Milwaukee Development News [Archive] - Page 2

JPmaverick

September 12th, 2007, 02:11 AM

That's great news about the Meno Valley. Does anyone know what the master plan looks like for that area? Is it all light industrial/commercial? I know at one point there was discussion of some restaurants near Miller Park.

Also, I heard someone talk about a Disney proposal for an entertainment area from long ago? Just rumor?

Yes. CMC Heartland Partners in 2000 proposed a retail and entertainment district on the land they owned east of Miller Park. CMC held this land for over two decades and allowed the buildings to deteriorate. The city opposed the CMC plan, in part, due to CMC's reputation as land speculators and their failure to seriously pursue development plans in the past. Another reason was the city's vision of green space mixed with light industrial development to attract high-wage manufacturing jobs (and return the valley to its roots).

As expected, a protracted legal dispute ensued. The city won the ongoing condemnation proceedings and an appeal by CMC over the order to raze the dilapidated buildings. The city also won a lawsuit granting access to the site for environmental testing. CMC threatened to sue the stadium district for violating a land swap agreement (baseless) and the president of CMC warned the Brewers that their attendance would suffer if his proposal failed. (I think the Brewers have done fine on their own in that regard). In the end, CMC gave up and accepted an offer from the city to purchase the land in 2003.

Subsequently, the city completed environmental cleanup and constructed the Canal Street extension (in addition to attracting new businesses such as Palermo's and Caleffi). The city and Menomonee Valley Partners are moving forward with plans to recruit other light industrial development and create recreational facilities and parkland on this site.

---

Other proposals:

The state Legislative Audit Bureau in 2004 recommended the Brewers consider developing portions of the parking lots to attract a new owner and additional revenue. Mark Attanasio (the new owner) in 2005 requested proposals for a hotel, restaurants, sports bars, and retail. Any development would need the approval of the city, state, and stadium district and, predictably, there was a mixed reaction from local officials:

The stadium district is interested in pursuing options. Mayor Barrett and County Executive Walker are open to a discussion. Alderman D’Amato stated an entertainment complex at Miller Park would damage establishments downtown and in areas near the stadium. Common Council president Willie Hines and Dept. of City Development commissioner Rocky Marcoux are opposed, citing a need for the city to conform to the Menomonee Valley development plan for light industrial development.

To date, no serious proposals have materialized for the parking lots surrounding Miller Park.

West Milwaukee, however, has done an incredible job of attracting retail, restaurants, and bars to vacant industrial parcels in the village near Miller Park. These businesses benefit from the proximity to the stadium, but primarily serve as a destination for the growing residential population. Arguments have been made that this area is better suited for a hotel and additional entertainment venues due to the isolation of Miller Park. Alternatively, other arguments have been made that the growing work population in the Menomonee Valley could contribute year-round to an entertainment district at Miller Park.

Welcome to Milwaukee. :)

NeuBrew

September 12th, 2007, 03:27 PM

Great reply, thanks JP!

I think the mixed greenspace and light industrial makes sense for that area, but when you have the Harley Museum, Casino, and Miller Park all on the parcel I would think that some entertainment/retail would make sense.

brewcityfan

September 13th, 2007, 08:29 AM

Yeah - welcome to Milwaukee...the place where arguing is top priority on our minds! :lol:

Coldwake

September 13th, 2007, 05:24 PM

brewcityfan

September 13th, 2007, 06:04 PM

OK... the Breakwater is boooorrrriiiinnngggg looking... but after looking at the website the unit layouts are pretty nice. Especially for the money! Plus I LOVE the huge balcony's. I'm not surprised they've sold so many units already.

Was the original rendering that's on SSC the exact design of the building, or did they change it to something more bland?

Markitect

September 13th, 2007, 06:30 PM

Was the original rendering that's on SSC the exact design of the building, or did they change it to something more bland?

It's the same terribly ugly design, with a couple slight modifications--a few of the balconies were removed, and the base changed colors from a grayish-red to white.

Steely Dan

September 13th, 2007, 06:34 PM

could someone please repost the rendering for the breakwater, or post a link to where i could take a look at it. thanks in advance.

Coldwake

September 13th, 2007, 06:46 PM

I don't have a pic to directly link... but here is their website again.

http://www.breakwater-condominiums.com/

This is definitely a case of function over form...

Steely Dan

September 13th, 2007, 06:52 PM

^ muchos gracias.

she sure ain't gonna be winning any beauty contests, but it's just ugly enough to almost be a little cool (intentional ugliness).

NLouisianaJay

September 13th, 2007, 07:14 PM

http://www.breakwater-condominiums.com/video.html

brewcityfan

September 14th, 2007, 12:34 AM

Well, I hope people are happy...

Developer's revised Park East plans include 2 hotels

Rebuffed in its request for tax incremental financing (TIF) assistance from the City of Milwaukee, Chicago-based developer RSC & Associates has submitted a new development proposal for a vacant two-acre block in the Park East Freeway corridor bordered by Milwaukee, Jefferson and Lyon streets and Ogden Avenue.

The company's new, $65 million, 288,825-square-foot proposal calls for two extended-stay hotels, five townhomes and a 100-unit apartment building. Parking would be centralized in the interior of the block. The project also includes 6,880 square feet of retail space.

The hotels would have 228 total rooms. RSC has been planning to have a Hyatt Place boutique hotel in the development. The company's latest plans show a Hyatt Place hotel and a Hyatt Summerfield Suites hotel.

RSC revised its plans for the block after city officials balked at the firm's request for $9 million in TIF assistance. The company's previous $70 million, 481,000-square-foot development plan for the block included 127 residential units, a 143-room Hyatt Place hotel and 80,150 square feet of retail space. City officials said they did not want to subsidize a project that would compete with existing hotels and stores in downtown Milwaukee.

RSC said that without the TIF assistance, it could not afford to build a large parking structure for the project. Therefore, the retail and commercial space was almost totally eliminated in the updated plan.

According to RSC, the new development plan will provide a similar amount of tax revenue, but fewer permanent jobs (64 to 74 instead of 150-200) and fewer construction jobs (230 instead of 310) than the previous plan.

However, unlike the previous plan, Department of City Development officials are supporting the new plan, according to DCD spokeswoman Andrea Rowe Richards.

In a letter to RSC chief executive officer Rich Curto, DCD Commissioner Richard "Rocky" Marcoux said RSC's new proposal "appears to conform to the zoning regulations imposed by the Park East redevelopment plan and it also complies with the city's adopted master plan for the Upper Water Street District."

Curto could not be reached for comment.

The Milwaukee County Economic Development Committee will review the updated development plan at its meeting on Monday, Sept. 17. RSC plans to purchase the property from the county. The county must approve the development plan before the sale of the property closes.

RSC plans to begin construction of the hotels, retail space and townhomes by the end of the year and complete that work in early 2009. Construction of the apartments would begin in early 2009 and be complete in 2010.

The company also has an option to purchase and plans to develop the vacant two-acre block to the west of the site from Milwaukee County.

Twoaday

September 14th, 2007, 01:35 AM

Skyking2

September 14th, 2007, 01:49 AM

I don't have a pic to directly link... but here is their website again.

http://www.breakwater-condominiums.com/

This is definitely a case of function over form...

You know, this thing isn't all that bad-looking. Sure, it could've been more "artistically-pleasing," but it DOES bring people downtown to live and add vibrancy.

Coldwake

September 14th, 2007, 04:43 PM

Well I haven't seen the actual design but I'd agree this fits the plan better and the removal of a 300-400 (9mil/25,000 = 360) car parking garage seems like a positive to me as well. Further if you think about it, this is actually a larger project than the other project. i.e. 70 mil - 9mil (just for a garage) = 61mil whereas this project is 65mil.

"Parking would be centralized in the interior of the block." This part sounds realy good.

The parking structure was already hidden pretty well in the design before. The retail and commercial would have been nice... added more foot traffic and what not. But I never liked the design of this place to begin with... so... I have mixed feelings. It at least appears they did a good job without a TIF.

CGII

September 15th, 2007, 02:11 AM

Breakwater actually looks like some nice filler from that video. Also, it plays an important role in accenting the 'residential towers on the hill' cluster that appears from the west formed by Juneau, Kilbourn, UCT and Regency House, but it will also play an important role in linking the Gold Coast skyline with Downtown.

Also, I just noticed today that the Pabst sign at the top of the grain elevators @ Pabst have been filled on one side with 'Joseph Zilber Development' and 'The Brewery' on either side. Nice to see even a slight hint of physical progress, even if it's superficial at best.

CGII

September 16th, 2007, 12:19 AM

We got preliminary massing studies before, well, now we have named architects' renderings:

New visions emerge for MacArthur Square
Green designs aim to revitalize 22-acre site
By WHITNEY GOULD
wgould@journalsentinel.com
Posted: Sept. 14, 2007
Picture this:
A hotel cooled by geothermal wells. A tower mixing dorm rooms with condos and a "vertical farm" where people grow their own food. A tired old office building reborn as a glassy, solar-powered icon with waterfalls inside. A grassy roof that functions as a golf range.

These green dreams by local architects are all part of an emerging vision for bringing MacArthur Square, that 22.5-acre dead zone in front of the Milwaukee County Courthouse, back to life. The city-owned square, now suffering from years of deferred maintenance, was cut off from the downtown in 1967 with the construction of an underground parking garage and tunnels to I-43.

A serious makeover would take many years, many millions of dollars and feats of structural engineering. But city officials say an environmentally sensitive transformation is not outside the realm of possibility. And, they say, it could spark additional redevelopment around the west side of the downtown, building on new construction at Marquette University and the conversion of the former Pabst Brewing Co. complex to condos and offices.

"We're just brainstorming right now," Mayor Tom Barrett said. "But I don't see a downside in saying: 'Here are some great creative ideas. Here is a bold vision. Let's put it out there.' "

Rocky Marcoux, commissioner of the Department of City Development, agreed.

"Some of it just takes your breath away," he said. "If we can help guide some of these ideas in a way that shapes planning for that part of the downtown for the next 50 years, I think it would give developers the confidence to invest" in other projects nearby.

The idea for reinventing MacArthur Square has its roots in the city's 1999 plan for the downtown, which envisioned extending W. Kilbourn Ave. up along the sides of the remote plaza, now laid out on three levels that are virtually inaccessible. But then-Mayor John O. Norquist never picked up on the idea; he has cited its enormous cost. And Barrett recalled that when he presented the challenge of MacArthur Square in 2004 to a design conference of mayors, he was told it was a "Sisyphean" problem that defied fixing.

His planning director, Bob Greenstreet, saw the site as a design opportunity, however. The leaky garage faces an estimated $18 million worth of repairs in the next few years "just to keep it exactly as it is," he noted, "and where's the sense in that?"

Greenstreet, who is also dean of the School of Architecture and Urban Planning at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, secured a $50,000 grant from the Richard and Ethel Herzfeld Foundation. The money allowed the Planning and Design Institute, a local consulting firm, to create a master plan for the site, starting with the Kilbourn extension along sloping ramps that would bring cars back to the square and reconnect it with the city street grid.

The grant also underwrote March workshops at UWM, where nine local architectural firms offered specific proposals for animating chunks of the site and its environs. The ideas, refined in renderings released just this month, include:

• A tower faced with white latticework next to W. Wells St. and the freeway that could house dorms for Marquette University or Milwaukee Area Technical College. (Arquitectura)

• A residential condo building on the south side of the courthouse, at 9th and Wells streets, overlooking a semi-circular park and a colonnade. (Zimmerman Architectural Studios)

• A glassy condo tower west of the Milwaukee Public Museum, connected to the museum by a transparent walkway with trees on top. (La Dallman Architects)

• A transparent new entrance to the museum from the square, along with an outdoor plasma screen that would showcase exhibits. (Engberg Anderson Design Partnership)

• A hotel at N. 6th St. and Kilbourn, possibly mixed with condos and offices, that would be largely "off the grid," drawing its cooling from underground geo-thermal wells and some of its electricity from wall-mounted wind turbines. (Hammel, Green and Abrahamson)

• A new, curved glass façade for the State Office Building at 6th and Wells streets, incorporating active and passive solar power, geothermal tubes and interior waterfalls. (Studio 1032)

• A classroom and dorm building for MATC at 6th and Wells, incorporating condos and a "vertical farm" of greenhouses and roof garden that would allow residents to grow their own food. (Kahler Slater Architects)

• Expansion of the Midwest Airlines Center along Kilbourn with a transparent tower topped by wind turbines on a sod roof that doubles as a driving range for golfers. (Johnsen Schmaling Architects.)

• A Community Justice and Resource Center with new courtrooms, a green roof and the text of the U.S. Constitution on an interior wall. (Eppstein Uhen Architects)

Dan Finley, president of the Milwaukee Public Museum, embraced the architects' visions, noting that his institution could gain new visitors and a more welcoming entrance. He said, only half joking, that he wanted to be first in line for one of the condos proposed next to the museum.

"We can't wait," he said. "It would make MacArthur Square the next hot spot for the downtown."

Jim Shields, an architect with Hammel, Green and Abrahamson, conceded that additional buildings on the square would truncate views of the courthouse. But much like the campanile in front of St. Mark's basilica in Venice, "they will also enhance it and make it more picturesque," he said.

Larry Witzling, who runs the Planning and Design Institute and teaches at UWM, cautioned that any new construction would require extensive structural reinforcement of the garage below.

"That adds to the cost, of course, but you have to balance that against the fact that you're adding a huge amount of value" to a desolate site that currently generates no property taxes and is almost never used, he said.

No one knows at this point what the price tag for a makeover would be, or how it would be paid for. But city officials said possible sources could include tax-incremental financing, in which new property taxes would pay for infrastructure improvements; state grants; and private investment. A proposed doubling of the 1,045 parking spaces in the MacArthur Square garage would bring in additional revenue.

A feasibility study is the next step. But Witzling is confident that the tract he calls "a black hole" can come back to life over the next decade or so. He points to the revival of the Third Ward, Commerce St. and the Menomonee Valley; the rapid redevelopment under way in the Fifth Ward; and the removal of the Park East freeway spur. Skeptics pooh-poohed those plans initially.

"It may take two or three years to figure it out," he said, "but it's doable."

jsonline.com

pictures from jsonline.com

http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11396_large.jpg
In this view looking north on Wells St., Arquitectura envisioned a dormitory tower faced with white latticework. The building could accommodate students from Marquette University or Milwaukee Area Technical College.
http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11397_large.jpg
Engberg Anderson Design Partnership imagined a transparent new entrance to the Milwaukee Public Museum facing the square, with a plasma screen that would showcase exhibits.
http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11398_large.jpg
Eppstein Uhen Architects proposed a Community Justice and Resource Center with new courtrooms, a green roof and the text of the U.S. Constitution on an inside wall.
http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11399_large.jpg
In this view looking west on Kilbourn, with the Hyatt Regency at left and the Milwauykee County Historical Museum at right, Hammel, Green and Abrahamson proposed a two-tower hotel at 6th and Kilbourn, possibly mixed with offices and condos, that would be cooled with geo-thermal wells.
http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11400_large.jpg
Johnsen Schmaling Architects proposed a glassy addition the Midwest Airlines Center overklooking Kilbourn Ave., with an insulating sod roof on top that would function as a driving range.
http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11401_large.jpg
Kahler Slater Architects proposed a classroom and dorm building at 6th and Wells, incorporating condos and a "vertical farm" where people could grow their own food.
http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11402_large.jpg
La Dallman Architects envisioned a glassy condo tower west of the Milwaukee Public Museum, connected by a transparent walkway with trees on top.
http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11403_large.jpg
Studio 1032 proposed to create a new, curved glass front for the State Office Building at 6th and Wells, combining active and solar power with interior waterfalls.
http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11404_large.jpg
Zimmerman Architectural Studios proposed a condo tower on the north side of the courthouse, overlooking a semi-circular park and a colonnade.

Eriol

September 16th, 2007, 12:40 AM

I don't have time to put up the pictures, but check this out:
http://www.renewthevalley.org/files/pdf/ValleyTranformation.pdf

brewcityfan

September 16th, 2007, 03:04 AM

The 1st, 3rd, and 5th renderings are a bit, well, odd. Are we trying to do Milwaukee or reinvent the 1960s?

At least the other renderings aren't bad. I like the MPM entrance, and the last 2 renderings.

EastSider

September 16th, 2007, 04:28 AM

I like this view of Eppstein Uhen's Community Justice and Resource Center:
http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/news/img/sep07/square091507.jpg

miltown

September 16th, 2007, 05:15 AM

wow i would like to see all of these happen ----- unfortunately in Milwaukee, maybe one will happen or none... i'm not going to get my hopes up.....

NLouisianaJay

September 16th, 2007, 07:13 AM

wow i would like to see all of these happen ----- unfortunately in Milwaukee, maybe one will happen or none... i'm not going to get my hopes up.....

Yeah I agree! Though, the fact that MacArthur Square revitalization and downtown is on the front page of the website is great altogether.

It's always fun to peer at all the visions and renderings they come up with. Plus what's even more depressing is how they mention "it will take 2-3 years to figure everything out". Well, i'll lock myself in my chair and wait for that.

Jesse276

September 16th, 2007, 03:53 PM

Obviously the square needs a makeover but I can't see how many of these proposals will improve the area. It seems to me that they destroy much of the view of the courthouse from down Kilbourn.

Hopefully allowing private development of some of the areas surrounding the square will provide funds to open up the square and activate the area with a little life.

milwaukee-københavn

September 16th, 2007, 06:36 PM

I think the discussion of what private development, if any, we want on public land is an important one. MacArthur Square was designed to and has the possiblity to be the most important public space in the city, and I think anything built there should be benefitial to the public as a whole. The museum additions and the courtrooms look like they would do that. The rest?

ThatGuy

September 16th, 2007, 08:34 PM

http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11400_large.jpg
Johnsen Schmaling Architects proposed a glassy addition the Midwest Airlines Center overklooking Kilbourn Ave., with an insulating sod roof on top that would function as a driving range.

WHAT?!

I usually just browse nowadays but I HAD to come here to say no to this one. I want the Midwest Airlines Center expanded to the third stage like most anyone else, and I would argue for them making it a few stories taller than the original, but it would be in the same style.

That thing is an atrocity! And, while I am very green, a driving range ontop of our Convention Center? Oh please. If you want the sod roof, just leave it at that, we don't need people loopin golfballs down into the streets of our downtown.

I want to know what these people were smokin when they came up with that idea, because I apparently need to get some and start doin drugs.

Johnny Drama

September 16th, 2007, 08:55 PM

yes, yes, yes! These renderings are awesome and a breath of fresh air from the garbage that I was expecting.

Johnny Drama

September 16th, 2007, 08:56 PM

call me insane, but I like the first rendering.

looksee

September 17th, 2007, 12:11 AM

call me insane, but I like the first rendering.

I've been waiting to say this: "You're Nuts!", but maybe not in this case.

I think all of them (except the Zimmerman, which is too much like the mistakes already built there) are great and thought provoking. Quality and contrast to the wretched piles that were plopped on the plaza in the 60's and 70's is exactly the right approach. Hope some of the dreams can come true.

Johnny Drama

September 17th, 2007, 12:44 AM

I've been waiting for this: "You're Nuts!", but not in this case.

I think all of them (except the Zimmerman, which is as horrible as what's already there) are great and thought provoking. Quality and contrast to the wretched piles that were plopped on the plaza in the 60's and 70's is exactly the right approach. Hope some of the dreams can come true.

yeah, the Zimmerman one is a bit ho-hum. That first one would be shocking, but a very cool piece of architecture. Personally, I would like it more if they took off that laticework so it doesnt look like its under construction.

I like many of the other ones. However, I would be concerned with block off the views of the Courthouse from Kilbourn Ave.

brewcityfan

September 17th, 2007, 04:12 AM

Wow - what can I say....

I'm not surprised to hear all the LOVE for these many designs, especially the first one. I guess I have to wait for the King's response on this, but if he agrees that the first rendering was good - then God Save this Forum!

Who in their right mind would want THAT in our downtown? You might as well forget the dorms and whatever's in between that "thing" - just leave a big'ol piece of construction mesh! I think this forum has gone EXTREMELY to the left in the past few months.

First, we want to represent Milwaukee internationally with a trade center that's about as tacky as the Greenfield Wal-Mart, and now we want to go as modern as...well...I don't know!

Talk about an identity crisis....

Let's not make Milwaukee the laughing stock of the country please.

MilwaukeeD

September 17th, 2007, 04:48 AM

weird does not equal good.

we want buildings that will stand the test of time...I think few of those would. while it is great to think outside of the box to come up with ways to revive this area of town, i don't think most of the those designs are worth pursuing. The uses, however, are pretty good: convention center expansion, dorms, condos, justice center...let's keep the uses and get some better designs.

looksee

September 17th, 2007, 05:36 AM

weird does not equal good.

.

Yeah, gee.
Let's start by tearing down the Calatrava.
Oops. Everbody says it's good. So I say it's good too.

Um, I wonder why Chicago don't dynamite that weird Millennium Park thingy.
Wait, they say that's good too. Me too.

Well, if it ain't yet official, then I say all this other new stuff is weird. I don't want to see nothin more on this page that ain't real familiar lookin. I have spoken. Too.

_________________________________________________________________

And if these weirdies ever get built, they'll never stand the test of time:

.
http://www.bluffton.edu/~sullivanm/wisconsin/milwaukee/mixgrain/whole.jpg
http://www.bluffton.edu/~sullivanm/wisconsin/milwaukee/mixgrain/entrance2.jpg

MilwaukeeD

September 17th, 2007, 06:14 AM

umm, the calatrava, millennium park, mitchell and mackie buildings aren't what I would call weird. they will and/or have stood the test of time. they are classics. Like others have said, some of the renderings above tend to resemble 60/70's mistakes that I'd rather not make again. in particular i am talking about architectura's and kahler slater's. i think the others could work.

looksee

September 17th, 2007, 06:44 AM

umm, the calatrava, millennium park, mitchell and mackie buildings aren't what I would call weird. they will and/or have stood the test of time. they are classics.
Must be official then.
http://www.cigarlabelart.com/images/bulk%20sale/Seal_Of_Approval_TS.jpg

brewcityfan

September 17th, 2007, 04:33 PM

I think Milwaukee needs a more realistic approach to this plan. It almost sounds like those in Planning gave the architectural firms all access/free will to design whatever they wanted.

What's the theme of Milwaukee? What seems to be sticking with Milwaukee? From what I see, it's more of the older-fashioned designs - like 100 E Wisconsin, The Milwaukee Center, etc. merged with semi-modern looks like UCT, KT, Calatrava, etc.

Sorry but if some architect proposed a building shaped like a dollar sign I wouldn't just fall in love with it automatically.

We need some realistic proposals so we can get this redevelopment site off the ground.

Also, I forgot who mentioned the whole teeing off and hitting pedestrians and cars on the street - but thanks for bringing that up! That would be pretty funny...IT'S RAINING GOLF BALLS!! :lol:

Jesse276

September 17th, 2007, 06:20 PM

I think this forum has gone EXTREMELY to the left in the past few months.

Do you mean politically, how would that work?

looksee

September 17th, 2007, 06:27 PM

,,,sounds like those in Planning gave the architectural firms all access/free will to design whatever they wanted.
Heaven forbid. When Mayor Barrett said "We're just brainstorming right now, ... But I don't see a downside in saying: 'Here are some great creative ideas. Here is a bold vision. Let's put it out there." what he really meant was "let's be careful, this is Milwaukee remember."

What's the theme of Milwaukee? What seems to be sticking with Milwaukee? From what I see, it's more of the older-fashioned designs - like 100 E Wisconsin, The Milwaukee Center, etc. merged with semi-modern looks like UCT, KT, Calatrava, etc.
Yes, I can picture it: MacArthur square rebuilt with older-fashioned designs merged with semi-modern looks. And that would look -- exactly like what's there now! Excellent insight!

Sorry but if some architect proposed a building shaped like a dollar sign I wouldn't just fall in love with it automatically.
That's precisely how these proposals appear to me too. I think if we get the right approval, in time, we will fall in love with the dollar-sign-shaped finalist. (Was it the first one, or number 5, or...? Now I am confused.:nuts:)

...IT'S RAINING GOLF BALLS!!
And on this site, GOOFBALLS.

brewcityfan

September 17th, 2007, 06:42 PM

^^We're both entitled to our own opinions, thank you very much.

Jesse276

September 17th, 2007, 08:13 PM

Coldwake

September 17th, 2007, 08:37 PM

I think Milwaukee needs a more realistic approach to this plan. It almost sounds like those in Planning gave the architectural firms all access/free will to design whatever they wanted.

If any of you are familiar with the auto industry... you can compare this exercise to that of a concept car. Most concept cars are wildly fantastic shapes and forms that definitely would not fit in on our roads. They are just exercises in what CAN be. Usually they have a goal of testing one small idea... and putting it into this way out there package.

Many great cars have come from ideas that were spawned in those concept cars (and many not so great cars too...). But just like that... future buildings and ideas can be spawned from this exercise.

So this isn't about what buildings you like from that group... but what good ideas and parts of the bigger picture can you take away from this?

MilwaukeeD

September 17th, 2007, 08:59 PM

If any of you are familiar with the auto industry... you can compare this exercise to that of a concept car. Most concept cars are wildly fantastic shapes and forms that definitely would not fit in on our roads. They are just exercises in what CAN be. Usually they have a goal of testing one small idea... and putting it into this way out there package.

Many great cars have come from ideas that were spawned in those concept cars (and many not so great cars too...). But just like that... future buildings and ideas can be spawned from this exercise.

So this isn't about what buildings you like from that group... but what good ideas and parts of the bigger picture can you take away from this?

exactly, some of the uses and concepts are great, just not thrilled about all of the designs.

looksee

September 17th, 2007, 09:16 PM

I'm sure when the Milwaukee Police Headquarters was unveiled, there were a bunch of people talking about how visionary the design was and how modern it will make our city look. Fast forward to now, it looks like crap.

I assure you it looked like crap the first time I saw it (and I doubt it was ever praised by anyone who didn't have a stake in it) and was just one in a long series (e.g. the Municipal Building, Courthouse Annex, former Convention Center), of bizarrely botched attempts at a kind of Milwaukee Modernism. These current ideas -- which btw have parallels that have already been built elsewhere, without becoming laughing stocks -- are almost all clearly aimed at providing some sparkle to distract from the Square's dreary surroundings.
You grievously underrate the ability of the current generation of Milwaukee's architects. They obviously now have the talent and experience to produce work that's creative, original, fun, and really, really good.

Danillo

September 17th, 2007, 09:26 PM

I don't see what all the fuss is about. If you've ever sat through a brainstorming session that was any good, a lot of crazy ideas come out. That's the point of brainstorming, to generate the widest range of ideas possible. It seems to me that this was essentially a brainstorming session, and so giving "the architectural firms all access/free will to design whatever they wanted" is exactly the right thing to do. We have nothing to fear from mere ideas, and that's what these are.

Ideally, if this redevelopment were to go ahead, I think you'd want it to be a showcase for the best design Milwaukee can do. If that's the goal, it's best to start with concepts like these and then reign them in if necessary, rather than starting with a bunch of "safe" designs then trying to make them more dynamic. Seems to me this was all a very worthwhile exercise.

Jesse276

September 17th, 2007, 09:46 PM

looksee

September 17th, 2007, 10:02 PM

...

Johnny Drama

September 18th, 2007, 12:30 AM

Danillo

September 18th, 2007, 12:36 AM

I question the idea that to make something good, beautiful, or useful that you have to start from the extremes of creativity. Something doesn't have to be completely different to be good or great.

It depends. First off, one has to decide if you want something that is merely good, beauftiful, or useful. Not that those are bad goals, but they are easier to get to than great and/or revouoltionary. I think you can start with the expected and ramp up to good, but I think it's much more difficult (and more risky) to get to something exceptional from that start. For instance, if you were to design an art museum and begin the process based off of an "expected" form (whatever that would be), you may be able to come up with quite a nice museum that would serve very well, but you probably would never come around to what the MAM has become.

Beyond that, I just think that when coming up with a public vision, it's easier to start with more radical ideas and tone that down, than it is to start with expected solutions and make them more radical. Either path is possible, but I think the former is an easier or more useful way to get there.

brewcityfan

September 18th, 2007, 01:12 AM

We dont want to build stuff like 100 East Wisconsin near the courthouse. That side of town already boasts enough bland, earth toned architecture.

And do you honestly think they would let golf balls be flying down on cars? There are ways to have a driving range without this problem.

One's bland is another's treasure.

And please take a bit of sarcasm....

Also, on a different note, brainstorming is a good thing, but not when the results mean Milwaukee might get a real-life version of a Lego set.

Johnny Drama

September 18th, 2007, 01:21 AM

One's bland is another's treasure.

And please take a bit of sarcasm....

Also, on a different note, brainstorming is a good thing, but not when the results mean Milwaukee might get a real-life version of a Lego set.

I like those two skyscrapers, but I dont want more of them. We have enough bland, tallish buildings in the skyline. Adding something glassy and glitzy is just what the doctor ordered, especially on that side of town.

I doubt something like that first rendering would ever be built. I happen to like it, perhaps not so much in that location. Something glassy and cool would be nice there though. As for the other designs, I dont see whats so earth shattering.

Jesse276

September 18th, 2007, 02:39 AM

It depends. First off, one has to decide if you want something that is merely good, beauftiful, or useful. Not that those are bad goals, but they are easier to get to than great and/or revouoltionary. I think you can start with the expected and ramp up to good, but I think it's much more difficult (and more risky) to get to something exceptional from that start. For instance, if you were to design an art museum and begin the process based off of an "expected" form (whatever that would be), you may be able to come up with quite a nice museum that would serve very well, but you probably would never come around to what the MAM has become.

Beyond that, I just think that when coming up with a public vision, it's easier to start with more radical ideas and tone that down, than it is to start with expected solutions and make them more radical. Either path is possible, but I think the former is an easier or more useful way to get there.

That process seems to work better for something that will be monumental like an art museum for a large city, but aiming for a "great and/or revolutionary" design carries the large risk of it also falling flat. Take a look at the first designs for Pier Wisconsin or even our own little gift from Saarinen on the lakefront.

Just to be clear, I don't dislike all or even most modern architecture. I just bristle at the idea that every building, every architect, can somehow pull off a "great and/or revolutionary" building.

JPmaverick

September 18th, 2007, 03:15 AM

I agree that some of the designs are "out there" but that's exactly the type of bold thinking that is desperately needed for MacArthur Square. Not to mention other projects (past and present) around town that have lacked this sort of fresh and unique perspective.

Remember that any idea or project that moves forward will inevitably be refined or scaled back in size or scope due to many issues: regulatory approval, zoning, funding, NIMBYs, etc.

More importantly, these ideas are generating a discussion about the future of MacArthur Square. The space has been bleak and uninviting for far too long. Other proposals have been floated around (parkland, condos/apartments, beer gardens, restaurants, office buildings) that didn't inspire a conversation that I believe the new designs will. Frankly, whatever ends up being built at MacArthur Square will be a welcome addition.

looksee

September 18th, 2007, 04:16 AM

but aiming for a "great and/or revolutionary" design carries the large risk of it also falling flat. Take a look at ... our own little gift from Saarinen on the lakefront.

I remember when the War Memorial Center -- Saarinen's little gift -- and before the Kahler addition --was the star of a complimentary article in Newsweek. It wasn't that building that fell flat, it was the self defeated fools who never gained any inspiration from that breath of fresh air and instead stuck us with so much dull witted dreck who are the failures.

looksee

September 18th, 2007, 04:36 AM

http://mssa.library.yale.edu/derivatives/mss/593/zoom/006983.jpg
http://mssa.library.yale.edu/derivatives/mss/593/zoom/006984.jpg

Jesse276

September 18th, 2007, 04:50 AM

That must be it. We are to blame because we're not inspired, not because it's not inspiriing.

looksee

September 18th, 2007, 04:58 AM

That must be it. We are to blame because we're not inspired, not because it's not inspiriing.
If you insist.
Truth is...
That's really the truth.

Johnny Drama

September 18th, 2007, 05:06 AM

Markitect

September 18th, 2007, 06:37 AM

The analogy to the purpose of "concept cars" in the automobile industry and the process of brainstorming described before was precisely the intention of these particular visions of a re-thought MacArthur Square. This very same technique is used all the time when designing cities/neighborhoods/buildings all around the world.

Similar approaches were used right here in Milwaukee as the genesis of the Park East Freeway demolition and redevelopment, for the revitalized Menomonee Valley, for the Downtown Plan, for the Third Ward, just to name a few. All of them started out at the very beginning with a visioning process like this that included a mix of informal conceptual ideas that ranged from completely outlandish, to safe and conservative, and everything in between (and I'm not talking about the stuff you see coming from developers...this stuff happens way before developers are even able to start pitching ideas for real proposals). The purpose of the visioning process is to flex some creative muscle, get some dialog going about ideas and potential ways to do things, and get the ball rolling for working toward an achievable goal.

Markitect

September 18th, 2007, 07:00 AM

I wish they would use my idea for MacArthur Square. Make it into an actual busy town square! Why not some cafe's without outdoor patio's to make it more lively? Something like you would see in a European city.

That's what they're doing.

And in order to have a lively public space, you need to do all the stuff to make it lively:

- Bringing urban-scaled streets and sidewalks (and the cars, transit, pedestrians, bicycles that come with them) up into and along the square.

- Lining those streets/sidewalks with buildings that actually face out toward the square (the current buildings turn their backs on the square).

- Encouraging a wide mix of uses in those buildings that generate different kinds of activity throughout the day and night. The cafes, patios, public art, fountains, etc. would come along with the new development.

By using those new streets, buildings, and uses, we can get a better defined, more finely-scaled, more active and intimate central public space than what's there now.

The current arrangement of MacArthur Square has none of those things, which is the reason why it's been such a large, utterly dead space for the past 40+ years.

Nuclear_Art

September 18th, 2007, 03:13 PM

By using those new streets, buildings, and uses, we can get a better defined, more finely-scaled, more active and intimate central public space than what's there now.

The current arrangement of MacArthur Square has none of those things, which is the reason why it's been such a large, utterly dead space for the past 40+ years.

The space was actually defined as exclusively public space going way back to Olmstead's plans in 1909. All public buildings in the city were to be located in this area. In 1941, urban renewal and the widening of Kilbourn started to bring his plans to reality by clearing the entire area between 6th, 8th, State and Wells Sts of all houses, tenements, and businesses. The actual creation of dead environment happened in 1941.

MacArthur Square was an afterthought based on the increasing traffic needs of the 60s and was actually adopted in 1956. I remember it being used often for many public events, rallies, speeches, etc during the early 1970s. Clarke & Rapuano's design works pretty well for the needs of large outdoor events and it is unfairly lambasted. It is usable space but it, like any space needs to be actively used. If people ignore it, it is useless. Many parks founder in their usefulness if people don't make an effort to get there and use them. This is something the New Urbanists, in their enthusiastic idealism seem to miss.

Even in areas of downtown that have been active living space for more than a decade, there is a dead quality to the adjacent streets. You can change a person's living space but you cannot change their habits. It doesn't matter how inviting landscape architects try to design their spaces.

Danillo

September 18th, 2007, 03:48 PM

Also, on a different note, brainstorming is a good thing, but not when the results mean Milwaukee might get a real-life version of a Lego set.

Can't have it both ways. If you do brainstorming, you have to accept as legitmate any ideas generated. These are just ideas, not concrete plans. There's no developer behind any of this. It's a creative exercise, and to say something to the effect of, brainstoming is good so long as I like the ideas generated is to defeat the purpose of the exercise. If you don't like some of the proposals, great, that's a legitimate response and part of the process, but let's not worry about that as though these are proposals that will begin construction tomorrow.

That process seems to work better for something that will be monumental like an art museum for a large city, but aiming for a "great and/or revolutionary" design carries the large risk of it also falling flat. Take a look at the first designs for Pier Wisconsin or even our own little gift from Saarinen on the lakefront.

A) The Saarinen isn't that bad.

B) Look what happened with Pier Wisconsin. That's part of my point. The first design didn't get built. In relation to these new proposals, they are even farther from ever being built, so why not start by thinking big? If we want Milwaukee to strive for greatness, you have to be willing to at least take the risk of thinking big.

Jesse276

September 18th, 2007, 04:01 PM

In relation to these new proposals, they are even farther from ever being built, so why not start by thinking big? If we want Milwaukee to strive for greatness, you have to be willing to at least take the risk of thinking big.

The question becomes, what is thinking big?

Is it everybody coming up with the most outlandish ideas because they can or is it presenting some things that are really pushing the envelope alongside somewhat less-radical, everyday proposals?

The thing is, I only see the architects here trying to push ideas and proposals in extreme new directions. There isn't much diversity in what was submitted.

Danillo

September 18th, 2007, 04:36 PM

The question becomes, what is thinking big?

Is it everybody coming up with the most outlandish ideas because they can or is it presenting some things that are really pushing the envelope alongside somewhat less-radical, everyday proposals?

The thing is, I only see the architects here trying to push ideas and proposals in extreme new directions. There isn't much diversity in what was submitted.

I don't know, seems like a pretty diverse collection to me. I picked to four below to show a range, but the first seems pretty extreme. The second isn't typical but I'd hardly say it's shocking. The third looks like a pretty handsome, glassy building. And the fourth looks quite traditional to me. Reasonable minds can differ, but to me the group as a whole (these 4 and the others) seems quite interesting and diverse. Would I want them all built? No. Are they ideas worth of the exercise? Certainly. Also, in a larger sense, I think this is exaclty the time to be looking to puch things in extreme new directions.

http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11396_large.jpg

http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11398_large.jpg

http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11402_large.jpg

http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11404_large.jpg

milwaukeeunseen

September 18th, 2007, 06:38 PM

When Mayor Barrett said "We're just brainstorming right now, ... But I don't see a downside in saying: 'Here are some great creative ideas. Here is a bold vision. Let's put it out there." what he really meant was "let's be careful, this is Milwaukee remember."

There was a time I would have agreed with you. But the last ten years have seen Milwaukee break with it's good-old "can't do" spirit and actually accomplish some things that were talked about. We didn't just talk about an indoor public market Downtown. It actually happened. We didn't just talk about tearing down a freeway to make way for development. We tore it down. We didn't even really talk about turning all the vacant railroad land along Commerce Street in a new neighborhood. We just did it. And we talked about improving our downtown Lakefront beyond the Summerfest grounds. Now that is a reality as well.

Of course, we talked and talked, kept talking, and talked some more about what to do with old Pabst Brewery. Now, after we got blue in the face from talking, we're finally doing it. We also talked for many years about the Menomonee Valley and, lo and behold, we actually are getting that done, too.

In a way I'm glad we're cautious. It takes a long time to get things done around here, but all of our talking helps make sure things turn out in a quality way. It took a lot of talking, and a lot of planning, but the Menomonee Valley is now a recognized example of environmentally-friendly development that creates good jobs for central city residents. I'm proud that we talked about making sure the Valley was redeveloped in this manner, and that we actually got it done.

I'm glad we took some extra time to talk about the Pabst, because in the end this talk has produced a better plan went beyond some cookie-cutter "they did this in Minneapolis and Denver and so now we have to" approach to urban redevelopment. In some years when the Brewery is redeveloped, I will be thankful for our propensity toward talk, because I'm convinced that our talk will have produced something that's truly unique to Milwaukee and a boost for our economy.

So now we're talking about McCarthur Square. This is Milwaukee, of course, so will be talking about this for awhile. But if the result of all this talking is something that adds real value to our city and our economy, I'm willing to wait.

looksee

September 18th, 2007, 06:47 PM

The question becomes, what is thinking big?

Is it everybody coming up with the most outlandish ideas because they can or is it presenting some things that are really pushing the envelope alongside somewhat less-radical, everyday proposals?

I find this sort of fear-driven yearning for mediocrity somewhat disheartening, especially on a forum like this. Has nothing been learned from the obvious creative renaissance going on in and about downtown, and the now-sustained interest in living there, spurred on by talents learning to spread their wings? Would anyone feel any sense of refreshment at the sight of the new Beerline neighborhood if it somehow resembled, oh I don't know, BrownDeer or PortWashington Roads?

My real concern is that there is evidence, from different eras, and not just because of economics, of a too-quick retreat into lowered expectations all over town --You know, the blocks that began with with one or two thoughtful buildings, but ended up stillborn with a repulsive mismatched clutter of throwaway, or even aggressively homely junk -- and that this mindset will predominate again in Milwaukee.

The city could get by with bad breath, a beer-belly and mismatched socks back when it was an industrial powerhouse, but these days looks and atmosphere play an important role in deciding it's future well-being, and what it should fear most, certainly in terms of its architecture, is a retreat back, once again, into half-heartedness and timidity.

looksee

September 18th, 2007, 07:11 PM

Heaven forbid. When Mayor Barrett said "We're just brainstorming right now, ... But I don't see a downside in saying: 'Here are some great creative ideas. Here is a bold vision. Let's put it out there." what he really meant was "let's be careful, this is Milwaukee remember."

There was a time I would have agreed with you.

My friend, I was being sarcastic. The whole post was a put down (nothing personal, Brewster). I think if you re-read it that way it'll make a very different kind of sense.

(Didn't realize that my sense of humor was so subtle; maybe that's why no one's tried to make me swallow my teeth recently.)

NeuBrew

September 18th, 2007, 07:36 PM

I'm not going to claim to be particularly knowledgeable in architecture, but has there been a resurgance of 60's and 70's era designs lately. Many of these proposals really strike me as designs that would be at home in that era. Maybe it's the simple geometric shapes, or the offset window shades, or the colors, can't really put my finger on it. I think the winning design for the Ruvin development was the same way.

It seems that many of these designs are either from that camp (with a dash of neo-environmentalist features) or from the fake-historical blah camp. I guess that's why I like the first design -- I simply haven't seen it. With such a beautiful traditional building like the courthouse, I think something diametrically opposed to it will drawn the most attention to it. It's that contrast that I really love. Reminds me of walking around London. When many of the buildings were bombed out in the second world war, they grew back fresh, with unique designs. It really adds to the appeal.

So, for me, I'd like to see something that doesn't represent the 1860s or the 1960s. I'd like to see something that just jumps out of the box.

looksee

September 18th, 2007, 08:02 PM

Pompidou Center, Paris, 1977: http://www.jneil.com/airscapes/2003_paris/img/paris030.jpg

Milwaukee, the future(?????????):http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11396_large.jpg

Jesse276

September 18th, 2007, 08:15 PM

I find this sort of fear...a retreat back, once again, into half-heartedness and timidity.

As you frame it:

Strip Mall vs. Mies

I guess that is what I get for asking for a departure from an exclusively modern aesthetic.

So much for intellectual and thought-provoking discourse...

Coldwake

September 18th, 2007, 08:18 PM

I find this sort of fear-driven yearning for mediocrity somewhat disheartening, especially on a forum like this. Has nothing been learned from the obvious creative renaissance going on in and about downtown, and the now-sustained interest in living there, spurred on by talents learning to spread their wings? Would anyone feel any sense of refreshment at the sight of the new Beerline neighborhood if it somehow resembled, oh I don't know, BrownDeer or PortWashington Roads?

My real concern is that there is evidence, from different eras, and not just because of economics, of a too-quick retreat into lowered expectations all over town --You know, the blocks that began with with one or two thoughtful buildings, but ended up stillborn with a repulsive mismatched clutter of throwaway, or even aggressively homely junk -- and that this mindset will predominate again in Milwaukee.

The city could get by with bad breath, a beer-belly and mismatched socks back when it was an industrial powerhouse, but these days looks and atmosphere play an important role in deciding it's future well-being, and what it should fear most, certainly in terms of its architecture, is a retreat back, once again, into half-heartedness and timidity.

Hey, that was pretty inspirational! :)

Jesse276

September 18th, 2007, 08:22 PM

I don't know, seems like a pretty diverse collection to me. I picked to four below to show a range, but the first seems pretty extreme. The second isn't typical but I'd hardly say it's shocking. The third looks like a pretty handsome, glassy building. And the fourth looks quite traditional to me. Reasonable minds can differ, but to me the group as a whole (these 4 and the others) seems quite interesting and diverse. Would I want them all built? No. Are they ideas worth of the exercise? Certainly. Also, in a larger sense, I think this is exaclty the time to be looking to puch things in extreme new directions.

I do see some diversity within a modern slate of buildings, and I don't dislike every aspect of each design. I'm not saying that these designs aren't worthy of this competition, honestly, it's good that these firms and studios put forth so much effort and laid their ideas bare. However, it would have been nice to see some diversity in what's being presented. In my opinion, these are all very modern, except the last which looks like a rip-off to me.

To great minds that don't think alike :cheers:

looksee

September 18th, 2007, 08:48 PM

As you frame it:

So much for intellectual and thought-provoking discourse...

http://www.buddy-icons.info/img/smile/1900.gifYou can't always get what you want...http://www.buddy-icons.info/img/smile/1354.gif

Jesse276

September 18th, 2007, 08:57 PM

http://www.buddy-icons.info/img/smile/1900.gifYou can't always get what you want...http://www.buddy-icons.info/img/smile/1354.gif

I've got something for you, although I know you'd prefer a Milwaukee's Best more.

:cheers:

brewcityfan

September 18th, 2007, 09:07 PM

Pompidou Center, Paris, 1977: http://www.jneil.com/airscapes/2003_paris/img/paris030.jpg

Milwaukee, the future(?????????):http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11396_large.jpg

I need to quote the pictures on this. How in the WORLD is that attractive? That's probably the biggest issue I have with the whole argument. We're ACTUALLY putting this in the public eye? How embarrassing.

It doesn't even match with the Courthouse or the Catholic Knights building across the street. Heck, what am I saying...it doesn't match with ANYTHING in Milwaukee.

Please tell me that "brainstorm" was short-lived. PLEASE!

looksee

September 18th, 2007, 09:16 PM

I've got something for you, although I know you'd prefer a Milwaukee's Best more.

:cheers:

I couldn't afford it myself, but an Old Pultney or a Highland Park straight up would be very nice.
Cheers :angel:

Coldwake

September 18th, 2007, 09:35 PM

It doesn't even match with the Courthouse or the Catholic Knights building across the street. Heck, what am I saying...it doesn't match with ANYTHING in Milwaukee.

Yeah, neither does that Art museum!!! Lets get rid of that hideous non-matching eyesore!

Seriously... thats not exactly a beautiful building in my eyes... but buildings also don't have to match. Plus... to Brew and Jesse... did you guys even read our explanation as to what this was?? An exercise... an exploration of ideas... a test of creativity. Don't worry, I'm sure that whatever happens will be plain and boring to satisfy your wishes.

historybuffer

September 18th, 2007, 09:36 PM

Jesse276

September 18th, 2007, 09:55 PM

Yeah, neither does that Art museum!!! Lets get rid of that hideous non-matching eyesore!

Seriously... thats not exactly a beautiful building in my eyes... but buildings also don't have to match. Plus... to Brew and Jesse... did you guys even read our explanation as to what this was?? An exercise... an exploration of ideas... a test of creativity. Don't worry, I'm sure that whatever happens will be plain and boring to satisfy your wishes.

I did and the explanation fell short because my criticism was that it was only relatively extreme ideas that were the product of the exercise.

I want to see something that adds to the fabric as much as anyone else, I just want to see a few practical ideas as well. As far excitement, I find the proposed irregular masses of concrete and steel to be boring.

Twoaday

September 18th, 2007, 10:10 PM

A little development update. The Breakwater is moving ahead on demolition as you can see here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/davereid/1399805046/

brewcityfan

September 19th, 2007, 12:44 AM

Yeah, neither does that Art museum!!! Lets get rid of that hideous non-matching eyesore!

AMEN CW! I hope you'll be standing next to me when the City allows its residents to begin tearing the thing down! Good grief...

*Sidenote - you are talking about the 1960s Art Museum/War Memorial building, right??*

Seriously... thats not exactly a beautiful building in my eyes... but buildings also don't have to match. Plus... to Brew and Jesse... did you guys even read our explanation as to what this was?? An exercise... an exploration of ideas... a test of creativity. Don't worry, I'm sure that whatever happens will be plain and boring to satisfy your wishes.

Hey, for once I can agree with Jesse. Just because we're testing the waters doesn't mean we have to go overboard. Something a tad more realistic would have done this City (and this forum) many positive favors. If the City wanted an architect to design a tinker-toy building, they coulda just asked yours truly ;)

I can't believe you of all forumers are criticizing a project proposed for Milwaukee!!!????

Hey, at least I wasn't caught saying Park Lafayette looks like a low-income housing project!

Johnny Drama

September 19th, 2007, 12:53 AM

That's what they're doing.

And in order to have a lively public space, you need to do all the stuff to make it lively:

- Bringing urban-scaled streets and sidewalks (and the cars, transit, pedestrians, bicycles that come with them) up into and along the square.

- Lining those streets/sidewalks with buildings that actually face out toward the square (the current buildings turn their backs on the square).

- Encouraging a wide mix of uses in those buildings that generate different kinds of activity throughout the day and night. The cafes, patios, public art, fountains, etc. would come along with the new development.

By using those new streets, buildings, and uses, we can get a better defined, more finely-scaled, more active and intimate central public space than what's there now.

The current arrangement of MacArthur Square has none of those things, which is the reason why it's been such a large, utterly dead space for the past 40+ years.

well anything is better than what is there currently. I guess the renderings are hard to judge on what they got in mind.

The Pabst redevelopment would also add alot more people to the area to add to the street activity of this area hopefully.

Johnny Drama

September 19th, 2007, 01:03 AM

Pompidou Center, Paris, 1977: http://www.jneil.com/airscapes/2003_paris/img/paris030.jpg

Milwaukee, the future(?????????):http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/11/11396_large.jpg

thats a good analogy. The Pompidou Center from what I read was hated by Parisians. I even recall a story about the architect telling some old lady that he was the architect and being hit with an umbrella. People hated the Eiffel Tower too.

Milwaukee should be open to these radical looking designs. We dont want the architecture to cater to the old timers. We want it to appeal to young, because that's who we want moving to our city. While I dont think that the Arquitectura building is as undeniably great as that SOM tower that the dipshits passed over in San Francisco. I do think its a step in the right direction for the future. Id rather see Milwaukee build these unusual looking things then more fake retro stuff or Park Lafayettes.

Johnny Drama

September 19th, 2007, 01:07 AM

I need to quote the pictures on this. How in the WORLD is that attractive? That's probably the biggest issue I have with the whole argument. We're ACTUALLY putting this in the public eye? How embarrassing.

It doesn't even match with the Courthouse or the Catholic Knights building across the street. Heck, what am I saying...it doesn't match with ANYTHING in Milwaukee.

Please tell me that "brainstorm" was short-lived. PLEASE!

you dont want to "match" your other buildings. You cant match the courthosue without making it a boring, retro looking thing. And godforbid they base their design on the Catholic Knights building!

Contrast is a nice thing. Thats what makes the city more intersting then the suburbs, which is filled with architecture that matches each other. Just go to Mequon sometime.

exit_320

September 19th, 2007, 01:30 AM

Contrast is a nice thing. Thats what makes the city more intersting then the suburbs, which is filled with architecture that matches each other. Just go to Mequon sometime.

Or Franklin....

CGII

September 19th, 2007, 02:08 AM

Let's get this straight. The impacting legacy of a building is NOT [repeat, NOT] made the moment it gets built. Honestly, this pisses me off so much I could go on for hours. People who like a particular design say, 'Oh, it will be an instant classic because buildings that were disliked when they were first built became classics!' and people who dislike that same design say, 'Oh, it will be terrible because in the past people woo designs that turn out looking horrible.' The truth is, nobody fucking knows. Don't pull this 'Oh I KNOW it will be a classic because I can see into the future and I can see the role this building plays into Milwaukee society and personal culture and the way it interacts with the future enviroment' BS. PLEASE. Let's keep it simply to the design merits or demerits in the PRESENT (well, to be fair, we can talk about how the material of a building will fare over time, but it is silly to argue about the long term psychological impact of the building).

you dont want to "match" your other buildings. You cant match the courthosue without making it a boring, retro looking thing. And godforbid they base their design on the Catholic Knights building!

Contrast is a nice thing. Thats what makes the city more intersting then the suburbs, which is filled with architecture that matches each other. Just go to Mequon sometime.

This is anoher argument I find frustrating. There should be no problem whatsoever with matching buildings supposing that the architecture is good. Go into the North Side sometime, maybe around 27th and Burleigh and tell me you don't see blocks and blocks of matching duplexes whos only real distinction from one another is paint and maybe the positioning of a bay windows. And please, tell me Paris is ugly because it's just blocks and blocks of indistinguishable apartment blocks. Or that the concept of rowhouses is stupid because repition is boring. The problem with matching architecture in a place like Franklin is that the architecture there just flat out sucks. No massing, no detail, no scale, and a huge garage.

-----
Now, if I were to design a building, desigining retro would likely be my last choice. However, it is possible to build retro assuming that correct massing and materials and details are used (check out the Harold Washington Library in Chicago). Zimmerman has done a respectable job in complimenting the courthouse in a modern, sofisticated sense without wobbling into postmodernity.

looksee

September 19th, 2007, 02:26 AM

Zimmerman has done a respectable job in complimenting the courthouse in a modern, sofisticated sense without wobbling into postmodernity.

Yeah, their work is generally as "sofisticated" as your spelling.

CGII

September 19th, 2007, 02:34 AM

Yeah, their work is generally as "sofisticated" as your spelling.

Right, because what's really important is how well I spelled my statement, not the actual content therein.

Please, if you don't have anything to add to the argument besides pointing out the mechanical errors of my typing, keep quiet. You waste everyone's time.

brewcityfan

September 19th, 2007, 03:03 AM

Or Franklin....

Don't even go there...

Let's get this straight. The impacting legacy of a building is NOT [repeat, NOT] made the moment it gets built. Honestly, this pisses me off so much I could go on for hours. People who like a particular design say, 'Oh, it will be an instant classic because buildings that were disliked when they were first built became classics!' and people who dislike that same design say, 'Oh, it will be terrible because in the past people woo designs that turn out looking horrible.' The truth is, nobody fucking knows. Don't pull this 'Oh I KNOW it will be a classic because I can see into the future and I can see the role this building plays into Milwaukee society and personal culture and the way it interacts with the future enviroment' BS. PLEASE. Let's keep it simply to the design merits or demerits in the PRESENT (well, to be fair, we can talk about how the material of a building will fare over time, but it is silly to argue about the long term psychological impact of the building).

I think I agree with your comments...but then again, what are your feelings about the designs being shown presently?

This is anoher argument I find frustrating. There should be no problem whatsoever with matching buildings supposing that the architecture is good. Go into the North Side sometime, maybe around 27th and Burleigh and tell me you don't see blocks and blocks of matching duplexes whos only real distinction from one another is paint and maybe the positioning of a bay windows. And please, tell me Paris is ugly because it's just blocks and blocks of indistinguishable apartment blocks. Or that the concept of rowhouses is stupid because repition is boring. The problem with matching architecture in a place like Franklin is that the architecture there just flat out sucks. No massing, no detail, no scale, and a huge garage.

Oh that's just comical. I think exit and cg were working together to get me riled up. So let me get this straight - a CITY can repeat designs: FINE. A SUBURB can repeat designs: UGLY! HORRIBLE! NASTY! BURN THE DARN THING!

Give me a break. It's simply yet ANOTHER jab at suburbia because well, who else can people point the blame at these days?

To put it frankly - repeating too many items too many times, ANYWHERE, is a bit boring. But to have an older-looking architectural building and then this ultra-modern tinker-toy building just across the street...looks horrendous. You just don't do that! It's like putting a polish bungalow you see on the south side of Milwaukee next to a McMansion in Franklin - it's not gonna look right.

-----
Now, if I were to design a building, desigining retro would likely be my last choice. However, it is possible to build retro assuming that correct massing and materials and details are used (check out the Harold Washington Library in Chicago). Zimmerman has done a respectable job in complimenting the courthouse in a modern, sofisticated sense without wobbling into postmodernity.

This I agree with. Around the courthouse, find something that complements the courthouse. The courthouse deserves the full attention of that area, period. It's our place of civics and justice, not Disneyland.

CGII

September 19th, 2007, 03:26 AM

I think I agree with your comments...but then again, what are your feelings about the designs being shown presently?

My favourite design right now is the Arquitectura dorms. Some of the proposals along Kilbourn are simultaneously garish and uninteresting, but worst of all they cramp the view corridor along Kilbourn.

Oh that's just comical. I think exit and cg were working together to get me riled up. So let me get this straight - a CITY can repeat designs: FINE. A SUBURB can repeat designs: UGLY! HORRIBLE! NASTY! BURN THE DARN THING!

Give me a break. It's simply yet ANOTHER jab at suburbia because well, who else can people point the blame at these days?

The reason repetition in suburbia does not work is because the quality of architecture is far lower. I guess you can argue this all you want, but let's compare the housing stock of Milwaukee, the duplex:

http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/8564/17ap4.jpg
http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/7339/32ly4.jpg
[My favourite row of houses in the city is this block here, on the SE corner of Locust and Holton, lamentably, I have no ground level photos:]
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/411/1235123451234512345nr1.jpg

Now let's compare the architecture of the Milwaukee duplex to that of the standard American suburban style:

http://blogs.move.com/first-time-home-buyers/wp-content/blogs.dir/21/files/2007/04/136003346_b581e5e331.jpg
http://www.embassyhomes.com/modelpages/newenglander6/ne6photos/frontelevation.jpg
http://www.embassyhomes.com/modelpages/cedarpointe8/cp8photos/cp8frontelevation.jpg

The reason suburban reptition sucks is not because it is suburban, but because the architecture that comprises it sucks. Think of Frank Lloyd Wright's usonian duplexes off of Layton Blvd. to find a creative and attractive solution for repitition.

To put it frankly - repeating too many items too many times, ANYWHERE, is a bit boring. But to have an older-looking architectural building and then this ultra-modern tinker-toy building just across the street...looks horrendous. You just don't do that! It's like putting a polish bungalow you see on the south side of Milwaukee next to a McMansion in Franklin - it's not gonna look right.

While repitition can be used well, so can contrast. There should never be an 'either or' option when designing such a grand plan for an urban centre of either building to match everything old or building simply to be groundbreaking. Accept contrast sometimes, it really can work.

exit_320

September 19th, 2007, 03:31 AM

Take a look at the SUBURBS of South Milwaukee, Cudahy, St. Francis, Tosa, West Allis, Shorewood... All examples of suburbs that work because they are walkable, dense neighborhoods with decent construction and architecture. There is some repetition, but there is also enough contrast to make the neighborhoods exciting. Cities would never evolve or change if every building was designed based on traditional design.. if that is how things worked the whole city would look like Soloman Juneau's trading post at Water & Wisconsin.

looksee

September 19th, 2007, 03:37 AM

Right, because what's really important is how well I spelled my statement, not the actual content therein.

Please, if you don't have anything to add to the argument besides pointing out the mechanical errors of my typing, keep quiet. You waste everyone's time.

This is probably one of those times when I'm going to regret replying.

I actually used your misstep as a device for venting about Zimmerman Group. They've designed many large and prominent commissions for the University and its environs, most of which, I think, I pass daily. And they are, at least the ones I know about, without exception, grossly flawed, exactly in the ways you say buildings should be mindful of, i.e. massing, and/or materials combinations, and/or color palette and/or proportions and/or window treatments. Maybe one of these days I'll post and photo-document my case on the Madison forum, but I guess I really am out gunning for them.

Sorry about exploiting your thoughts and seeming to take a cheap-shot and getting you so upset.

You say I was wasting everybody's time, and I thought I was just wasting my breath.

Au revoir.

milwaukee-københavn

September 19th, 2007, 03:52 AM

looksee

September 19th, 2007, 03:56 AM

It is both a little funny and a little sad how upset everyone is getting over a brainstorming excercise.
So , what's to be sad about? http://www.smileyhut.com/fighting/starwars.gif

CGII

September 19th, 2007, 04:34 AM

This is probably one of those times when I'm going to regret replying.

I actually used your misstep as a device for venting about Zimmerman Group. They've designed many large and prominent commissions for the University and its environs, most of which, I think, I pass daily. And they are, at least the ones I know about, without exception, grossly flawed, exactly in the ways you say buildings should be mindful of, i.e. massing, and/or materials combinations, and/or color palette and/or proportions and/or window treatments. Maybe one of these days I'll post and photo-document my case on the Madison forum, but I guess I really am out gunning for them.

Sorry about exploiting your thoughts and seeming to take a cheap-shot and getting you so upset.

You say I was wasting everybody's time, and I thought I was just wasting my breath.

Au revoir.

Ah, I see. Seem to have overlooked that. Sorry for exploding.

At any route, I can understand the contempt held for Zimmerman, they haven't consistently given particularily great designs, but I think in this instance they've given a well formed piece of architecture.

Johnny Drama

September 19th, 2007, 05:03 AM

This is anoher argument I find frustrating. There should be no problem whatsoever with matching buildings supposing that the architecture is good. Go into the North Side sometime, maybe around 27th and Burleigh and tell me you don't see blocks and blocks of matching duplexes whos only real distinction from one another is paint and maybe the positioning of a bay windows. And please, tell me Paris is ugly because it's just blocks and blocks of indistinguishable apartment blocks. Or that the concept of rowhouses is stupid because repition is boring. The problem with matching architecture in a place like Franklin is that the architecture there just flat out sucks. No massing, no detail, no scale, and a huge garage.

-----
Now, if I were to design a building, desigining retro would likely be my last choice. However, it is possible to build retro assuming that correct massing and materials and details are used (check out the Harold Washington Library in Chicago). Zimmerman has done a respectable job in complimenting the courthouse in a modern, sofisticated sense without wobbling into postmodernity.

I think matching buildings sucks in almost every instance. The difference between Paris and modern day buildings is that the style of those Paris apartments ages better.

Johnny Drama

September 19th, 2007, 05:06 AM

This I agree with. Around the courthouse, find something that complements the courthouse. The courthouse deserves the full attention of that area, period. It's our place of civics and justice, not Disneyland.

That doesnt mean it has to be boring. Im not saying that that actual design has to be built, as it is a bit on the wild side. But something funky like that could be interesting in that location.

Jesse276

September 19th, 2007, 05:10 AM

It is both a little funny and a little sad how upset everyone is getting over a brainstorming excercise. This is about the same as if you all started yelling at each other because of some class project from SARUP that someone posted up here.

I don't know, I think it has fostered some interesting conversation about architecture in general. The only thing that could be better is if people starting giving more of their own ideas to improve the square.

Johnny Drama

September 19th, 2007, 05:32 AM

I think it would be kind of cool if they had an event in MacArthur Square. Something like Jazz in the Park. I remember some people talking about a "night market" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_market) in Milwaukee. Something like that in this city could be really cool.

CGII

September 19th, 2007, 03:09 PM

I think matching buildings sucks in almost every instance. The difference between Paris and modern day buildings is that the style of those Paris apartments ages better.

http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/HPI/images/02.gif

http://www.bridgeandtunnelclub.com/bigmap/brooklyn/parkslope/seventhave/9th-20th/25rowhouses.jpg

Repetition can be a very dramatic element in designs, I don't think it should be ruled out.

historybuffer

September 19th, 2007, 03:27 PM

What's the difference? You said and I quote:

" We're ACTUALLY putting this in the public eye? How embarrassing.
Please tell me that "brainstorm" was short-lived. PLEASE!"

You were so offended that I didn't like one project that was proposed for Milwaukee (because I am supposed to support everything Milwaukee?), and here you are criticizing conceptual drawings for MacArthur Square.
The hypocrisy is what is the issue.

I really don't care if you embarrased about the ideas for MacArthur Square you are entitled to your own opinion. You have every right to express your dislike for a project just don't berate others because their ideas and views don't allign with yours. I happen to agree with you about the Pompidieu Center/Lloyd's of London (Richard Rogers) knock-off. Talk about Milwaukee being slow to copy trends, but these are only drawings of what ifs for the sake of stimulating conversation and nothing more than drawings of what ifs designed to show massings and mixed heights and use in the civic space.

historybuffer

September 19th, 2007, 03:47 PM

What pattern or built repetition is the Calatrava addition to the art musueum echoing? Or City Hall? MacArthur Square was designed as a civic destination, just as a museum or City Hall are. Destination spaces are unique because they do not conform to the city grid or the design and massings of the buildings around their immediate neighborhood. Unfortunately MacArthur Square is one of the most underwhelming, out of the way, civic destination spaces in America, and that's do to the legacy that Mayor Henry Maier wanted to leave happening in one of the worst decades for architectural design and urban planning.

The drawings start thought for the future of MacArthur Square. There is little doubt any those buildings will exist in the future, it will be the exact opposite
of how the Amtrak station evolved from Eppstein Uhen Architects' first version a very common place (Bayshore Mall esthetic) architecture to the more innovative approach that is under construction now.

brewcityfan

September 19th, 2007, 04:19 PM

Repetition can be a very dramatic element in designs, I don't think it should be ruled out.

What was the second picture, CG?

I'd go into a tad more depth into comments made on the last page, but I'm about to run out the door here.

Milwaukee, WY

September 19th, 2007, 06:13 PM

thats a good analogy. The Pompidou Center from what I read was hated by Parisians. I even recall a story about the architect telling some old lady that he was the architect and being hit with an umbrella. People hated the Eiffel Tower too.

Milwaukee should be open to these radical looking designs. We dont want the architecture to cater to the old timers. We want it to appeal to young, because that's who we want moving to our city. While I dont think that the Arquitectura building is as undeniably great as that SOM tower that the dipshits passed over in San Francisco. I do think its a step in the right direction for the future. Id rather see Milwaukee build these unusual looking things then more fake retro stuff or Park Lafayettes.

They didn't take the SOM tower? That's a shame, which one did they choose? That red skeletal one? I agree with you 110% though, I'd hate to have a downtown full of retro mockery. That's the shit that belongs out in Franklin, not in my downtown. I'm all for something new and fresh. We should leave the past where it belongs -- in the past.

MilwaukeeD

September 19th, 2007, 06:14 PM

With all of this talk, we have forgotten about some great development news over the past few days (3 hotels expected to break ground by year's end):

Supervisors favor plan for Park East Square
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=663212

Hotel planned near Harley museum site
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=663211

City committee backs $3.1 million for Mitchell St.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=664159

In addition, Manpower being open with flags up. Breakwater demo started as pointed out by twoaday. North End demo well underway. Park Lafayette above ground. Staybridge Hotel about to go above ground. Work on Urban Outfitter's and Anthropologie moving ahead for fall openings. Amtrak station and Harley museum looking great. And First Place and River Renaissance finishing up with their retail/restaurant tenants opening in November. Lots of great stuff happening.

NorthernIL Mike

September 19th, 2007, 06:23 PM

Some of you are making my head hurt. Reminds me of my brothers 6th grade class bitchin.

Good news about the hotels!

Twoaday

September 19th, 2007, 07:05 PM

Here are a couple Manpower photos I took last week:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/davereid/1368672446/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/davereid/1368671522/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/davereid/1367773581/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/davereid/1368671162/

Coldwake

September 19th, 2007, 07:15 PM

NeuBrew

September 19th, 2007, 09:29 PM

Twoaday

September 19th, 2007, 09:51 PM

Yea from the river the Manpower building really came out better than I had figured and if you walk right by the building it is a really nice space on the riverwalk (note they are still finishing that). The streetside is a little unfortunate with the big surface lot but it is my understanding that if they were to expand in the future that lot could be developed so that seems like a reasonable plan.

DooMer_MP3

September 19th, 2007, 10:34 PM

I hope the restaurant over there - Libiamo's - gets some much needed business with Manpower locating there. Its such good, reasonably priced food, but every time we are there, its dead.

Jesse276

September 19th, 2007, 11:26 PM

I hope the restaurant over there - Libiamo's - gets some much needed business with Manpower locating there. Its such good, reasonably priced food, but every time we are there, its dead.

I've been there a couple times too and it was always very good food and service. I'm sure they will do very well with 900 more people next door.

Johnny Drama

September 20th, 2007, 01:03 AM

http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/HPI/images/02.gif

http://www.bridgeandtunnelclub.com/bigmap/brooklyn/parkslope/seventhave/9th-20th/25rowhouses.jpg

Repetition can be a very dramatic element in designs, I don't think it should be ruled out.

Yeah, its ok in instances. But its just not what I want to see in downtown. Skyscrapers tend to be better when they look different from the one next to them anyway. historybuffer hit it on the head I think.

Johnny Drama

September 20th, 2007, 01:04 AM

They didn't take the SOM tower? That's a shame, which one did they choose? That red skeletal one? I agree with you 110% though, I'd hate to have a downtown full of retro mockery. That's the shit that belongs out in Franklin, not in my downtown. I'm all for something new and fresh. We should leave the past where it belongs -- in the past.

They decided on the Pelli tower. Its not a horrible design, but its quite similar to his other work. The SOM tower was a masterpiece and would have been an instant landmark. If those fools out there dont want it, Milwaukee will. Its even white to go along with Moderne and UC.

Johnny Drama

September 20th, 2007, 01:08 AM

City committee backs $3.1 million for Mitchell St.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=664159

.

this is great news. Mitchell St. is such a great part of this city. Its got alot of streetlife and storefronts. Hopefully this money will help bring more businesses to the area.

brewcityfan

September 20th, 2007, 01:40 AM

I realized today, as I sat down to read the bitching, that the exercise for McArthur square did exactly what it intended. That is to spark conversation about what should be there. Our only problem is that everyone on here is so passionate it gets a bit out of hand!

So really we played right into what was supposed to happen.

On a side note... I'd really like to see the newest version of park east square. Has anyone seen any renderings?

I'm glad that we had some kinda half-decent discussion, then! :lol:

I'm still trying to figure out how repititious City houses are better than suburban houses...all I see is the fact that they're closer together and really don't have lawns! But :bash: if you must.

Here are a couple Manpower photos I took last week:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/davereid/1368672446/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/davereid/1368671522/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/davereid/1367773581/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/davereid/1368671162/

Thanks for the pics, Two! I like all the flags in front of Manpower. Looks very prestigious, and makes Milwaukee have that "world class" feel.

CGII

September 20th, 2007, 02:15 AM

Yeah, its ok in instances. But its just not what I want to see in downtown. Skyscrapers tend to be better when they look different from the one next to them anyway. historybuffer hit it on the head I think.

But how many skyscrapers are envisioned thus far for MacArthur Square? Two?

DooMer_MP3

September 20th, 2007, 06:17 AM

I'm still trying to figure out how repititious City houses are better than suburban houses...all I see is the fact that they're closer together and really don't have lawns! But :bash: if you must.

You just answered your own question! ;)

Johnny Drama

September 20th, 2007, 06:53 AM

But how many skyscrapers are envisioned thus far for MacArthur Square? Two?

yeah, but the original argument was building a retro design or matching the lovely Catholic Knights.

brewcityfan

September 20th, 2007, 08:05 AM

You just answered your own question! ;)

From what I see now, it doesn't seem my concern/question ever existed! What the hell are you quoting, DooMer!? :lol:

And just because I said the building didn't go well with CK doesn't mean I want it to look EXACTLY like CK...

NeuBrew

September 20th, 2007, 08:11 PM

Improvements for hotel project advance
A Common Council committee today recommended the city provide $275,000 for public improvements tied to a proposed hotel in the Walker's Point area, just south of downtown Milwaukee.

Developer Tim Dixon plans to convert a former warehouse at 500 W. Florida St. into a 100-room hotel. The site is about three blocks south of the Harley-Davidson museum, which is being built east of the 6th St. Viaduct at W. Canal St.

The Community and Economic Development Committee unanimously recommended spending $275,000 to build a viaduct retaining wall and make improvements to S. 5th St. in conjunction with the proposed $18 million development.

This is great news. I think we could soon see a movement to renovate all areas south/southeast of the Harley Museum. That area is really prime for re-development and could become become a hot area. Maybe the Musuem was the tipping point.

Does anyone know of any plans for the adjacent properties to that Musuem?

If only the post office would renovate/move...

milwaukeeunseen

September 20th, 2007, 08:51 PM

Yes. Walkers Point is where things are really going to happen. Immediately south of the HD museum, and along 1st and 2nd Streets. Eventually we may see continuious mixed use redevelopment from Bay View to the Third Ward along 1st and 2nd Streets. The old Grebe foundry is currently being razed on 1st/Greenfield right across from Rockwell. There are big plans for the huge garage site on 1st/National. Several smaller projects along the 1st and 2nd street corridor are either moving forward or are in the works.

Eriol

September 20th, 2007, 11:40 PM

Imagine the day when all the rivers and canals have promenade/riverwalks or parkway/trails. There must be a way to get the water in the canals to flow and aerate.

brewcityfan

September 21st, 2007, 12:03 AM

^^And couple that with the 3.1 million given towards revitalizing Mitchell Street and you could see a huge turnaround for the south side of Milwaukee.

Johnny Drama

September 21st, 2007, 12:54 AM

Imagine the day when all the rivers and canals have promenade/riverwalks or parkway/trails. There must be a way to get the water in the canals to flow and aerate.

I like the possiblity of Milwaukee having a Venetian aspect to it, where you can get around by boat.

JPmaverick

September 21st, 2007, 01:23 AM

I like the possiblity of Milwaukee having a Venetian aspect to it, where you can get around by boat.

Water taxi service downtown will begin next spring. The boats are on order and will feature an enclosed cabin with heat and A/C. Rip Tide is a sponsor and a yacht dealer from the Third Ward will run the service. The dealer hopes to run the taxi until 2 a.m. (Spring-Fall) and make stops at bars and restaurants along the Milwaukee River. Rip Tide will also cater boats that are chartered for special events.

Twoaday

September 21st, 2007, 05:19 AM

I was wondering what happened to the water taxi service as I had originally been told it would of run this summer.

NeuBrew

September 21st, 2007, 04:00 PM

I like the possiblity of Milwaukee having a Venetian aspect to it, where you can get around by boat.

I just wonder if that will ever be possible. The plan for the meno valley is industrial and you have a huge railyard in between the canals. I think you'll see further development on the Milwaukee River and just a couple newer places on the Menomonee river, but those canals are really used for industry. I don't think anyone is moving the giant Weenergies plant or it's coal dump. We need power, but man that thing is on a good piece of property.

I think this is the area we're really talking about growing quick:

http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/4738/milwda2.gif

Skyking2

September 21st, 2007, 05:44 PM

I read a business brief in the current Business Journal that stated New Land Enterprises LLP purchased the lot at Kilbourn and Van Buren (formerly Edwardo's Pizza) to build a multi-story project incorporating office, retail and residential. This Boris Gokhman is turning into quite the local developer.

Anyone know any more about this?

While I'd like to see it a couple of blocks further south on Van Buren (to help bridge the skyline), it would be sweet if Gokhman had the courage to put up something significant -- say in the 35-40 story range. This would seem to be a very nice location, nonetheless. Will be interesting to see if this comes to fruition, and what "multi-story" actually means. Ten floors, twenty or more?

looksee

September 21st, 2007, 05:50 PM

it would be sweet if Gokhman had the courage to put up something significant

So pay him a visit and see if you can stiffen his spine. These developers are such wimps, you know?

________________________________________________________________________________

(I better take a long break; I'm developing a bad habit here.) Bye.http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/26/26_7_6.gif

brewcityfan

September 21st, 2007, 06:19 PM

Actually you'd be amazed what miracles happen when they get some realistic citizen input...

Developers otherwise build the cheapest humanly possible!

Skyking2

September 21st, 2007, 06:28 PM

So pay him a visit and see if you can stiffen his spine. These developers are such wimps, you know?

________________________________________________________________________________

(I better take a long break; I'm developing a bad habit here.) Bye.http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/26/26_7_6.gif

Well, I think they're actually more interested in developing profitable projects rather than eye-popping additions to the skyline. But, I hear you. Seems most developers are taking a very, very safe approach to anything...and who can blame them. If it were us, I think we'd also be wary of trying to put up something that could lose money and forever tarnish credibility. Point is, while there is demand for developments -- particularly residential -- too many people are building their own deals, therefore diluting the market and making any really big (read TALL) projects unlikely.

DooMer_MP3

September 21st, 2007, 06:44 PM

Boris and NLE are quite the shady bunch. There is a reason they have multiple lawsuits against them... I should know, I live in one of their wonderfully crafted buildings!

Skyking2

September 21st, 2007, 06:57 PM

Boris and NLE are quite the shady bunch. There is a reason they have multiple lawsuits against them... I should know, I live in one of their wonderfully crafted buildings!

That's what I understand. Too bad he's effing around in our city with @$#! developments. The fact that he has purchased some Katz properties tells us something, too...misery loves comapny. Can't he be sent packing back to Siberia, or wherever he's from?!

milwaukeeunseen

September 21st, 2007, 09:16 PM

This is good news:

Bradford Beach to get a cleanup
Posted: Sept. 18, 2007

By this time next year, Bradford Beach should be sporting a new look, with $1.2 million in rain gardens, dunes and grassy swales installed as a means of diverting bacteria-laden storm water runoff from the sand.

Buy a link hereLow spots near the beach that now are mowed will be shaped into basins with native plantings to help hold and absorb excess rainwater, and nearby berms will be planted with dune grass.

More:

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=664189

Johnny Drama

September 22nd, 2007, 12:33 AM

Water taxi service downtown will begin next spring. The boats are on order and will feature an enclosed cabin with heat and A/C. Rip Tide is a sponsor and a yacht dealer from the Third Ward will run the service. The dealer hopes to run the taxi until 2 a.m. (Spring-Fall) and make stops at bars and restaurants along the Milwaukee River. Rip Tide will also cater boats that are chartered for special events.

That will be great for the downtown area! Imagine a night out on the town bar hoping via the River? It would also be interesting if people living along the river, would use the taxi to get to work in the morning. Surely this would just add to the draw of downtown.

Johnny Drama

September 22nd, 2007, 12:38 AM

I just wonder if that will ever be possible. The plan for the meno valley is industrial and you have a huge railyard in between the canals. I think you'll see further development on the Milwaukee River and just a couple newer places on the Menomonee river, but those canals are really used for industry. I don't think anyone is moving the giant Weenergies plant or it's coal dump. We need power, but man that thing is on a good piece of property.

I think this is the area we're really talking about growing quick:

http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/4738/milwda2.gif

This is the area that I am most excited about for future development. There is so much potential, especially on that site across from the future Harley Museum, in the Fifth Ward. My dream is that someone would build something on the Post Office site if they move. Being across from perhaps one of Milwaukee's most famous future attractions, I am dreaming big.

CGII

September 22nd, 2007, 04:09 AM

I absolutely love the potential for the old train yard site just south of the Harley Museum site. I always hope that someday, eventually, it could be kind of a Milwaukee's Millenium Park, with all the old warehouses on Florida St. converted to vibrant residential/retail buildings.

I actually took a college trip to University of Minnesota/Minneapolis about a month ago and saw that one student had done a presentation for something of the sort on that very lot.

Twoaday

September 22nd, 2007, 04:52 AM

I think my post got deleted so here's the link to Park Lafayette
http://www.flickr.com/photos/davereid/1419849507/

i_am_hydrogen

September 22nd, 2007, 06:53 PM

I think my post got deleted so here's the link to Park Lafayette
http://www.flickr.com/photos/davereid/1419849507/

It was moved to the Park Lafayette thread.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=446109

hello345

September 23rd, 2007, 08:00 PM

has the edge ( www.edgecondos.com ) started constuction yet ? it looks like a great project!

MilwaukeeD

September 23rd, 2007, 09:49 PM

yes, they are moving dirt around right now.

Twoaday

September 23rd, 2007, 09:50 PM

The edge appears to be working on the riverwall I think. I snapped a photo the other day but really all you can see is a big pile of dirt.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/davereid/1420887922/

D-res

September 23rd, 2007, 10:48 PM

According to Emporis the Rivianna was approved. Any news on this? If someone posted something I must've missed it.

Markitect

September 23rd, 2007, 11:33 PM

According to Emporis the Rivianna was approved. Any news on this? If someone posted something I must've missed it.

Rivianna received some preliminary zoning approvals back in July, but it hasn't been given a green light yet. It will be up for more approvals in the future once the developer submits more refined and detailed plans.

Coldwake

September 24th, 2007, 07:13 PM

I was looking something up on Emporis today and saw a proposed project called "1646 North Prospect Avenue." Did I miss someone talking about this at some point?

If not, does anyone know anything about it?

**EDIT: Nevermind... this was the one that was talked about at the same time as Breakwater. Just got overshadowed I guess.

mohammed wong

September 25th, 2007, 04:13 AM

Olson Pays Up Taxes and Fines, Some ZND Members Move to Block Holton St. Development Anyway
Author/Source: Dan Knauss
Tuesday, 18 September 2007
Full Council Will Make Final Decision Tuesday, 9/25

Proposed Development Above Holton St. Bridge
Since my last report on developer Tim Olson's efforts to get a variance for increased density and zoning changes on a proposed condo/apartment/retail project at Holton and Brown Streets, he has paid all his outstanding property taxes--over $300,000--on the properties he holds under his own name. He has also paid in full all his litigated fines in municipal court--over $20,000--for building and property code violations.

These formerly outstanding debts to the City were the main sticking point for Olson with the City's Zoning, Neighborhoods, and Development (ZND) committee last time he appeared before it. At that time Olson was asked to pay all his fines and delinquencies before the ZND would consider his requests.

Today Olson appeared before the ZND again with no outstanding municipal fines or debts on an item relating to a change in zoning from Neighborhood Shopping to Detailed Planned Development for the proposed development site. (Item 19 at the 03:20:00 mark.)

Two members of the ZND--Alds. Bob Bauman and Ashanti Hamilton--voted no on granting the variance with Ald. Wade absent. Alds. D'Amato and Murphy voted yes. As a result, this item is now passed to the Common Council without recommendation for a final decision when the full Council convenes on September 25. It is not on the consent agenda and will undergo discussion before the Council.

To pass a motion supporting the item, a minimum of eight council members' votes are needed. If the Council votes down the item, it seems probable that Olson will either hold the property in its current state (a vacant, former funeral home) or build by right with fewer and larger, higher rent apartment units under current zoning.

To make your support known to the Council for or against approving Olson's variance request and the development plan as presented to area residents, please contact all aldermen before next Tuesday.

Update: coverage of this story in today's (9/19) Journal-Sentinel.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=664152

mohammed wong

September 25th, 2007, 04:16 AM

In other news Center street Cafe will open on Center street of all places
this coming winter in Riverwest, its liquor license was approved.

We have to stem the loss of bars closing,
and have more bar openings, oh yeah and how about milwaukee bars
atleast some stay open until 4-5am?

I guess milwaukeeans are too wild to be trusted out that late :)

Twoaday

September 25th, 2007, 04:44 AM

bar time is a state law I believe so if you'd like to see it changed contact your local representatives! What other bars have been closing?

mohammed wong

September 25th, 2007, 04:56 AM

bar time is a state law I believe so if you'd like to see it changed contact your local representatives! What other bars have been closing?

well this is speaking over a long long period of time I read that wright street was chock full of bars in riverwest,its obvious which places were storefronts/bars along wright street and other places in riverwest and milwaukee,
that are now just residences

Jesse276

September 25th, 2007, 05:29 AM

well this is speaking over a long long period of time I read that wright street was chock full of bars in riverwest,its obvious which places were storefronts/bars along wright street and other places in riverwest and milwaukee,
that are now just residences

Well, some of those places closed decades ago. Honestly, I don't think it would be good for all of them to reopen as bars and restaurants. While it would be nice for the nightlife for the area, it would detract from the residential aspect of the neighborhood. Also, part of the reason for the decline of retail in neighborhoods was the decline in household density. After WWII there was a housing shortage with families crammed into apartments that now house one or two people. If you have less people, you will have less retail and entertainment demand.

It seems most of the east-west streets in Riverwest have some former retail/pub/restaurant buildings that have been converted to other uses over the years.

Twoaday

September 25th, 2007, 05:31 AM

Oh ok I still don't know Riverwest as well as I should. That said in the years I've lived in Milwaukee it seems more and more bars keep opening.

EastSider

September 26th, 2007, 06:13 AM

Can someone help me with something that's been bothering me. Is the road bordering the river in the North End project new, and if so, where is it going to connect?

http://www.mandelgroup.com/data/condos/northend_pic1_big1.jpg

Jesse276

September 26th, 2007, 06:40 AM

Can someone help me with something that's been bothering me. Is the road bordering the river in the North End project new, and if so, where is it going to connect?

It would be a new road and my guess is that it wouldn't really be for through traffic but would be a pseudo-extension of Edison Street. I don't really know though, it could just loop back out to Water street.

mohammed wong

September 26th, 2007, 04:39 PM

A little off topic but i thought this was odd

Ant farm thievery
By Mary Louise Schumacher
Wednesday, Sep 26 2007, 08:04 AM

What's a gallery owner to do? Do people buy art? So rarely that he has to beg the electric company to leave the lights going. Do people steal things like a copy of Found Magazine, fun little buttons and a copy of the very first issue of Suicide Girls? Sadly, yes, they do.

But, what Mike Brenner, owner of Hotcakes Gallery in Riverwest calls the "ultimate atrocity" has just happened.

Someone absconded with his gallery ant farm.

"All the hours my little red friends and I spent together eating meals, gazing into each other's eyes and making plans for our future together," Mike said in an email to a popular artist listserv. "Now we have been separated."

He insists no ransom will be paid.

Anyone knowing the whereabouts of the Hocakes Gallery an

JPmaverick

September 26th, 2007, 04:39 PM

Can someone help me with something that's been bothering me. Is the road bordering the river in the North End project new, and if so, where is it going to connect?

In the photo below, the red line represents the proposed alignment for a new street in the North End development and the green line represents an extension of the River Walk.

http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/9779/northendyg6.png

D-res

September 26th, 2007, 08:28 PM

So I just read in the JS that city tourist officials are hoping to put a life-size bronze statue of the Fonz downtown. :ohno:

brewcityfan

September 26th, 2007, 09:11 PM

Hopefully they pick a decent spot for the statue!

ClarkWGriswald

September 26th, 2007, 09:39 PM

So I just read in the JS that city tourist officials are hoping to put a life-size bronze statue of the Fonz downtown. :ohno:

Hehe I read that too. I think they were talking Water & Wisconsin, near the Chase Bldg.

exit_320

September 26th, 2007, 10:04 PM

So I just read in the JS that city tourist officials are hoping to put a life-size bronze statue of the Fonz downtown. :ohno:

I don't see anything wrong with it, the Fonz is a cool image, especially if the statue had him on a Harley. Now if it was Laverne and Shirley skipping down the street... well that would be embarassing

Steely Dan

September 26th, 2007, 10:28 PM

So I just read in the JS that city tourist officials are hoping to put a life-size bronze statue of the Fonz downtown. :ohno:

that's pure, raw, unadulterated, mega-awesomeness. the fonz was the coolest person who ever roamed the earth. FONZIE FOREVER!

Paule

September 26th, 2007, 10:34 PM

Now if it was Laverne and Shirley skipping down the street... well that would be embarassing

Mmmmm, no it woudn't. Lennie and Squiggy running after them would though...

brewcityfan

September 26th, 2007, 11:57 PM

that's pure, raw, unadulterated, mega-awesomeness. the fonz was the coolest person who ever roamed the earth. FONZIE FOREVER!

Now I know who that guy will be forcing people to take pictures of him standing next to the statue when it's revealed! :lol:

EastSider

September 27th, 2007, 05:37 AM

In the photo below, the red line represents the proposed alignment for a new street in the North End development and the green line represents an extension of the River Walk.

It would be a new road and my guess is that it wouldn't really be for through traffic but would be a pseudo-extension of Edison Street. I don't really know though, it could just loop back out to Water street.

Thanks, especially for the map.

EastSider

September 27th, 2007, 05:42 AM

Model:
http://onmilwaukee.com/images/articles/beachdesign_story1.jpg

From: OnMilwaukee.com (http://onmilwaukee.com/buzz/articles/beachdesign.html)
Better Pictures: Friends of Bradford Beach (http://www.designoffice.com/watergarden/)

D-res

September 27th, 2007, 09:29 AM

^^
I remember this being posted some time ago. Has this been resurfaced and is it actually going through? I think before they spend the money to build this they should CLEAN UP THE BEACH! So many damn shells it hurts to walk, let alone the fucking trash. They need to put trash cans on the beach, although sadly some people are too lazy to walk 20ft to a trash can when they can just throw their shit right where they're standing.

Which reminds me.. last week my roommate and I were waiting at Capitol and Humboldt for the bus. A lady with a stroller was waiting when we got there. About 15-20 minutes later the bus FINALLY came and we all got on. The NEXT EFFING STOP she got off. In the time she waited for the bus she could've walked home, back to the bus stop and back home again two times. Some people kill me.

/rant

NeuBrew

September 27th, 2007, 03:51 PM

^^
I remember this being posted some time ago. Has this been resurfaced and is it actually going through? I think before they spend the money to build this they should CLEAN UP THE BEACH! So many damn shells it hurts to walk, let alone the fucking trash. They need to put trash cans on the beach, although sadly some people are too lazy to walk 20ft to a trash can when they can just throw their shit right where they're standing.

I thought the intention of this project was to clean up the beach. Isn't this the one that is intended to help manage the contaminated storm runnoff from coming down onto the beach? That was the source of the bacteria, correct?

milwaukeeunseen

September 27th, 2007, 04:45 PM

I thought the intention of this project was to clean up the beach. Isn't this the one that is intended to help manage the contaminated storm runnoff from coming down onto the beach? That was the source of the bacteria, correct?

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported a few weeks ago that Bradford Beach was set to undergo a major renovation aimed at improving asthetics and keeping the beach cleaner.

The heart of the problem is indeed storm water runoff. So they're going to put in native plantings that will soak up more runoff, thus reducing the amount that ends up in the Lake.

The water garden is a seperate issue from the County-funded beach renovation. It's being put together by a private "Friends of Bradford Beach" group. Fund-raising for the project is going well, so it looks like the water garden should be a reality soon.

Nuclear_Art

September 27th, 2007, 05:25 PM

In the photo below, the red line represents the proposed alignment for a new street in the North End development and the green line represents an extension of the River Walk.

http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/9779/northendyg6.png

Most likely not a public road but a private drive.

Markitect

September 27th, 2007, 07:22 PM

Most likely not a public road but a private drive.

No. They are definitely public streets, as indicated in the plans for the North End. A good chunk of the TIF request that was approved last year is going toward the dockwall along the river, the RiverWalk, and the new streets--all of which will be publicly accessible.

There will also be a short extension of Milwaukee Street (not drawn on JPMaverick's map) put in that will link Water Street to the new riverside street and RiverWalk.

Nuclear_Art

September 28th, 2007, 04:22 PM

No. They are definitely public streets, as indicated in the plans for the North End. A good chunk of the TIF request that was approved last year is going toward the dockwall along the river, the RiverWalk, and the new streets--all of which will be publicly accessible.

There will also be a short extension of Milwaukee Street (not drawn on JPMaverick's map) put in that will link Water Street to the new riverside street and RiverWalk.

Sorry, you either heard wrong or don't know the difference between public and private right of way. The city will neither own nor maintain these streets. Public accessibility does not equal public streets.

I just want to make these clarifications to avoid the misinformed response of "My tax dollars are going to build dinky little roads to nowhere!".

Milwaukee, WY

September 28th, 2007, 04:42 PM

Sorry, you either heard wrong or don't know the difference between public and private right of way. The city will neither own nor maintain these streets. Public accessibility does not equal public streets.

I just want to make these clarifications to avoid the misinformed response of "My tax dollars are going to build dinky little roads to nowhere!".

Markitect I'm fairly sure doesn't really ever "hear wrong", and the reason for the TIF in this case was in part to build/upgrade city streets. They will be public roads. The TIF has been debated black and blue in this forum in the past, just search the archives.

Nuclear_Art

September 28th, 2007, 04:50 PM

Markitect I'm fairly sure doesn't really ever "hear wrong", and the reason for the TIF in this case was in part to build/upgrade city streets. They will be public roads. The TIF has been debated black and blue in this forum in the past, just search the archives.

I work as an engineer in the city DPW and I just asked the head of Planning who has his fingers in all of these projects and the word is that these are private roads. I hate to pull rank on Markitect but thems the facts and you can't get more definitive answers even if you have a direct line to God. While the distinction between a public road and a publicly accessible road may seem minor to the layman, for us engineers and planners, it is a night and day difference.

Markitect

September 28th, 2007, 09:08 PM

Yes, I do know the difference. I happened to be referring to "public" in the non-technical sense, for the benefit of the laymen (laypersons?) here. Sorry.

Yes, the street is going to be owned and maintained by the landowner (so it is not public in the technical sense, as in being owned/maintained by the municipal government), but it will be open as an amenity for for anyone wanting to walk/run/crawl/bike/rollerskate/skip/gallop/drive on (so it is public in the non-technical sense).

NeuBrew

September 28th, 2007, 09:49 PM

That's the first time I've ever heard Markitect even half wrong. Glad to have so many people 'in the know' on the board.

Unseen, thanks for the clarification on Bradford Beach.

EastSider

September 28th, 2007, 09:50 PM

http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/bym/img/sep07/iron_092807_big.jpg

Developer Tim Dixon is converting the former warehouse at 500 W. Florida St., a short distance from the new Harley-Davidson Museum and businesses such as Rockwell Automation Inc.

Full Story: JSonline.com
(http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=668466)

Eriol

September 29th, 2007, 11:34 PM

One thing is for sure. When you consider all the boutique hotels being considered for development and the various name changes, almost always as upgrades, Milwaukee has definitely become a very competititive and increasingly upscale hotel market in the last very few years.

Airport Four Points reflags as Wyndham, plans renovationThe Business Journal of Milwaukee

Print Article Email Article Reprints RSS Feeds Add to Del.icio.us Digg This

The Four Points by Sheraton Milwaukee Airport has been reflagged as the Wyndham Milwaukee Airport Hotel & Convention Center and will undergo a two-year renovation.

The hotel, at 4747 S. Howell Ave., has 508 guest rooms, and more than 55,000 square feet of meeting, banquet, and convention hall space. For the past several years, it has ranked second on The Business Journal's list of largest Milwaukee-area hotels and third on the list of largest Wisconsin hotels and resorts.

"The Wyndham brand is a great fit for this hotel, because it has the comfortable accommodations, full-service amenities, and expansive convention facilities that you expect to find in a Wyndham property," said Cindy Cox Olcott, president of Horizon Hotels Ltd., of Eatontown, N.J., the property's management company for more than 10 years.

As part of the Wyndham conversion, effective Friday, the property will undergo a complete renovation over the next two years. All guest rooms will be updated, hallways and thoroughfares will be redecorated, and all meeting, banquet and convention space will be completely refurbished.

The hotel offers four dining and entertainment facilities for guests and walk-in patrons: America's House of Steaks, America's Lounge, Scooter's Sports Bar, and Courtyard Restaurant.

EastSider

September 30th, 2007, 07:50 AM

http://www.biztimes.com/nf/uploads/Image/9.28issue/macarthur.jpg
City of Milwaukee officials recently began work to update the Milwaukee Downtown Plan, which serves as a guide for downtown development. “We think the process is an opportunity to take a look at the downtown holistically,” said City Planner Robert Greenstreet.

For the first time ever, city officials are creating a master plan for the entire city. In addition, city officials are creating 12 area plans, including the update of the downtown plan. All of the planning work is expected to be complete by 2010, Greenstreet said.

Once completed, the updated downtown plan will likely be heavily focused on the west side of downtown, which has long been overshadowed by the area east of the Milwaukee River.

Small Business Times (http://www.biztimes.com/news/2007/9/28/city-updates-downtown-master-plan)

CGII

September 30th, 2007, 06:10 PM

Those tall bulidings need to be backed up from the street: the vista along Kilbourn Avenue is probably the best thing about Westown as it is and needs preserving. I really like that tall buildings are being included in the plan but some sort of setback zoning would be fitting to the area.

EastSider

October 3rd, 2007, 06:23 AM

The Wall Street Journal had an article that labels "the brewery" development as being an example of recent projects that are aimed at 'revitalizing' Milwaukee.

Partial Story Availabile: HERE (http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119076845442339446.html)

Coldwake

October 3rd, 2007, 04:53 PM

Bringing the street up to park level would be nice. As long as they keep the freeway access through the tunnels. In fact, it could be a "lower Kilbourn" as it goes under that section.

DooMer_MP3

October 3rd, 2007, 10:24 PM

Interesting story on the CEO of RedPrarie and a supposed home-robbery he endured by a shotgun-wielding burglar that he never reported to MPD, but instead the mayor/media...

http://www.jsonline.com/watch/?watch=1&date=10/3/2007&id=29988

I like how crime in Milwaukee factors into his business plan. Its almost like a home break-in (if true) would equate to a downtown office building. I mean, I can see it now - "RedPrarie Office Building Robbed Repeatedly, Shot At".

brewcityfan

October 4th, 2007, 01:47 AM

^^ :lol: "Shot at"

Yeah, well, robbers these days like shooting at buildings!

Who knows what RedPrairie is going to do now with the CEO truly finding Milwaukee this utterly disgusting.

NLouisianaJay

October 4th, 2007, 04:25 AM

The Asian Invasion!
http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/photographer/12/12710_large.jpg

this time it's not the beetle or a toyota. Go bucks!

Twoaday

October 4th, 2007, 05:35 AM

Instead of calling the police he sends an email to the neighborhood complaining about taxes? This guy seem like quite the character.

ClarkWGriswald

October 4th, 2007, 06:19 AM

Instead of calling the police he sends an email to the neighborhood complaining about taxes? This guy seem like quite the character.

Yeah, there certainly is something not right about this and how he went about it. I wonder if he really expects a lot of cooperation now from the police, after cutting them off at the ankles before even giving them the opportunity to do what the police do.

I rather like the tone of how the article ends - "John's a big businessman," Stiehl said, "and he's used to snapping his fingers and getting things done." :nuts:

NeuBrew

October 4th, 2007, 04:59 PM

That reminds me, don't apply for a job at RedPrairie -- check.

DooMer_MP3

October 4th, 2007, 05:16 PM

Wait, in the latest article, he starts talking about starting the "de-annexation" process. Is this guy for real? I hope this idiot and his company decide to leave the state. What a maniac.

exit_320

October 4th, 2007, 06:13 PM

he's a douche

milwaukeeunseen

October 5th, 2007, 12:14 AM

I took this photo yesterday of work going on at the site of the Edge condos:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v739/milwunseen/HPIM1515.jpg

Foundation work?

Eriol

October 5th, 2007, 03:13 AM

I sure will be happy when that tannery is finally gone.

Which reminds me, has any plan been discussed for the Lackey & Joys place? That is a waste of good property.

Levelup

October 5th, 2007, 06:10 AM

Milwaukee, WY

October 5th, 2007, 07:46 AM

he's a douche
:cheers1:

-Begin rant-

If he is so afraid of the big black, err, bad city, and all it's taxes, he can take his racist ass and his company right on out of Wisconsin. What a moron. Good riddance!

Rant over.

brewcityfan

October 5th, 2007, 03:28 PM

Considering the loss of RedPrairie would amount to more conservative talk radio hosts nagging about how bad our business climate is in Wisconsin, I sure hope we do our best to keep em here.

NeuBrew

October 5th, 2007, 03:52 PM

Considering the loss of RedPrairie would amount to more conservative talk radio hosts nagging about how bad our business climate is in Wisconsin, I sure hope we do our best to keep em here.

I'm not sure you could ever placate a talk show host, considering their livelihood rests on discontent.

Considering the price of office space and the quality of the workforce education in this area, he should stop his whining.

brewcityfan

October 5th, 2007, 08:16 PM

I'm not sure you could ever placate a talk show host, considering their livelihood rests on discontent.

Considering the price of office space and the quality of the workforce education in this area, he should stop his whining.

Considering I debate a radio talk show host everyday on my blog - I can almost sense what he'll write by the end of the morning...

Skyking2

October 5th, 2007, 11:23 PM

:cheers1:

-Begin rant-

If he is so afraid of the big black, err, bad city, and all it's taxes, he can take his racist ass and his company right on out of Wisconsin. What a moron. Good riddance!

Rant over.

Perhaps RedPrairie's owner is a bit of a whacko (time will tell), but before all of you boys get too tanked up with yourselves look at how foolish you're acting as well. C'mon, with the need to find large tenants for developments downtown, you're all stoked up and puffing your chests and kicking RedPrairie's ass out of town?!! Get real, boys.

As for your collective comments re local talk radio, all I can do is thank God it exists as a rational counter to the lunacy that is the Left. :nuts:
Perhaps Bob Hope once said it best:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWpU8sX10_4

MJinOshkosh

October 6th, 2007, 10:26 AM

Perhaps RedPrairie's owner is a bit of a whacko (time will tell), but before all of you boys get too tanked up with yourselves look at how foolish you're acting as well. C'mon, with the need to find large tenants for developments downtown, you're all stoked up and puffing your chests and kicking RedPrairie's ass out of town?!! Get real, boys.

As for your collective comments re local talk radio, all I can do is thank God it exists as a rational counter to the lunacy that is the Left. :nuts:
Perhaps Bob Hope once said it best:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWpU8sX10_4

^^ I couldn't agree more.

Eriol

October 6th, 2007, 04:47 PM

Good one!:cheers:

Milwaukee, WY

October 6th, 2007, 10:25 PM

milwaukeeunseen

October 7th, 2007, 05:14 AM

Looks like the Amtrak station is coming along ...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v739/milwunseen/HPIM1565.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v739/milwunseen/HPIM1564.jpg

Fiddlerontheruf

October 7th, 2007, 02:59 PM

^Looks awesome.

NorthernIL Mike

October 7th, 2007, 06:40 PM

Train station is taking shape!

MilwaukeeMark

October 8th, 2007, 02:44 AM

Wow, that's freaking awesome. Thanks for posting the update pictures... I haven't been down along that street in weeks.

usbmfa

October 8th, 2007, 06:01 AM

WSJ article text. Great piece, it mentions L&S, Dahmer, and our lackluster economy. I included authors email address for your flaming convience. OK, its not really that bad, but our reputation still precedes us.

Milwaukee
Brewery Site Becomes Redevelopment Linchpin
By MAURA WEBBER SADOVI
September 26, 2007; Page B4

The long-vacant former Pabst brewery site in Milwaukee -- which includes a location that was made famous in the TV series "Laverne & Shirley" -- is poised to gain its first tenants next year, as a local businessman is working to redevelop the blighted section of his native city. The project is one of the latest efforts aimed at revitalizing Milwaukee, which anchors a region that has battled anemic job and population growth as its manufacturing sector has shrunk.

The asking price for the historic 'Laverne & Shirley' bottling building in Milwaukee is about $5.8 million.
The 21-acre Pabst parcel in the northwest corner of downtown Milwaukee has remained a high-profile and largely vacant relic of the city's past since it closed in 1996. Joseph Zilber, a prominent native Milwaukee businessman who made part of his fortune building homes for returning World War II soldiers, last year paid about $13 million for the property and the rights to various related environmental and engineering studies. His company is working to redevelop it as a mixed-use neighborhood and is selling off many of the historic buildings to new owners who will put the properties to a variety of residential, retail and office uses. The site includes a beer-bottling building built between 1889 and 1911 that was featured in the opening sequences of the TV show.

Mr. Zilber says he is pursuing the project as a way of establishing his legacy and giving back to the city. "It needs to be done," says Mr. Zilber, 89 years old, chairman of Brewery Project LLC, which is the master developer of the project now known as the Brewery. Mr. Zilber envisions a vibrant neighborhood emerging on the property in about five years. Mr. Zilber has worked to bolster the city's reputation before: he led a group in the 1990s that bought and destroyed evidence used in the trial against serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer to ensure that the materials wouldn't become grisly collectors' items.

Mr. Zilber stepped forward to buy the site after an earlier proposal to develop it as an entertainment-oriented project fizzled. The Brewery now has four agreements to sell off parts of the property, according to Mike Mervis, assistant to Mr. Zilber.

The Brewery project is moving forward as Milwaukee has seen a surge of residential development downtown in recent years. Milwaukee plans to challenge the U.S. Census Bureau's estimate of the city's 2006 population, which it said was about 573,000. A city spokesman maintains its population was more than 600,000 last year, as it is beginning to reverse a decades-long decline.

Several projects are also planned in a new area near the Pabst site known as the Park East corridor, a piece of land opened up by the demolition of a section of elevated freeway. Among the new additions in that area: a 280,000-square-foot new headquarters for Manpower Inc., the global employment-services company, which opened last week. The city also gained attention with the 2001 completion of a Santiago Calatrava-designed addition to the Milwaukee Art Museum.

Still, average rents in the Milwaukee region's office, retail, warehouse and apartment sectors continue to lag behind national averages based on 54 major U.S. markets. Area office rents of about $13.94 a square foot were slightly below the level they were 10 years ago, according to Property & Portfolio Research Inc., a Boston real-estate research firm. The lower rents can be traced in part to the Milwaukee metropolitan area's lackluster economy, which saw average annual job growth, though improving, of just 0.2% from 2002 to 2006, compared with the national pace of 0.9%, according to Moody's Economy.com. Year-over-year population growth for the Milwaukee region was 0.3% in the second quarter, compared with 0.8% nationally.

Write to Maura Webber Sadovi at maura.sadovi@wsj.com