles traveled, reduced vehicle trips taken, and oddly more parking for those who want to come to the area being served.

^^^

again, I didn't say I'm against better modes of transportation. But I will stand by that questions need to be asked. This is the reason why we have a democracy to ask questions to officials as to why they spend our tax money like they do. When there is a major local public interest in a project then maybe a referrendum on ballot better serves the public interest than to depend on an elected official who may or maynot be paid for by a special interest to vote on this project.

Mass transit, whether it be rail or buses will lower the amount of drunken driving along with increasing businesses and jobs.

@Mj
"When there is a major local public interest in a project then maybe a referrendum on ballot better serves the public interest than to depend on an elected official who may or maynot be paid for by a special interest to vote on this project."

Ahh yes the big, influential and well funded streetcar special interest. Funny.

@Mj
"When there is a major local public interest in a project then maybe a referrendum on ballot better serves the public interest than to depend on an elected official who may or maynot be paid for by a special interest to vote on this project."

Ahh yes the big, influential and well funded streetcar special interest. Funny.

:lol: Funny how nothing ever gets done when you lay a comment on a single word. It could just as easily be the cement interest. Again, I never said that I would be against a better mode of transportation. Questions need to be asked and the problem lays in listening to what others with a different point may have to say on the subject.

State to seek full cost of Milwaukee to Madison rail (http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/41608122.html)

"State officials are seeking federal stimulus money to pay the full $519 million cost of a proposed 110-mph Milwaukee-to-Madison passenger train line, not just part of it, Gov. Jim Doyle says.

If the grant is approved, trains could be running as soon as late 2012 or early 2013, cutting the travel time between Wisconsin's two largest cities to 1 hour, 7 minutes, officials say. That's about 20 minutes faster than the same trip by automobile, depending on traffic.

Service would start with six daily round trips, connecting Milwaukee's downtown Amtrak-Greyhound station with a new station at Madison's Dane County Regional Airport, with additional stops in Brookfield, Oconomowoc and Watertown.

At the same time, service on Amtrak's Milwaukee-to-Chicago Hiawatha line would increase from the current seven daily round trips to 10, with all of the Madison-to-Milwaukee trains continuing to Chicago. If Chicago wins its bid for the 2016 Olympics, the trains would provide a link between the main Olympic sites and the cycling venues in Madison."

Why are you so convinced that no one will ride it? Over 77,000 people work downtown everyday, 20,000 people live downtown and millions visit downtown each year. The Bradley Center and Summerfest Grounds each attract over 1 million people a year alone. There are about 800,000 hotel night stays in downtown every year.

All of these people, whether they arrive downtown without a car or they park their car somewhere downtown, have a need to get around downtown. Just because downtown may not be a part of your daily life and you are unlikely to use transit downtown on a daily basis, doesn't mean that there aren't easily over one hundred thousand people that would be positively impacted by a streetcar (whether they ride it themselves, or whether additional parking is made available downtown because other are riding it).

Regarding what will happen to surface parking lots. Of course they will be sold for development. That is one of the greatest benefits: land becomes more developable, thus bringing more residents/workers downtown, thus increasing the tax base and vitality of downtown, etc.

Regarding lowering taxes for businesses to move downtown: The city only really controls one tax, the property tax. Few downtown businesses directly pay the property tax, instead they pay for it indirectly through their rent. Thus, the easiest way to attract a business is by reducing their rent. The main way this can be done is through TIF, typically to pay for parking, because downtown office rents are not unreasonable at all compared to the rest of SE Wisconsin. It's the parking that detracts companies.

So again, you either pay for parking, you pay for transit or you pay for both. Without going back to research all of the most recent Minneapolis office towers, I would say that it is very likely that the city assisted in paying for those towers (or really, their parking decks). I know for sure that Target received pretty generous assistance.

What kind of proof do you have for your inflated numbers here? Really, 77,000 and 20,000?

What kind of proof do you have for your inflated numbers here? Really, 77,000 and 20,000?

A search of the 2000 US Census indicates 20,967 people lived in the 53202 zip code.

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFFacts?_event=&geo_id=86000US53202&_geoContext=01000US%7C86000US53202&_street=&_county=&_cityTown=&_state=&_zip=53202&_lang=en&_sse=on&ActiveGeoDiv=&_useEV=&pctxt=fph&pgsl=860&_submenuId=factsheet_1&ds_name=null&_ci_nbr=null&qr_name=null&reg=null%3Anull&_keyword=&_industry=&show_2003_tab=&redirect=Y

What kind of proof do you have for your inflated numbers here? Really, 77,000 and 20,000?

And this extensive market study of downtown Milwaukee done by the UW-Extension, while a few years old, has good data: http://www.uwex.edu/ces/cced/downtowns/bid21.cfm

The numbers from here are based on the census, which we learned recently, actually underestimates Milwaukee's numbers. But in all of this, it really depends on what your definition of downtown is, whether it be the boundary shown in that report, the 53202 zip code, etc.

MJ, I have no problem with referendums, but only if they are done for all transportation projects. Would have been nice to put the Marquette Interchange and the coming I-94 expansion to a vote as well.

Doyle seeks full cost of faster train line (http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/41608122.html)
By Larry Sandler and Patrick Marley of the Journal Sentinel
Posted: Mar. 20, 2009

http://media.journalinteractive.com/images/TRAINS21G.jpg
Milwaukee-Madison route

State officials are seeking federal stimulus money to pay the full $519 million cost of a proposed 110-mph Milwaukee-to-Madison passenger train line, not just part of it, Gov. Jim Doyle says.

If the grant is approved, trains could be running as soon as late 2012 or early 2013, cutting the travel time between Wisconsin's two largest cities to 1 hour, 7 minutes, officials say. That's about 20 minutes faster than the same trip by automobile, depending on traffic.

Service would start with six daily round trips, connecting Milwaukee's downtown Amtrak-Greyhound station with a new station at Madison's Dane County Regional Airport, with additional stops in Brookfield, Oconomowoc and Watertown.

At the same time, service on Amtrak's Milwaukee-to-Chicago Hiawatha line would increase from the current seven daily round trips to 10, with all of the Madison-to-Milwaukee trains continuing to Chicago. If Chicago wins its bid for the 2016 Olympics, the trains would provide a link between the main Olympic sites and the cycling venues in Madison.

But even without the Olympics, authorities expect the Milwaukee-to-Madison trains to carry 1.08 million riders a year within a couple years after service starts, said Randy Wade, the state's passenger rail chief. Hiawatha ridership jumped 24% last year, to 766,167.

Republicans have been critical of the possibility that the state would have to pick up part of the operating costs of the new train line, regardless of how much the federal government pays to establish the route. Early plans predicted fares would cover all operating costs within a few years after service started. But Wade backed away from that projection, saying only that operating costs remained under study.

The Milwaukee-to-Madison route is part of the Wisconsin-led Midwest Regional Rail Initiative, a nine-state effort to connect cities throughout America's heartland with fast, frequent passenger trains. But the plans drawn up in the mid to late 1990s were moving slowly until the stimulus package appropriated $8 billion for high-speed rail nationwide.

Now Doyle and Transportation Secretary Frank Busalacchi are enthusiastic about the route's prospects.

Previously, the state had planned to apply for $137 million to upgrade tracks on just a portion of the route, from Milwaukee to Watertown, and to build a freight rail bypass to improve passenger service on the Hiawatha line.

But that was when state officials thought the stimulus bill would include a little more than $1 billion for high-speed rail. After they saw that figure had soared to $8 billion in the final deal, they set their sights higher.

With so much money available from the federal government, Doyle said, Wisconsin has a good chance of getting money to upgrade tracks all the way to Madison. Stimulus money also may be available for preliminary work on the next stage of the line, which would go to St. Paul.

"I don't want to get ahead of myself, because we're going to have to apply for this money, but Wisconsin is particularly well-situated," Doyle said. "We are one of the few states in the country - and I think we're talking about no more than two or three states - that actually have so-called shovel-ready projects ready to go, meaning design work is done, right-of-way is there and environmental permits have been met, have been issued."

Outside the Midwest, 10 other regions are competing for high-speed rail dollars. But Busalacchi said he expected the Milwaukee-to-Madison project to benefit from the backing of Democratic U.S. Reps. David Obey (D-Wausau) and Jim Oberstar of Minnesota. In the House, Obey is chairman of the Appropriations Committee and Oberstar is chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Doyle, a major backer of President Barack Obama during the campaign, was among the governors who advised Obama on how to shape the stimulus. And Doyle has said he talked to Obey repeatedly, sometimes several times a day, while the legislation was being drafted.

Future plans call for high-speed rail on three other Wisconsin routes, including:

Madison to St. Paul: The Wisconsin portion of this segment would cost $456 million. Intermediate stops for the six daily round trips would include Portage, Wisconsin Dells, Tomah, La Crosse and the Minnesota cities of Winona and Red Wing.

Milwaukee to Green Bay: This route would cost $421 million. Trains would run seven daily round trips, with intermediate stops on Milwaukee's northwest side and in West Bend, Fond du Lac, Oshkosh and Neenah, in the Appleton area.

Milwaukee to Chicago: Upgrading the Wisconsin portion of the current Hiawatha route to 110-mph service would cost $419 million, serving the existing stations downtown, at Mitchell International Airport and in Sturtevant and Glenview, Ill. Once that's done, service would jump to 17 round trips daily, with seven trains continuing to Green Bay and 10 continuing to Madison, with six of the Madison-bound trains continuing to St. Paul.

Even before the full upgrade, the freight rail bypass would allow Milwaukee-to-Chicago service to increase to eight round trips daily. That part of the cost is included in the $519 million Madison-to-Milwaukee price tag. Also, the federal government and Canadian Pacific Railway are splitting the $10 million cost of track improvements this year on the Milwaukee-to-Chicago route.

For the long-term plan to work, neighboring states must compete successfully for their share of the federal rail money, Doyle said.

"I hope that you'll see a broader Midwest effort made here, because ultimately the vision is a Midwest rail linkage through Chicago by which you could go to St. Louis, Detroit, Cleveland (and) Minneapolis through Milwaukee and Madison," Doyle said.

Technically, the Midwestern trains wouldn't meet the international standard for high-speed rail, which is closer to 220 mph, well above even the 150 mph top speed of America's fastest train, Amtrak's Acela line in the northeast, said Rick Harnish, executive director of the Midwest High Speed Rail Association. Leaders of the Midwestern effort have said 110 mph service would be more affordable than true high-speed rail.

Anyone else really not dig a lot of Milwaukee's riverfront condo developments? A lot of them are like 2-3 stories, tops, and extremely heavy on the concrete... Is Milwaukee letting anything get built?

Anyone else really not dig a lot of Milwaukee's riverfront condo developments? A lot of them are like 2-3 stories, tops, and extremely heavy on the concrete... Is Milwaukee letting anything get built?


What project are you specifically referring to? Pictures?

@Badgers77 I assume you are referring to the Beerline and it was the neighbors who stopped the buildings from going higher. The edge was going to be at least 2 stories taller for sure.

@MJinOshkosh Questions need to be asked? Of course. There will be public input taken on the project, like anything the city does (note the discussion on the Beerline above). But like MilwaukeeD (and I said this early) sure yes to referendum for all major transportation projects. Why single out the streetcar? So yes lets have referendums for I94 Expansion (2 Billion), Zoo Interchange (800 million).... Then sure the streetcar as well..(less than 100 million).

Twoaday, I didn't single out streetcars for a referrendum it is just the current subject being discussed. I am not against referrendums for roads. They too should be put up for public vote.

Doyle seeks full cost of faster train line (http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/41608122.html)
By Larry Sandler and Patrick Marley of the Journal Sentinel
Posted: Mar. 20, 2009

http://media.journalinteractive.com/images/TRAINS21G.jpg
Milwaukee-Madison route
Not in the Isthmus area (where their biggest Madison-area destination market is)?

:ohno:

Milwaukee to Green Bay: This route would cost $421 million. Trains would run seven daily round trips, with intermediate stops on Milwaukee's northwest side and in West Bend, Fond du Lac, Oshkosh and Neenah, in the Appleton area.
???

That one isn't going to fly very far around here without a stop in downtown Appleton. :no:

Also, about the previous discussions about taking that grade (West Bend to downtown FdL) back from the trail guys.... :eek:

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

We shall see, that's a lot of 'free' money being talked about.

Mike

^^
I thought they originally talked about stops in Oshkosh, Neenah and Appleton. Granted, three stops seems like a lot for that metro area. Neenah and Appleton stops seem redundant because of their close proximity. I think the Appleton stop would make more sense than Neenah.

Not in the Isthmus area (where their biggest Madison-area destination market is)?

Unfortunately, since this is eventually going to be a high-speed route from Chicago to the Twin Cities, the Isthmus is out of the way...it wouldn't make sense to dip down there and then go back out...you'd lose at least a half hour and for thru traffic it would be very inconvenient. Madison will have to run some type of shuttle from the airport to the isthmus. Something like that would be nice anyway for people trying to get to and from the airport.

Unfortunately, since this is eventually going to be a high-speed route from Chicago to the Twin Cities, the Isthmus is out of the way...it wouldn't make sense to dip down there and then go back out...you'd lose at least a half hour and for thru traffic it would be very inconvenient. Madison will have to run some type of shuttle from the airport to the isthmus. Something like that would be nice anyway for people trying to get to and from the airport.

Yes, to get to the isthmus of Madison, the train would have to "back in" and then continue on. I don't know that you'd lose a half hour, but it would be 10-15 minutes at least. The plan to get it to the airport uses the "U-turn" track at 1st & Washington, which is less than two miles from the Capitol. So that's only two miles of backing up and then two miles of going forward.

Madison has been looking at commuter rail, which I believe would connect the airport with the isthmus. Presumably they'd time it to coincide with the Milwaukee train. Obviously it isn't as convenient as a one-seat ride, but it does get you downtown.


I thought they originally talked about stops in Oshkosh, Neenah and Appleton. Granted, three stops seems like a lot for that metro area. Neenah and Appleton stops seem redundant because of their close proximity. I think the Appleton stop would make more sense than Neenah.

The MWRRI (http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/state/docs/mwrri-wi-brochure.pdf) envisions stops in both Neenah and Appleton. That makes sense to me, since both areas are dense and have business districts.

Madison has been looking at commuter rail, which I believe would connect the airport with the isthmus. Presumably they'd time it to coincide with the Milwaukee train. Obviously it isn't as convenient as a one-seat ride, but it does get you downtown.


Unfortunately, the proposed commuter rail does not connect to the airport. It may be possible for a future route to branch off to the airport though.

Mass transit, whether it be rail or buses will lower the amount of drunken driving along with increasing businesses and jobs.

Of course. Very good points you make. In fact, any form of mass transit -- especially trains -- will not only reduce drunk driving and create millions of businesses and jobs, it will also cure cancer, rid the world of hatred and help us all live in harmony as one spirit in a peaceful universe. Sorry to be just a tad sarcastic (as I've been known to be on rare occasions), but on what do you base such sweeping generalizations?

A search of the 2000 US Census indicates 20,967 people lived in the 53202 zip code.

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFFacts?_event=&geo_id=86000US53202&_geoContext=01000US%7C86000US53202&_street=&_county=&_cityTown=&_state=&_zip=53202&_lang=en&_sse=on&ActiveGeoDiv=&_useEV=&pctxt=fph&pgsl=860&_submenuId=factsheet_1&ds_name=null&_ci_nbr=null&qr_name=null&reg=null%3Anull&_keyword=&_industry=&show_2003_tab=&redirect=Y

Good enough. But how do you know the number of people working downtown?

I was in Milwaukee today for the first time in a long while and I don't see why so many of you hate the Breakwater. It doesn't add much to the lake view, but coming towards downtown on the street, it looks pretty nifty, and doesn't look too shabby at all up close either. I actually like it quite a bit.

Of course. Very good points you make. In fact, any form of mass transit -- especially trains -- will not only reduce drunk driving and create millions of businesses and jobs, it will also cure cancer, rid the world of hatred and help us all live in harmony as one spirit in a peaceful universe. Sorry to be just a tad sarcastic (as I've been known to be on rare occasions), but on what do you base such sweeping generalizations?

When, exactly, did you unplug your brain? I'm beginning to suspect you're actually a plant by those you supposedly oppose. You're certainly their (our) easiest foil.
Carry on. Your musings fill a void left by the long gone presence of Cliff Claven.

The amount of people employed in Milwaukee's cbd is fairly accurate as stated by MilwaukeeD at roughly 77,000. A study was recently done to figure out the amount of jobs in large cities cbd's. As with the residential population.
Just dont know where to find the links.

The amount of people employed in Milwaukee's cbd is fairly accurate as stated by MilwaukeeD at roughly 77,000. A study was recently done to figure out the amount of jobs in large cities cbd's. As with the residential population.
Just dont know where to find the links.

Downtown Milwaukee has about 16,000 residents and 78,000 employees (including 54,000 white collar workers and 24,000 blue collar workers).

http://www.biztimes.com/news/2009/3/20/real-estate-bid-will-recruit-retailers-for-downtown

Unfortunately, the proposed commuter rail does not connect to the airport. It may be possible for a future route to branch off to the airport though.
You are correct. I had been looking at old information and did not see the 2008 New Starts Application (http://www.transport2020.net/).

This makes me think they need to have two stations; one in downtown and one at the airport. Madison needs rail transit to get regional travellers downtown. Too bad the airport would logically be the terminal station until the MSP link is created.

Good enough. But how do you know the number of people working downtown?

I guess this is a few years older than the article shared by EastSider, but having extra sources never hurt:

Table 5.2 in the following link: 78,005. This is from the link that MilwaukeeD left a few posts ago. I'm just posting the link to a relevant chapter for our ready reference.

http://www.uwex.edu/ces/cced/downtowns/documents/5_milwaukee_DMA_workers.pdf

You are correct. I had been looking at old information and did not see the 2008 New Starts Application (http://www.transport2020.net/).

This makes me think they need to have two stations; one in downtown and one at the airport. Madison needs rail transit to get regional travellers downtown. Too bad the airport would logically be the terminal station until the MSP link is created.

So Madison can build a streetcar line from the airport to the Capitol.

If Kenosha can do it, anyone can.

Another recent example of the Regional Planning Authority and Mayor Barrett using some political clout for stimulus money.

JSonline.com: Regional Planning Group Delays 3 local projects (http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/41719117.html)

To establish a line to Sun Prairie before the airport is absolutely insane, in my opinion. If they are going to try to pull Chicago-ans and Milwaukee-ans in through High Speed Rail, they should worry about getting the line to the airport/rail station FIRST.

Not to mention they wouldn't even be able to take the line all the way to Sun Prairie at first...

So the $1.9 billion expansion has officially kicked off. Like the Marquette interchange the DOT has launched a website, called plan94 (http://www.plan94.org/) to follow the project.

You can see the designs and plans for the project. on the site. Milwaukee county will look like the Marquette interchange, with some design upgrades. Racine and Kenosha county will have a "Frank Lloyd Wright" influence. The airport spur has been made a "gateway".

I didn't know freeways could have architectural styles?

http://www.plan94.org/img/solutions-airport.jpg

^ $1.9 billion? And we all have to pay for that?

Hell no! This is America, if you want Socialism go to France

(right Skyking?) ;)

I didn't know freeways could have architectural styles?

http://www.plan94.org/img/solutions-airport.jpg

After viewing the webpage, the architectural styles have become my favorite part of this project. I love the details on the Marquette Interchange, the little Capitol symbols on the new Madison bridges, and even the design elements on I-94 just south of downtown Chicago. In a way, it makes traveling these roads more enjoyable.

http://www.arashakbar.com/scrap/bridge1.jpg

http://www.arashakbar.com/scrap/bridge2.jpg

^ $1.9 billion? And we all have to pay for that?

Hell no! This is America, if you want Socialism go to France

(right Skyking?) ;)

I know you're being sarcastic, but this is really how I feel. I cannot begin to understand why funding for any form of mass transit is heavily scrutinized and often put to a vote when ridiculous projects like this just get a free pass.

I couldn't give a sh!t how pretty the bridges are. I'll never see them. And yet, I'm just supposed to accept that this is for the greater good as I read about all the major auto manufacturers going out of business. While at the same time I'm supposed to put up a fight every day defending my mode of transport in a city that I love dearly while watching every city around continue to grow their transit systems.

I AM PISSED OFF!!!


Where was my vote?

Why is this being built while the KRM is still on the shelf?

Why are we planting flowers where no one will stop to smell them?


This is absolutely, without a doubt, an enormous waste of resources. Enough said.


.

interesting article about Milwaukee's new sister city, Carora.

http://www.wisn.com/news/19002580/detail.html

^^
Playing the 'Devil's Advocate' here (only in part), one can accurately say that I-94 will carry a LOT more people and commerce than either of the rail proposals can ever dream of. Also, the very economic existence of the Appleton area (as well as that of the rest of northeastern Wisconsin) is critically dependent on the continued health of I-94.

Yes, rail *IS* an important part of the overall transport mix, but I-94 here is not just a 'Milwaukee/Racine/Kenosha' project.

Mike