[QUOTE=Kramerica;25268358]Umm... actually, it is up to the State. WisDOT owns all State, U.S., and Interstate highways in Wisconsin. The Federal government does not, with very few exceptions, own public highways. Their role is mainly general oversight of what happens with Federal dollars, and with few exceptions, go with the plans presented to them by the states. There may be some funding issues involved with decomissioning I-794, but if the state wants to do it, they certainly can.

Tell that to the State of Pennsylvania who is now in the process of trying to toll Interstate 80 from the Ohio border to the New Jersey border.

You can't just up and say tear down (or in PA's case toll) a Federally numbered highway even if it is run, controlled or maintained by that state.

Since the Fed loves processes there will be one even with the Hoan bridge.

Hey MJinOshkosh, don't worry. We're getting and will be getting our fair share of pork barrel spending. Four cases in point:

The U.S. Hwy. 45 (formerly State Hwy. 110) project from Oshkosh to Winchester. Expanded from a 2 lane highway to a 4 lane divided highway. Will be completed next month.

The State Hwy. 44 project (Ohio Street reconstruction, and the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge reconstruction) right smack dab in the middle of my side of town. Will be completed next month.

The expansion of Oakwood Road from Witzel Avenue to State Hwy. 21 from a 2 lane street to a 4 lane street. Will be completed next month.

A major project starting in 2010 is the U.S. Hwy 41 expansion from a 4 lane to a 6 lane highway, from State Hwy. 26 to Breezewood Avenue in Neenah. Will be completed in 2015.

I'm thinking these four projects combined run at least $400 million dollars worth of local pork. Just a little reminder, that's all.

I was looking at one of the SEWRPC reports, and on the following link, if you look at page 36 you can see that 794 doesn't actually carry that much traffic in comparison to any other highway in the region, and actually carries less traffic than many of the standard arterial roads in and around milwaukee.
http://www.sewrpc.org/publications/pr/pr-047_regional_freeway_system_reconstruction.pdf

Anyone who doubts how vital 794 is didn't grow up in the direct southern suburbs of Milwaukee and see what a difference it made for this entire area. Nor are they regular users of it now.

I don't think that people are questioning whether 794 provides vital access, but instead they are questioning whether 794 needs to be reconstructed as a massive $40 million dollar bridge, or whether an at grade arterial boulevard or some other form or roadway may be more appropriate. Nobody has suggested getting rid of the link between downtown and the southern burbs, but they have suggested that there may be better alternatives than building a bridge that spans 2 miles over the Milwaukee harbor, and bypasses all of the near south side of Milwaukee. The design alternatives that are being considered all maintain the same access for the southern suburbs, and downtown, but they also provide increased access to the third ward, and the near south side, plus the total budget to implement the design alternatives may save local taxpayers money, something which is always important.

Count me as someone who doesn't consider replacing existing freeways as 'wasteful pork-barrel' spending. To me, that seems to be the best return on investment we could be making for our cities. Ultimately, if we want to avoid the Minnesota bridge disaster all over the country, we're going to have to bite the bullet and start paying for more projects.


'Pork-barrel' to me is building a multi-million dollar fake rainforest in Iowa, or securing funds for a new high school football stadium at your alma mater with a golden statue of yourself. And let's be honest, earmarks account for one of the tiniest fractions of the federal budget imaginable. If we want to fix all of our roads, we can afford it.

First 41 from Richfield to GB doesnt need 3 lanes. Traffic isnt that bad, and when it does get a LITTLE congested its nothing compared elsewhere (OTR truck driver). Besides, traffic on 41 and 43 at that should be given an alternative called passenger rail. that would alleviate some traffic and keep conditions under control.

794 was originally to extend all the way to chicago as an alternate to 94, not just the airport. but i would propose another bridge because it would have to be a bridge that is aesthetically pleasing like a cable-stayed...that would match the art museum in looks. On top of that, it would have a neat lighting display. Also 794 should be extended to racine still as a parkway and nothing larger. But the reconstruction of I-94 south of milwuakee should be postponed, and institute passenger rail first, to see what that does to I-94. Besides, congestion really occurs at interchages, those are the problem areas, not the mainlines.

Also, the reason the Milwaukee area needs a lot of transit money is because thats where the majority of goods/services/people originate, pass through and service. The other location - I-90 from beloit to I-94 in Hudson, WI, passing Madison.

I completely agree with you Jschmuck. Whatever the alternative becomes though, I'd really hope they include some form of bicycle access. Even if it's still a freeway, it would be really easy to include a separate lane for bikes and pedestrians.
My hope is that it ends up becoming a boulevard at street level with a larger bridge at the harbor. (Somewhere between the sizes of the Hoan and the 6th St Viaduct) I don't know whether a bascule bridge that can handle a lot of traffic is feasible, but whatever the bridge becomes...it MUST be aesthetically pleasing and be lit at night. I still cannot figure out why the Hoan isn't lit.

Definitely bike and ped lanes...And if 794 were extended even further, it picks up more traffic and thus keeping the need for a high capacity structure. In the back of my mind i have always thought that ALL of I-794 could have been a tunnel from the marquette to the point it becomes state 794, just like the the Big Dig. But that would be tough to get people on that train even though it would open up land for DEVELOPMENT...

I looked at Tom Barretts revised transit proposal, i just completely agree with him and completely disagree with walker... I dont know what walkers infatuation with roads is, and people like him that cant figure it out that rail transit is actually cheaper simply put. People say, "well i USE that road, thats why i dont mind paying for a massive highway project...but this rail proposal i wont use, so i dont want to pay for it." Hmm well what about that massive highway project 300 miles away in the other part of the state, do you use that??? because your also paying for that one...

Anyways heres a quickie from jsonline a few minutes ago...http://www.jsonline.com/watch/?watch=1&date=9/15/2008&id=46195

which is more appropriate for this blog... lol - im not good with links so its about the 26 story condo tower that has JUST been approved (sweeeet)
that reminds me, making milwaukees population density slightly higher thus proving the need for RAIL transit.

Packers - 2-0:cheers:

As a taxpayer who lives in the state of Wisconsin I don't want the state to throw anymore transportation money toward Milwaukee.

Well, seeing as metro Milwaukee counts for a third of the state population and is also the majour port/railroad hub for the state...


I looked at Tom Barretts revised transit proposal, i just completely agree with him and completely disagree with walker... I dont know what walkers infatuation with roads is, and people like him that cant figure it out that rail transit is actually cheaper simply put. People say, "well i USE that road, thats why i dont mind paying for a massive highway project...but this rail proposal i wont use, so i dont want to pay for it." Hmm well what about that massive highway project 300 miles away in the other part of the state, do you use that??? because your also paying for that one...


Now I disagree with Walker as much as you do, but we shouldn't be supporting Barrett's 'downtown circulator' plan. It just is not a reasonable excuse for good rail transit, and feels to me more like a wimpy compromise even though Barrett has the right idea.

Now I disagree with Walker as much as you do, but we shouldn't be supporting Barrett's 'downtown circulator' plan. It just is not a reasonable excuse for good rail transit, and feels to me more like a wimpy compromise even though Barrett has the right idea.


Pro-rail people cannot afford to be divided on this...that's why we don't have any rail...none of the pro-transit people can agree on routes or technologies. Barrett's plan supports Amtrak, high-speed rail, the KRM, a streetcar and bus rapid transit lines that could be converted to rail at a later date when funds become available. What else do you want?

This is the only plan with rail on the table right now, so either support it, or be prepared to wait another 10 years for any transit improvements. Every city has to start small with one small rail line. As people ride it, they want it expanded to their neighborhoods. But we will never get to that point if pro-transit people work against Barrett's streetcar.

The reason Barrett's streetcar is a good idea is that it is a starter system (inexpensive) and thus will be expanded upon...im not a big fan of that comet system because its just another excuse to keep the roads or build roads, but i believe barrett discussed changing those comet routes from buses into the expanded streetcar.

Its a starter system and thats what we need. It would be almost impossible to get any larger passenger rail system given the mentality and costs...so thats why i think this starter system by Barrett is best, and that it will be expanded upon rail speaking. Believe me, i would love a much larger rail system as well.

As a taxpayer who lives in the state of Wisconsin I don't want the state to throw anymore transportation money toward Milwaukee.

Until there is some sort of well thought out transpotation plan in place for Milwaukee and the whole area, tearing down a bridge just to build a new street level one is to me just crap.

A transportation plan shouldn't be based on one small segment of the 7 county SE Wisconsin transportation district (area around the Hoan bridge).

The whole area plan should also include the whole 7 county SE Wisconsin transportation district too.
Don't forget that the health and fluidity of the transport network in Metro Milwaukee has a DIRECT bearing on the economic health and vitality of Northeastern Wisconsin - yes, even Oshkosh and my home town of Appleton. Just check any map to see why.

And those freeways, especially US 45/I-894, are long overdue for reconstruction and upgrading.

Mike

Also, don't forget that the people of Milwaukee (I'm from De Pere) also pay taxes that help support the roads in the GB and Fox Cities areas, as well.

It should come as no surprise that Catalyst has stalled. I'll be shocked if this and other pending developments move forward in this miserable economic environment:

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=795652

It should come as no surprise that Catalyst has stalled. I'll be shocked if this and other pending developments move forward in this miserable economic environment:

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=795652

Yep, and based on the information in the story, this development would be no great "catalyst." Sadly, if the housing element is taken out of the project, you might as well not sell the lot to Ghazi and go back to Square One. The longer this developer is around, the more questions arise (see Charlotte). This parcel is too valuable to be developed half-assed, and that's the way it's starting to shape up. Timing is everything, and this is not the time to be building condos. My vote is to take this thing off the table until the economy improves. Don't fake an entertainment development when it's so watered down and a shell of its original plan.

Yep, and based on the information in the story, this development would be no great "catalyst." Sadly, if the housing element is taken out of the project, you might as well not sell the lot to Ghazi and go back to Square One. The longer this developer is around, the more questions arise (see Charlotte). This parcel is too valuable to be developed half-assed, and that's the way it's starting to shape up. Timing is everything, and this is not the time to be building condos. My vote is to take this thing off the table until the economy improves. Don't fake an entertainment development when it's so watered down and a shell of its original plan.

Agree completely.

Agree completely.

I don't think the selling point of this development was that there was residential. The selling point was that there was a hotel to support the convention center and entertainment/retail to support Grand Ave.

If/when there is a demand for residential development in that area, Milwaukee developers will certainly fill that demand. They have been doing so over the past decade. What no Milwaukee developer has been able to do successfully is bring major entertainment/retail to downtown.

Ghazi is still planning on doing that, and I would much rather have a theater and bowling alley downtown than wait 5-10 more years for a project that has some residential in it. If you haven't noticed, the Wisconsin Tower has had a real tough time trying to sell their units almost directly across the street...and that was when the condo market was actually strong.

The point is to bring amenities to downtown that don't currently exist, as well as provide some reasons for people who don't ever come downtown to give it a try. I think the Catalyst still succeeds in those two goals.

^^^Agreed.
I guess we'll find out in the next 45 days about his new renderings though.
In the previous ones, are those signs lcd screens? flashed billboards?

Don't forget that the health and fluidity of the transport network in Metro Milwaukee has a DIRECT bearing on the economic health and vitality of Northeastern Wisconsin - yes, even Oshkosh and my home town of Appleton. Just check any map to see why.

And those freeways, especially US 45/I-894, are long overdue for reconstruction and upgrading.

Mike

Also, don't forget that the people of Milwaukee (I'm from De Pere) also pay taxes that help support the roads in the GB and Fox Cities areas, as well.

I will admit to writing my first posting on the Hoan bridge in a state of frustration.

This bridge in actuality isn't that old being that it was opened to traffic in 1977.

31 years isn't that long and the state is as much at fault for the state of repair for this bridge as anyone.

Lets remember for those of us elsewhere in Wisconsin the Leo Frigo (Tower Drive) bridge in Green Bay isn't much younger, I believe opened in 1980 or so.

As I have said and will stand by is a regional transportation plan that includes all modes of transportation.

Wisconsin's 2020 transportation plan was and is a guideline for which some of the highway projects that have been done (In the state and Milwaukee) and are now being done, US highway 41 being one of many as an example.

Sorry if this is off topic... but I am having difficulty finding where someone makes a good case for expansion of I-94 from milwaukee to chicago. I'm not just talking about theories on the future interconnectivity of the cities but actual data on current traffic usage in relation to the the corridor's current capacity in relation to projected growth. Does anyone have alink or can show me where in the transportation studies they actually talk about this?

Thanks!

Obviously you do not commute. The traffic jams are getting worse all the time, especially on the Tri-State.

Have you ever noticed how the exhaust rises above a five mile string of cars as they creep forward 10 miles an hour? Good for the environment, right?

I am sure the environmental impact statement covers it. I have read traffic projections in the Journal.

^^are you talking about daily traffic counts?

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/d2/i94/docs/trafficvolum.pdf

This can be found at wisconsin department of transportation http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/
then click "plans and projects"

Opinion - I-94 could be 4 lanes from Ryan rd to the Mitchell, but all the way to illinois, nope. besides where are the trains?


FYI - MIlwaukee has its own transit blog http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=436421&page=45

We dont need expansion, we need alternatives (options)

Eriol, you're right, I don't commute south of the city. However any time I've had to go to/from chicago during rush hour I don't really have a problem unless I'm close to milwaukee or in IL already.

I'm not saying I'm for or against the expansion. I don't have enough information right now. Which is why I'm trying to find the evidence of it being necessary when compared to other areas that have major congestion on a daily basis. I'd love to see the hard numbers of vehicles traveling during peak times and how much slower the speeds are during those peak times.

In fact I saw a study about this recently, I just can't remember where. The particular one I saw highlighted the freeways in the area that during peak times had a slow dwn of less the 5 mph, 5-20, and greater then 20... or something along those lines.

A major part of the decision of going with 2x4 lanes vs. 2x3 on I-94 was that the difference in cost was only about $200M on a project (basically a 'dig it all out and start over from scratch' top-to-bottom re-engineering from the Mitchell interchange to the state line) with a total budget of over $2G.

IDOT and the ISTHA upgrading their part of I-94 to 2x4 played a BIG part in that decision, too. (Heck, I remember when the north end of the Tri-State was 2x2!)

I also wonder how things would be going with I-94 had the Lake South been built as planned.

Mike

I94 expansion is just poorly planned.

First off the I94 expansion is based on traffic estimates with gas at $2.20 (around there) a gallon. So clearly the traffic counts are bad. Secondly the $1.9 Billion number is based on a 3% rate of inflation even though construction inflation rates in recent years has run much much higher. (closer to 30% I believe).

And finally the average commute time in Milwaukee is 19 minutes. Hardly congested.

I don't think the selling point of this development was that there was residential. The selling point was that there was a hotel to support the convention center and entertainment/retail to support Grand Ave.

If/when there is a demand for residential development in that area, Milwaukee developers will certainly fill that demand. They have been doing so over the past decade. What no Milwaukee developer has been able to do successfully is bring major entertainment/retail to downtown.

Ghazi is still planning on doing that, and I would much rather have a theater and bowling alley downtown than wait 5-10 more years for a project that has some residential in it. If you haven't noticed, the Wisconsin Tower has had a real tough time trying to sell their units almost directly across the street...and that was when the condo market was actually strong.

The point is to bring amenities to downtown that don't currently exist, as well as provide some reasons for people who don't ever come downtown to give it a try. I think the Catalyst still succeeds in those two goals.

True. True. But without the retail (condo) portion of the development, you get no height (25-30 stories), and the project will automatically be starting from a deficit position. That is, after the initial rendering, it will be difficult to get all excited about a watered-down plan. Unless the developer (Ghazi) is going to maintain the original design, this development will become toast. These kinds of developments are supposed to separate Milwaukee from the Des Moines and Omaha's, but the Catalyst without a 25-30-story building is a real yawner. Sorry.

Does anybody know what construction is going on by the ramp going westbound 1-94 (not the new marquette site) off of wisconsin avenue?
There's also a building near 21st and Wisconsin that's getting pretty tall, 7 stories right now I think. don't know what it is though.

UWM dorm update..

http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2008/09/22/story1.html

^^The building near 21st and Wisconsin is an addition to the 2040 Lofts Apartments.

If you're interested in finding out more, Click Here:
http://www.2040lofts.com/#/suites/suites_about

Basically just adding more housing to the Marquette Neighborhood for students and others.

Does anybody know what construction is going on by the ramp going westbound 1-94 (not the new marquette site) off of wisconsin avenue?

Eckstein Hall - Marquette University's new Law School building (http://law.marquette.edu/building/project.html)

thanks much.

Jeez, so thats three new devlopments u/c for Marquette.

Its been too quiet here in my fave american city's thread.
Dont know whether this counts as appropriate but its good news for public transport folk and improved technologists, (whatever the hell that means :) )

From Chicago Tribune:


Amtrak gets federal money to improve Chicago routes
September 30, 2008 at 2:11 PM | Comments (0)

Amtrak trains will be able to travel as fast as 110 m.p.h. within about a year on portions of routes from Chicago to St. Louis and Chicago to Milwaukee under federal grants announced today.

http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2008/10/1/

Group plans 14-story building in Third Ward
60 North H.B. LLC, a group of real estate investors, has a contract to purchase the five-story, 43,200-square-foot, 108-year-old O.C. Hansen Building at 341 N. Milwaukee St. in Milwaukee's Historic Third Ward and the adjacent parking lot at 331 N. Milwaukee St.

The group has submitted plans to the city indicating that it eventually wants to build a 14-story, 186,169-square-foot mixed-use building with 54 residential units and 4,600 square feet of commercial space on the parking lot site. "Such new construction will be consistent with the Third Ward Neighborhood Comprehensive Plan," according to a document filed with the city...

It is now official. The Mandel Hometown site was chosen for the new UWM dorm. http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=801652

Yea Mandel had already begun demolishing the gas station a couple days back, so it seemed likely they had been chosen.

Condo tower at Goll Mansion site clears another hurdle

The Milwaukee Common Council's Zoning, Neighborhoods and Development Committee has voted to recommend approval of a re-zoning request for the 26-story, 35-unit condo tower that Milwaukee-based New Land Enterprises LLP plans to build behind the historic Goll Mansion at 1550 N. Prospect Ave., on the city's east side. The $60 million project would include a $1 million restoration of the 110-year-old mansion, which would be connected to the new condo tower.

This also looks like it has potential to actually happen.

@qwerty44 Yea it still has to go before the Common Council but I'm hearing the fight is still on. It's going to get really interesting before we know for sure.

Who has a rendering of this UWM dorm project? Is this a highrise? Seems it would have to be with all those beds.

Not.
http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/news/img/oct08/uwmnorth_090208_big.jpg

Uh oh, that could be a problem. There's an important link to the East Bank Trail, that looks like it'll get blocked off by this. A lot of worried people have asked me about whether this link will be preserved....and it doesn't look like it.

You can see the link at the beginning of this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9BDsn52azc

http://www.riverwestneighborhood.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2754&Itemid=567&lang=

Some stuff from the RNN website about UWM Dorm project.

OMG that UWM dorm project is huge! Not much character from this rendering. Hope the street level reflects more than Soviet era architecture.

I am really hoping that they build the new dorm as 3 seperate buildings like it is shown in the model. I think it would be cool for it to create it's own micro-campus feel where students can walk into the courtyard without having to go through the buildings, or around a huge U shaped building.

No Surprise here:

JSONLINE

THURSDAY, Oct. 2, 2008, 10:58 a.m.
By Tom Daykin

Hotel Palomar condo project delayed a year
Plans for a condominium tower and hotel in downtown Milwaukee's Park East area have been delayed for at least a year, a developer said today.

Dallas-based Gatehouse Capital Corp. had hoped to begin construction in November on the 22-story Residences at Hotel Palomar. The project would have 65 condos and a 184-room Kimpton Palomar Hotel on the block bordered by W. Juneau and W. McKinley avenues, and N. Old World 3rd and N. 4th streets.

But Marty Collins, Gatehouse chief executive officer, now says construction won't begin until the end of 2009 at the earliest. Collins said other Gatehouse projects are undergoing similar delays. He made his remarks at an event sponsored by the Business Journal of Milwaukee.

Gatehouse holds a purchase option for the Park East site, which is owned by Milwaukee County. The Palomar project becomes the latest major development in downtown Milwaukee to run into delays because of the economic slowdown and tightening credit markets.

Uh oh, that could be a problem. There's an important link to the East Bank Trail, that looks like it'll get blocked off by this. A lot of worried people have asked me about whether this link will be preserved....and it doesn't look like it.

No, in all likelihood that little downhill gravel road linkage will not be preserved. It is, however, very possible that it will be improved. Perhaps some paving, lighting, landscaping, signs directing bikers/walkers down to the trails, benches, artwork, etc.

Whatever the case, there's no way there's not going to be links connecting the dorm site and neighborhood to the trails below the bluff. It's part of the vision for the river corridor that's been laid out by groups like the Milwaukee River Work Group and the City, who have been (and will continue to be) working with Mandel and the University as this project proposal moves forward into reality.

Hoan analysis recommends land roadway
Development valued at $5.7 billion
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=802062
State Transportation Secretary Frank Busalacchi had roughly $5.7 billion worth of reasons to float the idea of replacing the Hoan Bridge with a four-lane boulevard through Milwaukee’s port area when he first broached the concept in August......

Also, links from the Milwaukee Rising Blog (http://milwaukeerising.net/wordpress/) which illistrate the two concepts...
Concept A (http://milwaukeerising.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/concepta.jpg)
Concept B (http://milwaukeerising.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/conceptb.jpg)

That $5.7b number is complete bs. When you look at their concept, how can you include the lands west and south of the KK River, (Solvay Coke and Grand Trunk) as being developable because the Hoan comes down? They don't become any more developable than they are today.

Also, both plans really constrict the Port of Milwaukee from growing, which would be a terrible economic move just because it saves you some money rebuilding a road.

That doesn't mean that replacing the Hoan with a smaller bridge is a bad idea, but the DOT should not be overstating the economic benefit of it like they are.

Hoan analysis recommends land roadway
Development valued at $5.7 billion
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=802062


Also, links from the Milwaukee Rising Blog (http://milwaukeerising.net/wordpress/) which illistrate the two concepts...
Concept A (http://milwaukeerising.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/concepta.jpg)
Concept B (http://milwaukeerising.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/conceptb.jpg)

I'm also skeptical that anyone would want to build next the the sewage treatment plant. The real benefit would be street level in the third ward. But really, with the festival grounds established right there, I'm not sure how well a large-scale highway would work.

Regarding the Hoan Bridge replacement, it appears the north shore and east side of Milwaukee have gotten along just fine without the northern extension of the once proposed Lake Parkway elevated highway. I would say they have been much better off and you would be fool to disagree. Lincoln Memorial Drive handles the capacity of "rush hour" in Milwaukee just fine for commuters traveling the same distance as users of the Hoan Bridge. And, I don't see any proposal to build condos right next to Jones Island as the treatment plant is isolated to the east, north and west by water. The Renner development in the Third Ward has "views" of Jones Island and that development is one of the most successful, sales wise, condo developments in Milwaukee history as well as commanding some of the highest resale value of any condo development. For anyone traveling to the Third Ward from Bayview, I would expect this only to improve your travels as you do not need to go into downtown and backtrack to the Third Ward.

Before the Park East came down, people were up in arms about how it was going to extend their commute times, what a joke, where are those people now? One problem now is if people are going to compare the demolition of the Hoan Bridge to the demo of the Park East, they are also going to point out the fact that nothing significant has been done with the Park East land, and the land around the Hoan will be left untouched "forever" too.

Also, both plans really constrict the Port of Milwaukee from growing, which would be a terrible economic move just because it saves you some money rebuilding a road.
-- Perhaps you should look at Concept B a little closer, in concept B, the area west of the port is conceived as a multi-modal Industrial Park and Port, and I think that is an important part of the concept which I think could be highly successful, while increasing use of the port. The area has great rail access, great highway access, and great access to the port, all it needs is to be spruced up like the Menomonee Valley, and I think that it would attract a lot of new businesses. The Port is one amenity that Milwaukee has that a lot of other cities do not, and could serve as a great way to attract new businesses to the area.

Secondly, there’s no residential in either of the concepts that’s closer to the sewage plants, then what’s already in existence. If you took a compass, and set it in the middle of the waste treatment plant, and set the pencil of it on the nearest condo in the third ward, and used that as your radius for a circle, you would find that the areas where they are recommending new residential development falls well outside of your circle.

Finally, I think it is assonate to think that SEWRP should keep the 794 designation for the spur. Freeways are built to promote commerce, trade, and movement of goods between regions, and having a dead-end freeway for 2 miles which does not do any of those things, and it is a waste of $200 million dollars to rebuild something which could be built for a lot less if it was done as an at grade boulevard.
The current Hoan Bridge is overbuilt for its current use, and there is no reason that when it is rebuilt, it should continue to be overbuilt and continue to be a drain on the taxpayers of the region.
There are a lot, of streets in Milwaukee which carry many times the traffic volumes of the Hoan Bridge, and the people who drive down them every day have just as far as a commute time as those who take the Hoan Bridge, but you don't see every arterial street being built as a highway, so what makes the Hoan Bridge special??

The only Legimate reason I have heard for not building it as a boulevard is because it will increase drive time for a small percentage(I am looking at traffic volumes) of commuters. You can attack the analysis of the economic impact if you want, but even if it is greatly overestimated, you cannot deny that there would be some sort of economic benefit from redeveloping the area, and the benefit would be at the bare minimum in the hundreds of millions of dollars, and which would benefit the whole region.

...and who cares about the South Shore suburbs anyway?:horse:

-- Perhaps you should look at Concept B a little closer, in concept B, the area west of the port is conceived as a multi-modal Industrial Park and Port, and I think that is an important part of the concept which I think could be highly successful, while increasing use of the port.

Ok, I understand they are showing light industrial buildings west of the Port. But how does the Hoan bridge coming down have anything to do with that land? That land could be developed for light industrial use regardless of what happens with the Hoan. Actually, it becomes harder for the Port to use because a new bridge would be required to open every time a large ship comes in. I doubt people would be happy with stopping traffic several times a day for those ships.

And where is the port supposed to put all of its existing functions? Right now they have a coal pile that is used to supply coal to the Valley power plant...which provides power for downtown and a lot of the surrounding area. That plan show no where for oil containers, coal/sand/salt piles etc. Sure, they aren't pretty, but that is a large part of what the port imports. Much of Wisconsin's road salt comes through the Port and the Port makes good money off of that. While I don't think taking down the Hoan would prohibit the Port from doing that...you can't just take the land dedicated to that now, throw some light industrial buildings on it and say "hey, we'll get a couple billion dollars in development out of that".

The figures DOT is showing are GROSSLY overstated and should not be used for them to try to gain public support.

That said, I support replacing the Hoan bridge.

-- Perhaps you should look at Concept B a little closer, in concept B, the area west of the port is conceived as a multi-modal Industrial Park and Port, and I think that is an important part of the concept which I think could be highly successful, while increasing use of the port. The area has great rail access, great highway access, and great access to the port, all it needs is to be spruced up like the Menomonee Valley, and I think that it would attract a lot of new businesses. The Port is one amenity that Milwaukee has that a lot of other cities do not, and could serve as a great way to attract new businesses to the area.


The same things could also be said for the southern half of Jones Island. It is already under municipal control as part of the Port, and various parcels and buildings are leased out to businesses (the bulk liquid storage tanks, the dry bulk storage areas, the repair facilities for freighters, to name a few). Others are nearby the Island and privately owned, but are significant businesses (such as the grain elevators). Plus, there's quite a bit of existing but underutilized infrastructure on the Island that's not present on the west bank of the Kinnickinnic River. There are existing rail yards on the Island (which the west bank of the KK River lacks), there are existing rail/truck/boat transfer facilities already on the Island (which the west bank of the KK River lacks). There's more linear footage of dockwalls along which freighters can tie up, and more space to build new piers if need be, on the Island (which the west bank of the KK River lacks). There are several large lift cranes already around the Island (which the west bank of the KK River lacks).

Perhaps most important of all is that the City already owns all of Jones Island, so it would be relatively easier to implement expanded/new port activities there, as opposed to the west bank of the KK River, since much of that area is under control of private owners who may have other non-industrial uses in mind for their properties. There's also no reason why Jones Island couldn't be spruced up and Menomenee Valleyified, either. It just makes more sense to continue to grow the port on Jones Island, rather than splitting it in half and redistributing parts of it across the river.

I think the key difference that would come by lowering the bridge to an at grade boulevard is the connection it would create between the highways and the neighborhoods. Right now the Hoan Bridge bypasses the entire area; there is no connection between 794, the third ward, Jones Island, or Walkers Point. The closest connection from 794 to any of those is a confusing set of ramps on the south end of Jones Island that divides the existing neighborhoods, and wastes a lot of land, land that could be freed up for development if the roadway was at grade. In addition, by lowering it to grade you increase the developable land in the third ward, because while there is a strong stigma for developing next to an elevated roadway, there is no stigma against building next to a boulevard, and a lot of the land whose value is now depreciated because of the highway would become developable.

Take a look at the area on Google maps. Consider any land that is either barren, vacant, a surface parking lot, inaccessible greenspace, or a junk yard as potential developable space. You should be looking at about 75% of the land shown in the Concepts Diagrams. Then ask yourself what is preventing it from being used or developed. Accessibility. Yes, a lot of the land is brown field, but if you can find a way to increase the accessibility of the land, you increase its value, and provide incentive to the owners to clean it up, or utilize it more efficiently.

Its all coming together now; the reason for the expansion of I-94 from the state line to the Mitchell interchange is for the secret traffic that usually takes I-794 and the Lake Parkway. They had this all planned out - expand 94, remove Hoan, move traffic to 94...AHHH HAH!

TUNNEL 794! (paid for by Tunnel794 committee, brought to you by WeWant794Tunnel.com, sponsored by Underground794.org) :cheers:

Its all coming together now; the reason for the expansion of I-94 from the state line to the Mitchell interchange is for the secret traffic that usually takes I-794 and the Lake Parkway. They had this all planned out - expand 94, remove Hoan, move traffic to 94...AHHH HAH!


I was actually thinking the same thing. It's odd that the interchange is done but they left the Hoan Bridge side intact, almost like they had other plans for it...

The sole area where home prices rose: Milwaukee.

According to New York-based real estate data company Radar Logic Inc., home prices rose 2.9% on a square foot basis in the Milwaukee metro area compared with July 2007. The next-best showing was in Chicago, where prices were down 1.2%.

The largest declines were concentrated in California and the southwestern states, where foreclosure-related sales weighed on average sales prices. Prices plunged 33.4% in Las Vegas, 28.1% in Los Angeles and 28% in Phoenix.

Journal Sentinel: Oct, 3, JSonline.com (http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=802064)

^^ We're Number 1, We're Number 1!!!^^

I'm not completely opposed to replacing the Hoan with surface level street but I'm very concerned about having a park east situation with a lot of new land that is open to development just sitting vacant for a long time.

I do think the infill between the current 3rd ward and the festival grounds would be nice and I'm sure it would be built up quickly... but that seems like the only area that would build up quick enough. The rest is either already open to development or I think it would take waaayyyy too long to actually have anything done with it.

^^ I disagree. Taking down the Park East was a good idea for Milwaukee, and even if it takes 20 years to fill that land the result will be a much more sewn-together city. Same thing goes for 794. The more that can be taken down to ground level, the better integrated the Third Ward and other areas can be with the downtown. It may take time, but if you don't take the opportunity to open the land, it will never happen. Sometimes you have to have the confidence to take such actions, and the patience to wait for the infill, as frustrating as that can be.

I think the problem with park east is that when they took it down they didn't plant grass or prarie, and they just left the bare ground sit, but Even with it being bare ground, the property in the area increased in value, and a lot of new development has occured in park east, if they do something similar for the harbor area, they definatly need to plant something on the vacant lots, and not leave the land as bare dirt.
Secondly, from looking at one of the articles or reports, or something that was circulating last week, I noticed that the report was actually a "Hoan Bridge, and Harbor Redevelopment Report" which may be in part why it had such a large scope.

ps. sorry about spelling, I am eating chichen wings while trying to type.

To me the issue that has slowed the Park East down starts with the County's handling of the land. First if the land was broken down into small enough parcels then smaller developments could occur. Right now you need a bunch of cash to make one of these projects work, and you have to plan large projects. Second the County continues to use the PE land to balance their budget instead of grow Milwaukee by offering any breaks on the cost of land. Finally there are two levels of government for a developer to deal with currently so the County should of sold the land to the City (more expertise in these matters) to handle its redevelopment. If these three things had happened I have no doubt that we would see much more activity in the Park East.

Taking the Hoan down is going to eliminate most if not all of the festival grounds parking lots. People think parking is a problem now; just wait.

And there are ethnic festivals failing already. Make it harder to park there and most will close.

To me the issue that has slowed the Park East down starts with the County's handling of the land. First if the land was broken down into small enough parcels then smaller developments could occur. Right now you need a bunch of cash to make one of these projects work, and you have to plan large projects. Second the County continues to use the PE land to balance their budget instead of grow Milwaukee by offering any breaks on the cost of land. Finally there are two levels of government for a developer to deal with currently so the County should of sold the land to the City (more expertise in these matters) to handle its redevelopment. If these three things had happened I have no doubt that we would see much more activity in the Park East.

All very good observations of the County's lackluster involvement. The City's Park East Redevelopment Plan even breaks down all of the blocks into smaller sections (two, three, four parcels to a single block), but the County has chosen to ignore that, putting up entire blocks outright up for sale...leading to some of the problems you described. And even still, not all of the County-owned blocks have even been put up for bid yet.

Also notice that developers, too, have played a role in the slow progress of Park East construction. This is especially true of those developers who won purchase options for County-owned blocks in the corridor through the competitive RFP process. Each of them were awarded exclusive rights to develop individual blocks based on the merits of development proposals judged by the County, but then after winning, all of them changed their design proposals into something completely different (some of them more than once), instead of moving forward with their initial plans. RSC's Park East Square proposals were redesigned a few times after their original proposal won. MLG's original plans were much smaller, but they went back and expanded it significantly. Ruvin/Gatehouse completely redesigned their winning proposal for the Sydney Hih block. Had at least a couple of them stuck to their originally proposed projects, rather than complete overhauls, some of them might have been built and ready for occupancy by now.

That said, even from the beginning, full Park East corridor build-out (public and private lands) was anticipated to have a long-term timeline...15, 20 years...so as to take into account the inevitable cyclical boom/bust swing of the economy. Unfortunately with the mishandling of things by the County and some developers, they've missed out on some of the most recent boom period, and will now have to wait it out though the current bust.


Taking the Hoan down is going to eliminate most if not all of the festival grounds parking lots. People think parking is a problem now; just wait.

And there are ethnic festivals failing already. Make it harder to park there and most will close.

Parking garages. Improved transit.

Outside of some summer weekends or concert times, many of those surface lots are pretty empty. Wasteful.

Markitect> Oh yea. I didn't even get started on the developers in the Park East. Ruvin and RSC acted as if a TIF was a right, have put forward less than stellar plans, and changed those plans so many times that now the market has tanked on them.

And you're right this project was supposed to take many many years. The perception that it should be filled in by now is just plain wrong.

Erol> I would hope that many of those parking lots would go away. Possibly for development or to create a greenbelt, either of which would be better than parking lots.

Sorry to rewind a bit... but please don't misunderstand what I was saying. I do not think that tearing down the park east freeway was a bad idea. What I'm worried about is that we'll have an over abundance of vacant land and we'll have more then anyone will know what to do with.

I doubt that the demand for housing dowtown has come to an end... but keeping tighter supplies of the available land to build will keep the demand from developers more consistant. (this is thinking long term, ignoring the short term downward trend in the economy because ultimately it will pass)

I think that having more vacant land that is so close to downtown is beneficial. I don't really see the harbor area as something which would directly compete with Park East. Most of the residential in the Harbor Plan is not high rise, and a lot of it isn't even mid rise, the harbor plan wants to attract more light industry and manufacturing as well as shipping to the area, something which I don't think is appropriate for Park East, and it would take the first steps towards urban renewal for a lot of blighted properties.

I think that having more vacant land that is so close to downtown is beneficial. I don't really see the harbor area as something which would directly compete with Park East. Most of the residential in the Harbor Plan is not high rise, and a lot of it isn't even mid rise, the harbor plan wants to attract more light industry and manufacturing as well as shipping to the area, something which I don't think is appropriate for Park East, and it would take the first steps towards urban renewal for a lot of blighted properties.

True... except a lot of areas that you're talking about for the light industrial and shipping already exist and can be developed and/or redeveloped already.

Bruce Murphy, investigative reporter and editor at Milwaukee Magazine has some more about the COunty's handling of the Park East corridor in his most recent blog:

County Real Estate Fiasco

Has anyone noticed how the portion of the Park East project owned by MilwaukeeCounty never gets developed? Yes, developers get selected, but they keep delaying or pulling out. County officials have blamed the economy, which is certainly a factor, but meanwhile the city continues to get projects developed. The huge North End development by Barry Mandel on Water Street and the Flat Iron building just across the street. The new Manpower campus just west of the river. Add to that the Staybridge Suites and the Brewery, both developments that adjoin the Park East area, and the city is getting a lot of projects up.

The reason for this is obvious. The Department of City Development specializes in developing real estate. “The city has an infrastructure to deal with this and a proven track record,” notes DCD head Rocky Marcoux. “Look at the Beerline, the MenomoneeValley and all the other developments we’ve done. We have the ability and we have the staff to do these deals.”

City officials say they approached the county and asked to manage the development of the county portion of the Park East, which includes about 16 of the 64 acres. They say Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker was interested, but County Board Chair Lee Holloway turned down the offer. Why?

Holloway didn’t get back to me, but Harold Mester, spokesperson for the board, did. So why wasn’t the board interested in taking up the city’s offer? “Because it’s the county’s land,” Mester answered.

That’s it? There were no policy reasons for insisting the county oversee the development? “The elected officials chose not to move forward on this,” Mester replied.

The situation is absurd on multiple levels. The city has created a Tax Incremental District for the entire Park East, including sewers and lights and street connections, which raises the value of county land, yet the city is left out of county deliberations. Companies wanting to develop on the county portion of the Park East first have to get board members’ approval, but they are voting without knowing if the company will need city help to complete the infrastructure connections. So after this approval, the company must go to the city and start all over again. “It complicates things. The cost of doing business goes up,” Marcoux notes.

The city, moreover, has experts on development that the county lacks, and is in a much better position to evaluate proposals. But that evaluation comes after – rather than before – the county has approved a developer’s proposal.

The county did have one expert in this area, Economic Development Director Bob Dennik, who has just resigned, after getting criticized by the board for a poor performance when it came to selling county land. Now Walker has floated a plan to eliminate this position. Odds are, the situation will only get worse.

Given that the county can’t really afford to pay staff to oversee the Park East development, why not accept the city’s offer to manage this? The current situation, where businesses have to get through two governments, makes Milwaukee look small time.

i got some dynamite.. anyone want to go take that bridge down now???

I like the idea, i think It would tie areas together after a while. Also the increased land might make it possible for the Port to expand or increase its usefulness with specialty businesses locating near it.


also off topic:
I was wondering if anyone knew anything about that highspeed rail line idea that has been floating around to connect chihcago milwaukee, madison, Minneapolis,... I heard a couple things recently but I was wondering how likely this is to happen???

^^ Midwest highspeed rail can be found here;http://http://www.midwesthsr.org/

Money has recently been alocated to slightly upgrade the line between milwaukee and kenosha, a section of rail is being converted from non-welded rail to welded sections...this will allow trains to go up to 79 mph, up from the previous 70 mph.

In illinois the amtrak from chicago to st. louis i believe is getting very close to going over 100 mph.

About I-794, i seriously think a tunnel would be best...It opens up the land for "development"....sure it will be expensive but apparently the potential in land development could pay it off, wasnt someone quoted at around 5 billion dollars in tax revenue and such?

True... except a lot of areas that you're talking about for the light industrial and shipping already exist and can be developed and/or redeveloped already.

I see your point: wondering whether too much available land is a good or bad thing; and questioning the timing of the public investment (would it matter whether we invest now or at a later date - when more Park East (PE) and Menomonee River Valley (MRV) land is developed – when Milwaukee could get a quicker return on its investment). But I think that the timing of this concept is dictated by: whatever is decided for 794, and the timeframe of that decision. The PE freeway project took a while to unfurl politically, and in terms of construction, before the land became available, and I think this potential project would follow suit. So we could see a lot of development in the PE and the MRV before anything happens here.

If we think that such a project would fail to differentiate itself from the MRV and PE, so as to slow down rob development energy from another area, it could be implemented in phases. I’m sure there are interim uses that could be allowed, such as open space with lake and port views. I believe that land this close to the lake, the rivers and downtown, is too valuable to let sit indefinitely inaccessible. Even if a lot of the land sat vacant for a few real estate cycles, the public investment and vision could only have a positive influence on the assessed land values.

I think that building a thoroughfare through the area, and having an approved plan, would present a nice marketing opportunity for the City. It would say that not only do we have this land available, but we have a coherent vision as to what the area will look like, and we are investing public money and sweat equity [the whole planning process] to back it up. Given the plans that the Department of City Development has implemented for Milwaukee, I have confidence that they would develop a plan which would make this area an appealing place to locate homes and businesses. This would bolster the notion that 1)Milwaukee wants more people, more business, more jobs, etc., and 2)we’re coming up with creative ways to do so.

I see your point: wondering whether too much available land is a good or bad thing; and questioning the timing of the public investment (would it matter whether we invest now or at a later date - when more Park East (PE) and Menomonee River Valley (MRV) land is developed – when Milwaukee could get a quicker return on its investment). But I think that the timing of this concept is dictated by: whatever is decided for 794, and the timeframe of that decision. The PE freeway project took a while to unfurl politically, and in terms of construction, before the land became available, and I think this potential project would follow suit. So we could see a lot of development in the PE and the MRV before anything happens here.

If we think that such a project would fail to differentiate itself from the MRV and PE, so as to slow down rob development energy from another area, it could be implemented in phases. I’m sure there are interim uses that could be allowed, such as open space with lake and port views. I believe that land this close to the lake, the rivers and downtown, is too valuable to let sit indefinitely inaccessible. Even if a lot of the land sat vacant for a few real estate cycles, the public investment and vision could only have a positive influence on the assessed land values.

I think that building a thoroughfare through the area, and having an approved plan, would present a nice marketing opportunity for the City. It would say that not only do we have this land available, but we have a coherent vision as to what the area will look like, and we are investing public money and sweat equity [the whole planning process] to back it up. Given the plans that the Department of City Development has implemented for Milwaukee, I have confidence that they would develop a plan which would make this area an appealing place to locate homes and businesses. This would bolster the notion that 1)Milwaukee wants more people, more business, more jobs, etc., and 2)we’re coming up with creative ways to do so.

Well thought out Embora. I am not only concerned about the devaluing of the land by having too much available in relation to the demand for it but also of the real dollars spent and the time value of that money.

If I understand correctly, they are saying it will cost more to tear down the bridge and build the boulevard but the economic payback will make it worth it. If this is true and the land sits vacant either through phased development or because of a poor real estate market the city of Milwaukee would not see a return in investment for a long long time. During that time we might have other better ways of using that money.

Since most of that land can be reveleoped already we might even be better off not tearing it down until much later when land is more scarce in our city and it comes time to do repairs to the bridge again...which we'll have to at some point anyway.

I was kind of thinking about this as someone look look at getting solar panels for their home. They are expensive, but eventually will give you a return on your investment. Unfortunately they wouldn't give you that return for 10-20 years. Maybe if getting that return on investment was the goal you might want to look at bonds, CD's, or investing in the stock market. However, there might be other reasons such as the environment that you would make that decision.

I'm still in the middle of this issue and I'm not quite sure what I think of it yet. I guess I'll have to see more information.

Nobody has said that it will cost more to tear down the bridge. The only thing they have said is that rebuilding the bridge would cost so much that they want to explore alternatives. The bridge needs work done on it in a few years to maintain it, and the cost of keeping it the same is so high that they are considering design alternatives which are a lot cheaper. An at grade road is a lot cheaper to maintain, and build than a raised roadway, and that is why they are considering it as a viable alternative.

Has anyone or any article actually stated what the "real cost" comparison was?

Without that I dont' feel an actual decision can be made.

Has anyone or any article actually stated what the "real cost" comparison was?

Without that I dont' feel an actual decision can be made.

I know the long version of the article goes into the details of the costs, but the quick blurb here says it is $80 million dollars less in construction and maintenance costs figuring through 2025.

http://milwaukee.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2008/09/29/daily49.html

From what I've read, the cost savings come mainly from reduced maintenance and the reduced cost of a simplified rebuild of ramps that would be needed about 2020. The high re-development potential is more just icing on the cake.

I saw that they said that but in both articles I've read I haven't seen anything more specific... I'm afraid that those numbers are exaggerated like the 5.7 billion dollar figure.

For some reason my BS alert is going off on this one and I want to know more. The whole way this all came about and how this study was such a surprise probably has something to do with that. Let alone those fishy numbers.

Not development news, but a local Milwaukee Firm, Kahler Slater, turned 100 this week:
nice slideshow of their work http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=804410

Rick Barrett, developer of The Moderne, a 30-story hotel/condominium/retail project planned for the southwest corner of Juneau Avenue and North Old World Third Street, has already sold 11 condominium units in the building, even though construction is not scheduled to begin until October. The development will include a 120-room Element Hotel and 16,000 square feet of retail space on lower floors and 80 condominiums on the upper floors.

http://www.gmtoday.com/content/m_magazine/2008/July/84.asp
10/4/08^^

Rick Barrett, developer of The Moderne, a 30-story hotel/condominium/retail project planned for the southwest corner of Juneau Avenue and North Old World Third Street, has already sold 11 condominium units in the building, even though construction is not scheduled to begin until October. The development will include a 120-room Element Hotel and 16,000 square feet of retail space on lower floors and 80 condominiums on the upper floors.

http://www.gmtoday.com/content/m_magazine/2008/July/84.asp
10/4/08^^

That article is from July, not this month (scroll down to the bottom), and quite out of date considering all the stuff that's happened since then.

The newest Business Journal has an article about the Moderne saying the developers won't be able to get financing until they sell 40% of the condo units. As of last month, they were only at 20%.

Needless to say, they will not be breaking ground any time soon.

I also read that it is delayed.

This is pretty cool. It does say that the Freshwater Sciences school needs legislative approval. Maybe he means the building itself. The school has already been approved.

Pieces of Eight site could become UWM facility
By TOM DAYKIN
tdaykin@journalsentinel.com
Posted: Oct. 9, 2008

The former Pieces of Eight restaurant site on downtown Milwaukee’s lakefront could be replaced by a University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee facility that would showcase its new water technology program.

The building also could house a new agency that would promote the Milwaukee area as a center for water-related businesses, including companies that make water treatment equipment.

That's according to UWM Chancellor Carlos Santiago, who discussed his idea at a recent conference on the economic development potential of water-related businesses. The building would showcase Milwaukee's campaign to turn its Lake Michigan location into a source of new investment and jobs, Santiago said Thursday.

"It's important to have a front door to the water industry," he said.

It's just an idea at this point, Santiago said. The building would likely need tens of millions of dollars from both public and private sources.

But the notion of creating such a facility is getting support from some key players in government and business.

"I think we need to utilize our lakefront as an asset for the community," said Rich Meeusen, chairman of Badger Meter Inc., who's helped lead the water development campaign.

Mayor Tom Barrett said city officials are "very excited about this idea."

"I think it's a terrific idea," said philanthropist Michael Cudahy, who is negotiating to buy the Pieces of Eight property, which Cudahy and his partners would turn over to the university.

New UWM building
The building's main purpose would be to house UWM's new graduate-level School of Freshwater Sciences. The proposed school, which needs legislative approval, would combine faculty from different academic departments, and train water scientists and engineers.

The school, by providing skilled workers, would complement efforts to develop more Milwaukee-area businesses that produce water-related products and services. Those current businesses include Badger Meter, based in Brown Deer; Pentair Inc., which has water filtration and pump operations in Brookfield and Delavan, and ITT Corp., which operates water subsidiaries in Pewaukee and Brown Deer.

Milwaukee 7, the region's main economic development agency, has identified southeastern Wisconsin's closeness to Lake Michigan as possibly its greatest asset. The Milwaukee 7 is considering the creation of a separate agency to focus on water-related business, and that agency could be housed at the new building, Santiago said.

Also, the new building could house portions of UWM's existing Great Lakes WATER Institute, which does ecological research on the Great Lakes. The institute is on the inner harbor in a heavy industrial area at 660 E. Greenfield Ave., and the new building would give it a much higher profile, Santiago said.

Santiago discussed the idea at last week's brainstorming session in Delavan that included executives from several water-related companies and economic development officials. He also mentioned it at a Monday conference on globalization and the Midwest, sponsored by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.

A showcase for Milwaukee
The UWM facility would serve as a showcase for the Milwaukee area's efforts to attract and grow water-related companies, said Meeusen, who is co-chair of the Milwaukee 7 Water Council.

Meeusen cited last week's visit to Milwaukee by Henri Proglio, chief executive of Paris-based Veolia Environment SA, the world's biggest water-technology company. Milwaukee would have made a more powerful impression on Proglio if the city boasted a lakefront facility like the one Santiago envisions, Meeusen said.

It makes sense to "create a synergy" between UWM and water-technology businesses, Barrett said.

"This is a vision that could grow Milwaukee," he said.

The 1.67-acre site is currently occupied by Harbor 550 restaurant, which for many years was known as Pieces of Eight. The restaurant hasn't been making enough money for its owner, Specialty Restaurants Corp., of Anaheim, Calif., and will close Wednesday.

Cudahy said his negotiations with Specialty Restaurants to buy the company's leasehold interest in the site are "moving forward." The company's lease with the city, which owns the property, runs until 2018.

The restaurant building could provide a "modest" initial facility for the School of Freshwater Sciences, Cudahy said. The larger building envisioned by Santiago could eventually replace the current building, he said.

The Pieces of Eight site would be a good location because it's on the lake, and it is near Discovery World, which has classrooms and conference facilities that UWM could use, Santiago said. Cudahy is chairman of Discovery World, a science and technology museum that includes a focus on the Great Lakes.

"I don't know if this is going to happen," Santiago said. "But nothing happens unless people starting thinking about it."

John Schmid of the Journal Sentinel staff contributed to this article.

This is pretty cool. It does say that the Freshwater Sciences school needs legislative approval. Maybe he means the building itself. The school has already been approved.

So far the proposed UWM School of Freshwater Sciences has been approved only by the UW System Board of Regents (and that's "school" as in program, not "school" as in physical building). The state legislature must also approve it, and that isn't expected to happen until sometime next year at the earliest. Any school building would likely need its own round of approvals once it's been designed.

The same it true of UWM's proposed Joseph J. Zilber School of Public Health. It only has Board of Regents approval so far. It is supposed to be considered for legislative approval next year. UWM and developer Joe Zilber are looking at putting it in an old MPS warehouse adjacent to the Pabst Brewery.

Wait, did the restaurant close?

It seems that plans for a new office building are in the works. This items is on the Board of Zoning Appeals for 10-16-08.

Dimensional
Variance

Matt Steigenga, Prospective Buyer 331 N. Milwaukee St.

Request to construct a general office facility that is
over the maximum allowed floor area (allowed
170,775 sq.ft. / proposed 222,600 sq.ft.)

This is just south of St. Paul which I think is the parking lot bookended by other buidings. Good luck to them if they can make it happen.

What kind of height would we be talking about for that amount of space? 220,000+ feet ish

What kind of height would we be talking about for that amount of space? 220,000+ feet ish

Group plans 14-story building in Third Ward (http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2008/10/1/group-plans-14-story-building-in-third-ward)

Wait, did the restaurant close?

It's closing Wednesday, due to low business.

Group plans 14-story building in Third Ward (http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2008/10/1/group-plans-14-story-building-in-third-ward)



It's closing Wednesday, due to low business.

Looks like the Palomar's little brother. :)

I also read that it is delayed.

This is pretty cool. It does say that the Freshwater Sciences school needs legislative approval. Maybe he means the building itself. The school has already been approved.

Pieces of Eight site could become UWM facility
By TOM DAYKIN
tdaykin@journalsentinel.com
Posted: Oct. 9, 2008

The former Pieces of Eight restaurant site on downtown Milwaukee’s lakefront could be replaced by a University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee facility that would showcase its new water technology program.

The building also could house a new agency that would promote the Milwaukee area as a center for water-related businesses, including companies that make water treatment equipment.

That's according to UWM Chancellor Carlos Santiago, who discussed his idea at a recent conference on the economic development potential of water-related businesses. The building would showcase Milwaukee's campaign to turn its Lake Michigan location into a source of new investment and jobs, Santiago said Thursday.

"It's important to have a front door to the water industry," he said.

It's just an idea at this point, Santiago said. The building would likely need tens of millions of dollars from both public and private sources.

But the notion of creating such a facility is getting support from some key players in government and business.

"I think we need to utilize our lakefront as an asset for the community," said Rich Meeusen, chairman of Badger Meter Inc., who's helped lead the water development campaign.

Mayor Tom Barrett said city officials are "very excited about this idea."

"I think it's a terrific idea," said philanthropist Michael Cudahy, who is negotiating to buy the Pieces of Eight property, which Cudahy and his partners would turn over to the university.

New UWM building
The building's main purpose would be to house UWM's new graduate-level School of Freshwater Sciences. The proposed school, which needs legislative approval, would combine faculty from different academic departments, and train water scientists and engineers.

The school, by providing skilled workers, would complement efforts to develop more Milwaukee-area businesses that produce water-related products and services. Those current businesses include Badger Meter, based in Brown Deer; Pentair Inc., which has water filtration and pump operations in Brookfield and Delavan, and ITT Corp., which operates water subsidiaries in Pewaukee and Brown Deer.

Milwaukee 7, the region's main economic development agency, has identified southeastern Wisconsin's closeness to Lake Michigan as possibly its greatest asset. The Milwaukee 7 is considering the creation of a separate agency to focus on water-related business, and that agency could be housed at the new building, Santiago said.

Also, the new building could house portions of UWM's existing Great Lakes WATER Institute, which does ecological research on the Great Lakes. The institute is on the inner harbor in a heavy industrial area at 660 E. Greenfield Ave., and the new building would give it a much higher profile, Santiago said.

Santiago discussed the idea at last week's brainstorming session in Delavan that included executives from several water-related companies and economic development officials. He also mentioned it at a Monday conference on globalization and the Midwest, sponsored by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.

A showcase for Milwaukee
The UWM facility would serve as a showcase for the Milwaukee area's efforts to attract and grow water-related companies, said Meeusen, who is co-chair of the Milwaukee 7 Water Council.

Meeusen cited last week's visit to Milwaukee by Henri Proglio, chief executive of Paris-based Veolia Environment SA, the world's biggest water-technology company. Milwaukee would have made a more powerful impression on Proglio if the city boasted a lakefront facility like the one Santiago envisions, Meeusen said.

It makes sense to "create a synergy" between UWM and water-technology businesses, Barrett said.

"This is a vision that could grow Milwaukee," he said.

The 1.67-acre site is currently occupied by Harbor 550 restaurant, which for many years was known as Pieces of Eight. The restaurant hasn't been making enough money for its owner, Specialty Restaurants Corp., of Anaheim, Calif., and will close Wednesday.

Cudahy said his negotiations with Specialty Restaurants to buy the company's leasehold interest in the site are "moving forward." The company's lease with the city, which owns the property, runs until 2018.

The restaurant building could provide a "modest" initial facility for the School of Freshwater Sciences, Cudahy said. The larger building envisioned by Santiago could eventually replace the current building, he said.

The Pieces of Eight site would be a good location because it's on the lake, and it is near Discovery World, which has classrooms and conference facilities that UWM could use, Santiago said. Cudahy is chairman of Discovery World, a science and technology museum that includes a focus on the Great Lakes.

"I don't know if this is going to happen," Santiago said. "But nothing happens unless people starting thinking about it."

John Schmid of the Journal Sentinel staff contributed to this article.

No! This is not pretty cool! If this most valuable piece of lakefront property goes to UW, it will be the greatest waste of land use-- EVER!! Are you kidding me?! For anybody who thinks this is a good idea, do you have any idea what you're talking about?!! No offense, but to hand over this parcel to a tax-free entity (UWM) without any consideration to opening it up to potential buyers, is economic suicide. For God's sake, there are plenty of other locations along the lake where this "Fresh Water Sciences School" could go. But, not in the heart of the downtown lakefront!! This is an A-1 piece of property, and anyone thinking it makes sense to give it to the UW is more out of touch with reality than...well, the UW System!

Open it up for bids and let a true developer embrace this site and do something good with it that the public can enjoy. To limit the use of this site to a "Fresh Water Sciences School" is downright scary...and a waste of valuable land.

skyking> It isn't terribly clear that Pieces of Eight should of ever been operating in that location, because Wisconsin State Law essentially doesn't allow it. So because of the legal questions it is unlikely the City could ever sell the land to a developer anyhow.

It would be one thing if it was likely the City could develop the land but as that isn't likely the idea of new facility focused on the Great Lakes and water research that could work in tandem with Discovery World seems like a good idea to me.

Yeah, there was a big fight when Po8 wanted to get a new lease a few years ago and everyone broought up the fact that they were in violation of the law. Pretty ironic that after that they are closed/closing/whatever.

Private development has no chance at all.

Isn't that area considered to be public land? I would be happy if notihng at all got developed there, but if something had to go there, it might as well be a public university research building.

I'm on Skyking2's side... That's prime land!! What a waste if it goes to UWM. :ohno:

No! This is not pretty cool! If this most valuable piece of lakefront property goes to UW, it will be the greatest waste of land use-- EVER!! Are you kidding me?! For anybody who thinks this is a good idea, do you have any idea what you're talking about?!! No offense, but to hand over this parcel to a tax-free entity (UWM) without any consideration to opening it up to potential buyers, is economic suicide. For God's sake, there are plenty of other locations along the lake where this "Fresh Water Sciences School" could go. But, not in the heart of the downtown lakefront!! This is an A-1 piece of property, and anyone thinking it makes sense to give it to the UW is more out of touch with reality than...well, the UW System!

Open it up for bids and let a true developer embrace this site and do something good with it that the public can enjoy. To limit the use of this site to a "Fresh Water Sciences School" is downright scary...and a waste of valuable land.

this is part of the original lakebed and therefore, no commercial uses are suppossed to be on it anyway. it's not like a high-rise condo could go up here. you aren't going to get some big tax generator there. i think you'd rather have it here, than on some other valuable property along the water that could be privately developed. plus, shouldn't the Fresh Water Sciences School be on fresh water? isn't fresh water suppossed to be one of the driving factors in our economy, why not give it a prime location?

It is a great idea. Isn't the building also going to house our offices for the region's agency that promotes our freshwater-ness? Great location to bring people to for meetings and showcase what we really have to offer as a city.

The Pieces of Eight restaurant was actually a mistake on the lake. Technically, it was never supposed to be built there. Since the Municipal Pier was built as a lakebed grant, the land and anything built upon it is supposed to be protected from private, standalone, for-profit development and businesses that do not serve the greater public in some way. That is how institutional/cultural/educational/recreational/navigational/transportational things like the Art Museum, Discovery World, the marinas, and the port businesses have been allowed to build and operate on the lakefront.

When the restaurant was first proposed in the 1960s the City and DNR had forgotten about those restrictions, and the restaurant was allowed to be built without any objections (property tax free, by the way, since it was built on City-owned land, and also with a sweet way-below-normal-market-rate rent). Several years later, the City and DNR came to realize their mistakes, and made an attempt to have the restaurant removed from Municipal Pier on the grounds that it violated the Public Trust Doctrine. The battle went to court, and in 1987 a ruling was issued saying that the restaurant was indeed in violation, but since the City and DNR made the mistake of allowing it to be built some 20 years earlier, they could not retroactively force the restaurant off the pier (kind of a "you made your bed, now you have to lay in it" situation). As long as the restaurant remained in business, and as long as the operators continued to pay their rent (which was renegotiated every few years), they could stay there. In the event that the restaurant closed, the restaurant building, patios, and parking lots would revert back to the city and the Public Trust Doctrine would be back in play for any future uses there.

This does not mean a restaurant cannot ever go onto the lakefront again, just that it cannot be a business and destination in and of itself, like Pieces of Eight/Harbor 550 was. It could be possible to have a restaurant or cafe built as part of a new museum, or boathouse, or university development, for example.


There's been much talk the past couple of years for making the southeastern Wisconsin region a "Silicon Valley" of water-related business and education...that water issues will become ever more important in the age of globalization. Southeastern Wisconsin already has a cluster of businesses dealing with water in some way (water meters, pumps, filtration systems, water heaters, etc.). Southeastern Wisconsin also already has a small-but-growing emphasis of water-related education and research at local universities, especially at UWM with the desire to turn its existing efforts into a whole new and unique degree program with an actual School of Freshwater Sciences. These things haven't really been played up, though, as most of the local region, let alone the world, does not know of their existence. Building a facility to showcase these combined industrial/technological/educational efforts, and to promote spin-off business and educational opportunities, would have a pretty big economic impact for the whole region. A high-profile location within the already-existing cultural/educational campus on the highly-trafficked Downtown lakefront is an ideal place to put such a facility.

Yeah, there was a big fight when Po8 wanted to get a new lease a few years ago and everyone broought up the fact that they were in violation of the law. Pretty ironic that after that they are closed/closing/whatever.

Private development has no chance at all.

Then, raze the building and turn it into a park for taxpayers to enjoy. Not another building that just a very few will be able to use. Make it a "Freshwater Park."

Then, raze the building and turn it into a park for taxpayers to enjoy. Not another building that just a very few will be able to use. Make it a "Freshwater Park."

I think a freshwater sciences building would benefit everyone int he area as it adds to the water industry that they want to promote for SE wisconsin. As much as I hate to see Po8 (and now it's successor) go... I think that what is replacing it is a pretty good thing for the city.

Well even though it's been postponed it seems they are still trying to stay in the news and in our top of mind awareness while they wait. I think that is a good sign.

http://www.biztimes.com/daily/2008/10/16/palomar-plans-include-high-end-spa

Palomar plans include high-end spaPublished October 16, 2008 - BizTimes Daily

Previous | 5 of 13 | Next

Although construction of the Milwaukee Palomar Hotel and Residences project is on hold for the moment, the developer of the site announced that it has selected Rockville, Md.-based WTS International Inc. to manage a 6,800-square-foot spa and fitness facility to be built on the property.
Dallas-based Gatehouse Capital Corp. plans to develop the project in the Park East corridor in downtown Milwaukee.
Marty Collins, chief executive officer of Gatehouse Capital, recently announced that the Palomar project will not begin construction for at least a year, because of the credit crunch that has made it extremely difficult for developers to obtain financing for their projects.
However, plans for the development are moving forward, company spokeswoman Lisa Todd said.
"When the capital markets come back we want to have everything ready to go so we can move full-steam ahead," she said.
The addition of WTS to run the spa and fitness center is an important part of the project, Todd said.
"They do some pretty fabulous spas around the country," she said. "The closest one (to Milwaukee) is at the Trump (International Hotel and Tower) in Chicago."
Other facilities that WTS has provided leisure consulting and management services for include: The Spa at Trump International Hotel and Tower in Las Vegas; The Aqua Star Spa at the Beverly Hilton hotel in Beverly Hills, Calif.; The I Spa at the Willard InterContinental hotel in Washington, D.C.; and Fern Tree, The Spa at Half Moon, in Montego Bay, Jamaica.
An array of massages, body treatments, nail services and skin care options would be available at the spa to Palomar hotel guests and residents of the project's condominiums.
"WTS has an impeccable reputation for providing world-class spas and lavish services," Collins said. "With the addition of WTS, we have increased the roster of high-end amenities offered at the Milwaukee Palomar Hotel and Residences. Residents and guests will have access to the ultimate pampering services within steps of their hotel room or personal residence."
The Milwaukee Palomar Hotel and Residences would be built at the northwest corner of West Juneau Avenue and Old World Third Street. The $150 million development would include 63 condominiums, a 175-room boutique hotel, a restaurant, nightclub, the spa and fitness center, retail space, and a parking structure.

After a series of layoffs at my job today some surprising news despite the economy...

THURSDAY, Oct. 16, 2008, 3:13 p.m.
By Tom Daykin

Aloft Hotel might break ground soon
The developers of a planned Aloft Hotel in downtown Milwaukee's Park East area hope to begin construction of the delayed project as soon as possible.

That was the word today from developers David Florsheim and Robert Ruvin, who plan to build the 160-room hotel on a parking lot they own overlooking the Milwaukee River, north of W. Juneau Ave. They commented on the project after the city Redevelopment Authority approved an agreement to share costs on a public Riverwalk, dock wall and plaza that will be part of the project.

The Common Council in April authorized more than $1 million in city funding for the project. Aldermen voted to borrow $858,000 for a Riverwalk segment and plaza, and $278,000 for nearby street improvements. If the money is spent, it would be repaid through property taxes generated by the hotel and other new development within the Park East area.

Kilbourn Reservoir Park is now open and I snapped a few photos.

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f99/ajknee/DSC03232.jpg

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f99/ajknee/DSC03231.jpg

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f99/ajknee/DSC03243.jpg


Here's the full photo thread:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=730330


And a bonus of the topped out Park Lafayette:

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f99/ajknee/DSC03204.jpg

Then, raze the building and turn it into a park for taxpayers to enjoy. Make it a "Freshwater Park."

It's important to protect public land, but we do already have an entire park-system dedicated to "freshwater parks". We also just built the city's first State Park steps away, and it's an island made out of waste from the deep-tunnel project, so I think the commitment to public amenity is there. I had the same sentiment about the underground Veterans Musuem proposal that was floating around a couple of years back, but this thing is a whole new animal.

Think of the transformation Milwaukee could experience if we began to regain just a franction of the economic benefits we used to experience from our location on Lake Michigan. Think of the one-two punch the school of Freshwater Sciences and Discovery World would have, both unique to Milwaukee, located next to Calatrava's first building in the US. Take it one step further: continue with plans to demolish and relocate the Hoan Bridge, and create public and private partnerships and incentives to new and existing water-related industries, by commiting the land from the location of the (approved) School of Freshwater Sciences to the existing Great Lakes Institute.

Big Picture: We lost Miller and our reality is that if we don't move on this, someone else will (and it'll probably be Chicago). This is our golden ticket to compete in not just the regional and national economy, but globally as a fresh-water powerhouse.

We need to start moving on our great ideas, and if Barrett is serious about dubbing us the "Fresh Coast" this is how we start.

What does tearing down the Hoan bridge have to do with Milwaukee becoming the center of fresh water technology?

What does tearing down the Hoan bridge have to do with Milwaukee becoming the center of fresh water technology?

It doesn't. I just made it up.

But it could silence my fellow south-side residents who oppose the bridge relocation. A 'silicon-valley' in their backyard might ease their economic concerns about the project.

^^ Don't get me wrong, I think putting the school between the Art Museum and Discovery World are, if done right, would be an excellent idea, but following your logic, if the plan was to have a "Silicon Valley" of water related business down towards where the Hoan Bridge is, wouldn't you then want the school there as well?

It doesn't. I just made it up.

But it could silence my fellow south-side residents who oppose the bridge relocation. A 'silicon-valley' in their backyard might ease their economic concerns about the project.

It wouldn't silence those of us who grew up in the suburbs directly south of the city and realize how much it has helped the area... the only consideration to the bridge being torn down is if the burbs are connected by rail.

^^ Don't get me wrong, I think putting the school between the Art Museum and Discovery World are, if done right, would be an excellent idea, but following your logic, if the plan was to have a "Silicon Valley" of water related business down towards where the Hoan Bridge is, wouldn't you then want the school there as well?

In my scenario yes, but that's not the reality.

It wouldn't silence those of us who grew up in the suburbs directly south of the city and realize how much it has helped the area... the only consideration to the bridge being torn down is if the burbs are connected by rail.

The floating proposal of tearing down the bridge does mention building an alternative connection to the lake parkway, they wouldn't be tearing that down.

"We need to start moving on our great ideas, and if Barrett is serious about dubbing us the "Fresh Coast" this is how we start."

Is it true that Tom Barrett is still the mayor of Milwaukee? He is an alumn from my HS, and I couldn't be more ashamed of fellow Hilltopper! He has done less as mayor of Milwaukee than any other mayor in recent history. He could jump-start the "Fresh Coast" by leaving office and allowing for a fresh start.
(Hello, Mr. Barrett? Are you ever going to take charge of the voter fraud going on right under your nose?! Pitiful and pathetic, to say the least). There are many opportunities out there for you, Mr. Barrett, which will allow you to show us whether you are a mayor or a...congressman. Start by putting an end to the folly of a Hoan Bridge demolition. That bridge is fine (with some updates), and to think anyone is going to build on the sewer that is Jones Island is just idiotic. C'mon "mayor," come out of the shadows and strap 'em on already!!

"We need to start moving on our great ideas, and if Barrett is serious about dubbing us the "Fresh Coast" this is how we start."

Is it true that Tom Barrett is still the mayor of Milwaukee? He is an alumn from my HS, and I couldn't be more ashamed of fellow Hilltopper! He has done less as mayor of Milwaukee than any other mayor in recent history. He could jump-start the "Fresh Coast" by leaving office and allowing for a fresh start.
(Hello, Mr. Barrett? Are you ever going to take charge of the voter fraud going on right under your nose?! Pitiful and pathetic, to say the least). There are many opportunities out there for you, Mr. Barrett, which will allow you to show us whether you are a mayor or a...congressman. Start by putting an end to the folly of a Hoan Bridge demolition. That bridge is fine (with some updates), and to think anyone is going to build on the sewer that is Jones Island is just idiotic. C'mon "mayor," come out of the shadows and strap 'em on already!!

Ha, we've had such awesome mayors over the past century that when we get an average one people get angry.

I realize this is not an appropriate place for this question, but is so highly frequented by you marvelous Milwaukee folks, I wanted to get the question out here where you would see it, but I insist that it only be answered by private message, as to not take up space on this thread with off-topic stuff. Thanks!

I have a small IT business based in Madison. I'm looking into taking my staff to Milwaukee (because Madison is just too familiar and doesn't provoke inspiration for us anymore) for some inspiration and idea building. What activities might you recommend? I have already considered a Harley tour, or a visit to the Harley museum with a finish at the brewery. What else is there? Ie; if we were in NoCal I would take them to Pixar, or Google, etc. What activities does Milwaukee have that I can bring a staff of 4-5 to that can provoke thought and excitement? Your expertise is greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Look into:

Bucketworks.
Urban Ecology Center.

http://www.tomwujec.com/

highly recommended

RedPrairie to build Delafield headquarters
Software maker RedPrairie Corp. will build its headquarters in Delafield, on a site south of I-94 and east of Highway C, the company said today.

RedPrairie plans to move to Delafield from Crossroads Corporate Center, in the Town of Brookfield, by fall 2010.

The new 120,000-square-foot headquarters will be among four buildings that will be developed in the first phase of a business park that RedPrairie will develop in partnership with RP Technology Development Group LLC. The RedPrairie headquarters will be among the largest office developments pending in the Milwaukee area.

Real estate industry sources in August said the Delafield site was the preferred site for RedPrairie, which had once considered moving to downtown Milwaukee's Park East area. Those plans were dropped after CEO John Jazwiec resigned a year ago.

RP Technology's principals include developer George Erwin, investor Robert Gerbitz, Briohn Building Corp. and Zilber Ltd.


Looks like that park east tower won't happen!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! I want that tower SO bad.

Well, good luck to RedPrairie when they open their new building in four years when gas is $12 per gallon. They'll either have to subsidize their own neighborhood or have no employees.

***this is biased educated wishful thinking***

RedPrairie to build Delafield headquarters
Software maker RedPrairie Corp. will build its headquarters in Delafield, on a site south of I-94 and east of Highway C, the company said today.

RedPrairie plans to move to Delafield from Crossroads Corporate Center, in the Town of Brookfield, by fall 2010.

The new 120,000-square-foot headquarters will be among four buildings that will be developed in the first phase of a business park that RedPrairie will develop in partnership with RP Technology Development Group LLC. The RedPrairie headquarters will be among the largest office developments pending in the Milwaukee area.

Real estate industry sources in August said the Delafield site was the preferred site for RedPrairie, which had once considered moving to downtown Milwaukee's Park East area. Those plans were dropped after CEO John Jazwiec resigned a year ago.

RP Technology's principals include developer George Erwin, investor Robert Gerbitz, Briohn Building Corp. and Zilber Ltd.


Looks like that park east tower won't happen!

Shoot! This is certainly a blow to downtown's office development. I'm not surprised, as Red Prairie has a history of a suburban location (Waukesha) and a move to downtown would've been quite a shift for them. The good news is that they're staying in SE Wisconsin, the bad news is they won't be bringing 120,000 sq. feet of office space and lots of people with them to downtown.

This isn't new news about RedPrairie it was out in August. The key thing to notice here is that the CEO lives in Delafield.

At least it is a shorter commute for the CEO:ohno:

The floating proposal of tearing down the bridge does mention building an alternative connection to the lake parkway, they wouldn't be tearing that down.

It depends on where the alternate connection goes.. if it just dumps people off onto 1st steet the connection will be ineffective. If it is replaced with something similar with similar or expanded connections then it would be beneficial.

if it just dumps people off onto 1st steet the connection will be ineffective.

It would indeed be pretty ineffective...which is why such a routing has not been suggested as a possible alternative.

If it is replaced with something similar with similar or expanded connections then it would be beneficial.

Looking at both alternative concepts drawn up by HNTB, the new routing more or less falls within the footprint of the existing bridge/freeway, it's just not elevated...thus allowing for new connections to adjacent neighborhoods and streets. You'd still be able to get from the South Shore suburbs to Downtown, plus improved access to Bay View, the Third Ward, the Lakefront, the Port, and everything else in between.

It doesn't. I just made it up.


haha, so are half the "facts" and other information people bring up in these forums. Glad someone finally admitted it! :lol:

Just messing with ya EastSider!

haha, so are half the "facts" and other information people bring up in these forums. Glad someone finally admitted it! :lol:

Just messing with ya EastSider!

I was just talking about an idea, but I know what you mean.

I see in the ads St. Johns on the Lake is 60% leased. That's encouraging

Speaking of St. Johns, what's the construction going on behind them?

From the information I have, St. Johns needs a 70% leased amount for them to get the financing. Assuming nothing has changed due to the economy.

Anybody know what's going on at the Domes? I was walking through the Valley taking shots of Chimney Park and noticed a strange green light coming from the Tropical Dome.

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f99/ajknee/DSC03316.jpg

I know the re-opening is next Wednesday, but does anyone know if this will be a permanent fixture?

Grand reopening is Nov. 5th.

http://www.biztimes.com/daily/2008/10/27/county-to-reopen-the-mitchell-park-domes

Great article from the Small Business Times (http://www.biztimes.com/news/2008/10/31/the-bridge-to-somewhere) on the idea of replacing the Hoan Bridge with a boulevard.

Excerpt:

“It would look like an urban boulevard with a high level of landscaping, sidewalks, bike lanes and all sorts of things like that,” said Matthew Hintze, a vice president for HNTB and the author of the Hoan Bridge study. “We’d still have to rise up to get up to the lift bridge – we’d still need 45 feet of clearance. We wouldn’t want to have to lift (the bridge) up for every sailboat that comes through.”

The roadway would begin rising at Polk Street in the Third Ward, then pass over a bridge that crosses the river and continue over the Metropolitan Milwaukee Sewerage District plant and the Port of Milwaukee. The road would lower to street level after the port, opening some of the land on Jones Island for potential redevelopment.

HNTB’s study created two conceptual plans. Both plans call for:

--A new marina to be created along the lakefront, south of the Port of Milwaukee.
--Increased development occurring within the eastern portion of the Third Ward, an area of numerous parking lots and vacant parcels.
--The Lake Interchange, the connection between the Hoan Bridge and the western segment of I-794, would be lowered to street level, freeing up additional land for redevelopment in the Third Ward.
--New residential development occurring in Bay View, north of Becher Street. The land is currently dominated by industrial and storage facilities, some of which are vacant.

http://assets.bizjournals.com/story_image/210018-300-0-1.jpg

Biz Journal:

The banking and financial meltdown that has devastated world stock markets hasn’t exactly ended sales of new condominiums in and near downtown Milwaukee.

In fact, sales are chugging along.

Three downtown-area condo projects that will deliver finished condo units in early 2009 continue to report sales are active. Prospects continue to show interest in the Breakwater Condominiums, 1313 N. Franklin Place; Park Lafayette, at North Prospect Avenue and Lafayette Place; and The Edge, 1890 N. Commerce St.

“We are truly astonished by our sales figures,” said Chris Corley, a sales and marketing director for Breakwater, a 21-story high-rise project developed by Renner Architects LLC, which also has completed The Harbor Front condos at 541-601 E. Erie St. and The Waterfront Condominiums at 130 S. Water St.

I think the only way i would jump on to the idea of creating a surface boulevard is if there was ROW given to light rail during the reconstruction, whether it be in the median or separate ROW. Or if they even construct the track.

To me the key thing about tearing down the Hoan is the land that would be opened up in the Third Ward and the improved access to the lake front that would come with it.

To me the key thing about tearing down the Hoan is the land that would be opened up in the Third Ward and the improved access to the lake front that would come with it.

Improved access to the lakefront? The Summerfest Grounds will still be in the way.

Land opened up? The new boulevard will take up essentially the same footprint as I-794. All those parking lots there in the Third Ward can be developed, regardless of the status of the Hoan Bridge. And I believe that those lots WILL be developed eventually, regardless of the status of the Hoan Bridge.

Improved access to the lakefront? The Summerfest Grounds will still be in the way.

Am I the only person in Milwaukee who thinks that the Summerfest grounds are a waste of land there on the lakefront? Don't get me wrong: I'm all for Summerfest, but shouldn't that land be made available to the public (who actually owns it) during the 80% or so of the year that it isn't being used for festivals? (I also realize that Lakeshore SP kinda opened up some of the lakefront, but the monopoly that World Festival Inc. has on the land there has always irked me.)

Jeez.

Am I the only person in Milwaukee who thinks that the Summerfest grounds are a waste of land there on the lakefront? Don't get me wrong: I'm all for Summerfest, but shouldn't that land be made available to the public (who actually owns it) during the 80% or so of the year that it isn't being used for festivals? (I also realize that Lakeshore SP kinda opened up some of the lakefront, but the monopoly that World Festival Inc. has on the land there has always irked me.)

Yes.

I wouldn't touch the Summerfest Grounds with a stick. The amount of people those festivals bring in is incredible. They keep the Lakewalk open in the off season for public use, and the State Park is easily accessible from both ends. They also make good use of the off season with remodeling. Also, what would you rather have there? Another park? I love our parks, but we're already know for having an above average amount of park space on our lake. Plus, why would you want to be in a park during the hellish days of February/March?

Am I the only person in Milwaukee who thinks that the Summerfest grounds are a waste of land there on the lakefront? Don't get me wrong: I'm all for Summerfest, but shouldn't that land be made available to the public (who actually owns it) during the 80% or so of the year that it isn't being used for festivals? (I also realize that Lakeshore SP kinda opened up some of the lakefront, but the monopoly that World Festival Inc. has on the land there has always irked me.)
Probably the only person in Wisconsin and the northern half of Illinois.

Am I the only person in Milwaukee who thinks that the Summerfest grounds are a waste of land there on the lakefront? Don't get me wrong: I'm all for Summerfest, but shouldn't that land be made available to the public (who actually owns it) during the 80% or so of the year that it isn't being used for festivals? (I also realize that Lakeshore SP kinda opened up some of the lakefront, but the monopoly that World Festival Inc. has on the land there has always irked me.)


Maybe they aren't a waste, but yes I think it should and could be used for many other things during the "80%" of the time it is sitting there not being used!!... i.e events...

Summerfest is Milwaukee and the revenue it brings the city is essential. Along with many others festivals/concerts that do quite well also.

Kramerica> The better access to the lake front would be that parts of I794 could then be removed as not needed. You could create a much grander entrance and connection to the MAM and Discovery world. And purely a more pedestrian friendly environment to walk to the lakefront.

And there's a reason part of this land hasn't developed. Because it was encircled by freeways. When you open it up then it will be more likely to develop.

Now that I'm looking at a map of 794, I really don't understand where a boulevard would go...

I'd image it would follow Harbor Dr along the Summerfest Grounds, but there where would it go? We can't level Jones Island. It could cross over the the 5th Ward and we could get a cool roundabout ot connect it up to National. But I don't really see how it could connect up with Bay View without completely obliterate our port. I know all that stuff down there looks blighted and abandoned, but it definitely isn't and cannot be easily moved.

Any thoughts?

Now that I'm looking at a map of 794, I really don't understand where a boulevard would go...

I'd image it would follow Harbor Dr along the Summerfest Grounds, but there where would it go? We can't level Jones Island. It could cross over the the 5th Ward and we could get a cool roundabout ot connect it up to National. But I don't really see how it could connect up with Bay View without completely obliterate our port. I know all that stuff down there looks blighted and abandoned, but it definitely isn't and cannot be easily moved.

Any thoughts?

A new boulevard could easily follow the exact same path and fit within the same footprint as the existing freeway/bridge. The north and south ends would be at ground level, which would allow the street/block grids of the Third Ward and Bay View to be extended eastward to the meet the boulevard. The middle segment of the boulevard would rise up toward a new drawbridge over the river mouth and a viaduct over the port area. The drawbridge would be built high enough to allow most river traffic to pass freely without having to open (motorboats, sailboats, tugs and barges, and other low-level boats), and would only have to be opened to allow very large boats to pass (the big freight lakers and salties). Bridge opening curfews could even be put in place--like there are on all the other moveable bridges around town--so that openings would not be allowed during morning/evening rush hours and certain special events. The low-level viaduct would allow traffic to pass over the port without interference from the trucking/railroad loading and unloading activities at the piers and railyards down below.

Kramerica> The better access to the lake front would be that parts of I794 could then be removed as not needed. You could create a much grander entrance and connection to the MAM and Discovery world. And purely a more pedestrian friendly environment to walk to the lakefront.

I don't doubt that the area could be made to be really nice. BUT, it is not fair to compare the vision you have with what is there now. The current Lake Interchange could be made a A LOT more pedestrian friendly. That huge parking lot could be a really nice park/great lawn. Put in some trails and other features and you'd have a really nice gateway to the lakefront from the Third Ward.

So when you compare that to your boulevard option, I don't think the upgrade is all that much. Especially since IMO there is going to be a ton of traffic on the streets there and to me that's not a good thing to be crossing, as a pedestrian. (I'm thinking the Michigan / Lincoln Memorial intersection... that's hardly a grand entrance)

Houston's Buffalo Bayou Walk (http://www.buffalobayou.org/sabinebagby.html) is a good example of what can be done under a freeway. Obviously there are differences from this to I-794, but my point is that it can be done well.

And there's a reason part of this land hasn't developed. Because it was encircled by freeways. When you open it up then it will be more likely to develop.

I think that's highly simplistic. I'm not sure what was there before all those parking lots, but I'd say the reason the area isn't developed was because it was right in the middle of the industrial port and/or IS part of the port. And now with much of the industry actually going away, the Third Ward is now desirable. Redevelopment is slowly marching across the ward and WILL take up all those lots some day. Perhaps taking down the Hoan Bridge would hasten the process, but the Hoan Bridge certainly isn't stopping it.

I don't doubt that the area could be made to be really nice. BUT, it is not fair to compare the vision you have with what is there now. The current Lake Interchange could be made a A LOT more pedestrian friendly. That huge parking lot could be a really nice park/great lawn. Put in some trails and other features and you'd have a really nice gateway to the lakefront from the Third Ward.

Turn it from concrete pillars, steel girders, and seas of asphalt (basically transportation infrastructure and automobile storage) into buildings of offices, apartments, condos, stores, schools, hotels, community centers, plazas, pocket parks, sidewalks, gardens, courtyards, parking garages. That is placemaking. That is balancing transportation and development. That is adding value to the city.

Making the area more pedestrian friendly by planting lawns, putting in trails below the freeway, or even giving crosswalks at the ends of the ramps fancy colored paving doesn't really do much in the way of capturing the potential for the area. Unfortunately the phrase "putting lipstick on a pig" comes to mind, sorry to say.

Houston's Buffalo Bayou Walk (http://www.buffalobayou.org/sabinebagby.html) is a good example of what can be done under a freeway. Obviously there are differences from this to I-794, but my point is that it can be done well.

The Bayou Walk looks pretty good passing beneath those Houston highways, and perhaps under a scenario in which the Hoan Bridge stays put, something similar could be done along the Milwaukee River. However, that's only a small section, right at the main draw--the waterway--and does not really address how the land beneath and adjacent to remainder of the elevated freeways and ramps could be dealt with.

I think that's highly simplistic. I'm not sure what was there before all those parking lots, but I'd say the reason the area isn't developed was because it was right in the middle of the industrial port and/or IS part of the port. And now with much of the industry actually going away, the Third Ward is now desirable. Redevelopment is slowly marching across the ward and WILL take up all those lots some day. Perhaps taking down the Hoan Bridge would hasten the process, but the Hoan Bridge certainly isn't stopping it.

If the Hoan Bridge and freeway would be replaced with a boulevard, we could have something akin to what's going on in Washington, DC around the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge and South Capitol Street, which is a major traffic artery linking DC's southeastern suburban areas to the southeastern urban areas of the city (so similar to how the Hoan Bridge is a major link between the South Shore suburbs and Downtown).

In DC, they tore down the elevated viaduct at the northern approach to the Douglass Bridge, replacing it with a new boulevard that ramped down to ground level to connect with the existing ground level part of South Capitol Street. By doing this, the city was able to connect adjacent neighborhoods (once very gritty and seedy post-industrial area, now going through an amazing transformation) directly to the main street, opening up frontage along the new section of street that was previously unexposed and unreachable when the viaduct was in place. That added value to those parcels of land, and now there are several projects in development there.

The current design for the Douglass Bridge itself, is old, there are no pedestrian or bicycle accommodations whatsoever, and it is in need of of replacement. As opposed to the Hoan Bridge, the Douglass is much lower, has a pair of bascule leafs that open to allow boats on the Anacostia River to pass, and is a fairly standard (read boring and non-iconic) design. However, there are plans in the works to build a completely new bridge, which is being designed to carry high levels of traffic, accommodate pedestrians/cyclists, open/close for boats, and have a memorable iconic landmark appearance. Those are cues that can be taken and applied in Milwaukee if a new boulevard/bridge is built to replace the Hoan.

Another similarity between the DC example and Milwaukee is the adjacent presence of a seasonal-only crowd/traffic generator. In DC, they built their baseball stadium right along the new boulevard, right at the new intersections that hook up with the surrounding neighborhoods. In Milwaukee, the analogous seasonal attraction is the festival grounds. Back in DC, the streets right next the stadium are being developed as a year-round, live/work/shop/play/dine/visit neighborhood, with several new developments underway or on the drawing boards, made possible by the opening up of land created by lowering the viaduct. This cannot be done in Milwaukee across the street from the festival grounds because a large elevated freeway looms above.

The parking lots immediately west of the freeway have not been developed yet because there is little value in developing them, despite all of the redevelopment that has occurred in the rest of the Third Ward. The presence of the freeway drags down the value of those lots, and developers know there aren't too many people who would like to rent and apartment or buy a condo or work at an office in a building that sits in the shadow of a freeway and has a room that looks out at cars and trucks whizzing past five stories up. You can surround those concrete pylons with all the grass and shrubs you want, you can paint the bridge girders and arch any color you want, but it's not going to add enough value to make those lots live up to their full redevelopment potential.


By the way, those big surface parking lots north and south of the Italian Community Center, west of the freeway was mostly covered by the Chicago & North Western Railroad's passenger coach yards, freight yards, and locomotive servicing facility. The freeway and festival grounds were once a lakefront airstrip, (Matiland Field), and before that, underwater.

Has anyone noticed the blocked off spur, if you could call it that, at the end of the new Mchange (94 eastbound, but visible after crossing the Hoan bridge towards downtown)? It's weird they'd build an extension to the freeway without future plans for it ...

Has anyone noticed the blocked off spur, if you could call it that, at the end of the new Mchange (94 eastbound, but visible after crossing the Hoan bridge towards downtown)? It's weird they'd build an extension to the freeway without future plans for it ...

These directions don't make any sense. Could you please show where you're talking about on a map?

There is a blocked off spur at the Lake Interchange (just north of the Hoan Bridge, along the northbound off-ramp from I-794 to Lincoln Memorial Drive) that was supposed to be an off-ramp leading down to Michigan Street, back when the freeway was planned to run further north along the lakefront to link up with the then-proposed Park East freeway.

But that is neither on 94 eastbound, nor at the end of the new Mchange, none of which cross the Hoan Bridge.

Has anyone noticed the blocked off spur, if you could call it that, at the end of the new Mchange (94 eastbound, but visible after crossing the Hoan bridge towards downtown)? It's weird they'd build an extension to the freeway without future plans for it ...

Are you talking about the construction crossover that was built above the Public Market Parking lot?

Maybe they aren't a waste, but yes I think it should and could be used for many other things during the "80%" of the time it is sitting there not being used!!... i.e events...

That's really more what I was getting at. There's no way I would ever suggest that Summerfest or any of the other lakefront festivals should go away, I'm just saying it would be nice to have access to the area, events or otherwise, on days that are not weekends from May to September. Sorry if it came across as Summerfest bashing. I do love all that it is and does for the city. (Except for Don Smiley's boomer-centric lineups)

Assuming that it is upheld in the courts, how much damage will that 'paid sick days' referendum inflict on the city's economy and how much will it benefit the suburbs?

Mike

Construction fence up, buldozers doing site preperation work on the NW corner of 3rd/Juneau ... the Aloft site.

i heard the Aloft project was moving forward. anyone know what its current design looks like? i believe the top two floors of condos were removed...

Assuming that it is upheld in the courts, how much damage will that 'paid sick days' referendum inflict on the city's economy and how much will it benefit the suburbs?

Mike

Let's put it this way, if this sick "tax" isn't taken out back and shot, the city of Milwaukee will quickly become a suburb of Waukesha! :ohno: Who the H is responsible for even getting this piece of garbage on the ballot?!! :ohno:

Let's put it this way, if this sick "tax" isn't taken out back and shot, the city of Milwaukee will quickly become a suburb of Waukesha! :ohno: Who the H is responsible for even getting this piece of garbage on the ballot?!! :ohno:

It was put there by some special interest group who had a bunch of people sign a petition, which required it to appear on the ballot, and since the silly thing passed, the common council has to write and implement a law to that effect. As an aside, despite my political leanings indicated by my avatar, I voted against this ridiculous proposal. Why on earth would anyone who lives in Milwaukee ever want to place the city at yet another disadvantage economically? Smacks of the proverbial "free lunch.":wtf:

The sick leave ballot question was a load of bs. As if the companies were not already laying off enought people because they can't balance their books, they now have to add paid sick days to their paid benefits packages. :bash: Good job Milwaukee lets kick our businesses while they are down.

The sick leave resolution was brought forward by a group called 9to5. They under Wisconsin's Direct Legislation law obtained 42,000 signatures which then required the Common Council to either approve it or put it on the ballot. So they put it on the ballot. Apparently it got enough votes (I voted against it, but voted for transit), but it is now going to court.

On a side note they did pass this in San Fransisco (I know Milwaukee isn't San Fran) but jobs have actually increased in San Fran since.

These directions don't make any sense. Could you please show where you're talking about on a map?

Yea, sorry that was vague. I see it after I cross the Hoan bridge traveling north from Bayview to downtown, right after I cross the Milwaukee St. exit:

http://api.tiles.virtualearth.net/api/GetMap.ashx?ppl=24,,43.0417900590423,-87.9068201205855&b=h,mkt.en-us&z=18&c=43.0358090713797,-87.9080428366365&w=874&h=798

Are you talking about the construction crossover that was built above the Public Market Parking lot?

It looks like it. Anyone know if they have a future purpose for it?

http://onmilwaukee.com/images/articles/ke/kenilworthnland/kenilworthnland_story1.jpg

About four years ago, New Land Development purchased properties at Kenilworth and Farwell Avenues on Milwaukee's East Side. Plans have now surfaced for this corner. They include a great-looking building of high end, one-room apartments and street side retail...

OnMilwaukee (http://onmilwaukee.com/market/articles/kenilworthnland.html)

Is it just me, or does new land suck at street level retail? More power to them for keeping projects going, but I'd rather see them fill the Sterling storefronts than build this. And please God, don't let NLE tear down those two houses unless they're 100% sure they can build in their place. I would hate to see that corner empty for an extended period.

it's not just you. NL's retail spaces are awful and unfilled. coincidence? their buildings routinely die at street level. the Stirling is a prime example.

this new design doesn't exactly offer hope for anything better. it's basically a combination of current architectural fads --- staggered windows, relentless storefront, etc... it's a tough project type to work in, so i feel for the architects. clearly NL is doing this project on the CHEAP.

Regarding NLE's new project:
I think they just need to add a bit of depth to the facade on the street level. When you look at the Sterling, the facade is too flat, and the materials look painted on because nothing pops out. They need to put a few niches into the facade, and have a few areas where the facade juts out to engage a person walking past. When you look at the sterling from the outside there is nothing there that would make any business want to locate there. There are hundreds of ways to make the facade more engaging to the street level, they could add planters, or any other sort of decorative elements.

Yea, sorry that was vague. I see it after I cross the Hoan bridge traveling north from Bayview to downtown, right after I cross the Milwaukee St. exit:

http://api.tiles.virtualearth.net/api/GetMap.ashx?ppl=24,,43.0417900590423,-87.9068201205855&b=h,mkt.en-us&z=18&c=43.0358090713797,-87.9080428366365&w=874&h=798



It looks like it. Anyone know if they have a future purpose for it?

They are probably going to keep it so that if at anytime in the future they need to do road repair or something, they can still use it, but other than that it isn't going to be used.

http://www.biztimes.com/nf/uploads/Image/reweekly11.5.08/246echicago.jpg

Chicago-based advertising agency this week moved its Milwaukee office from 733 N. Van Buren St. in downtown Milwaukee to its new home at 246 E. Chicago St. in the city's Historic Third Ward.

Cramer-Krasselt is occupying almost 50,000 square feet of office space on the 2nd and 3rd floors of the Third Ward building.

Nov. 5: Small Business Times (http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2008/11/5/cramer-krasselt-moves-to-third-ward)

http://www.mkedcd.org/news/2008/images/AloftSite.jpg

The $40 million development will feature a 160-room Aloft Hotel, a Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide Inc. brand that offers a similarly modern feel as its ‘W’ brand hotels. The project is expected to create 75 new jobs. The hotel is expected to open November 2009.

The City of Milwaukee is working with the development team of Milwaukee River Hotel LLC to add a Riverwalk segment, dock wall, public plaza and street improvements as part of the project

DCD (http://www.mkedcd.org/news/2008/Aloft.html)

From the Biztimes Milwaukee

Friday, November 14, 2008
Milwaukee to create land bank for water-related businesses
City of Milwaukee officials are working to establish a 150- to 200-acre bank of land to attract water-related businesses, Department of City Development Commissioner Richard "Rocky" Marcoux announced today.
Speaking at the sixth annual BizTimes Commercial Real Estate & Development Conference in Milwaukee, Marcoux said business, government and academic leaders in the metropolitan Milwaukee area intend to establish the region as a major hub for water-related businesses.
The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee is working to create a School of Freshwater Sciences, which will be the first such school in the nation. In addition, there are already 120 businesses in southeastern Wisconsin that deal with water technology and water services, a larger water industry cluster than in any other city in the United States, according to Franz Hoffmann, president of Procorp Enterprises LLC in Milwaukee and chair of the Milwaukee 7 Water Council.
The region, of course, is strategically located along Lake Michigan, part of the Great Lakes, which comprises about 20 percent of the world's fresh water, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The city intends to provide locations for water-related businesses that want to move to the Milwaukee region and be part of the water industry cluster, Marcoux said.
"We can be and we will be the water capital of the world," he said.
City officials are working to assemble the land bank, which would be located near the lake and the city's rivers. The land bank would be comprised of scattered sites close to water, Marcoux said. There is not enough available land in the city to create a water industry land bank all in a single location, he said.
Marcoux declined to name specific sites that the city is trying to acquire for the water business land bank.
The theme for this morning's conference was "Milwaukee's Fresh Coast Advantage."



http://www.biztimes.com/daily/2008/11/14/

Who knows what is being built on the north side of Wisconsin avenue just west of the freeway overpass? And, does someone have any renderings or links that would show the project. Looks like one big hole right now. I don't recall this being discussed.

that is a new law school building.

^^Depending on which site you are speaking of, it is either the new Law School or the Student Services Building.

Eckstein Hall (Law School) is shown below. It is on the corner of 11th St. and Tory Hill Dr./Clybourn, south of Wisconsin Ave.

http://law.marquette.edu/building/images/illustrations/3drender.jpg
(11th St. is on the right, Clybourn on the left)
http://law.marquette.edu/building/images/illustrations/campusentrance.jpg
(viewed from Campus)

Zilber Hall (New Student Service Building) is on Wisconsin Ave, from 12th to 13th. An older rendering is shown below. The final version, according to my discussions with the University Architect, will have more glass near the central entrance to the building, as well as some other changes.
http://www.marquette.edu/architect/images/Zilber808.jpg

A new engineering building (called the Discovery Learning Complex) is targeted to break ground June 2009. It will be located on the south side of Wisconsin, from 16th to 17th Streets. A render of the current plan can be seen in during second 28 of the video at this link:
http://www.marquette.edu/engineeringonamission/

Wow. This has become a very depressing thread. When we start talking about MU's new law building as a focal point, you know it's slow out there.
Until the economy imroves, say goodnight to any of the big projects. My prediction: mid November of 2012.

Zilber Hall.Thats it MarqKev... This is a huge project and great massive infill to this area of Wisconsin Avenue. We have seen renderings of the law school but not Zilber Hall. Thanks for the quick follow-through.

These two building might represent 100 million dollars collectively. I don't think this lends to "depressing". I like these two structures and look forward to their super structure going up.

A new engineering building (called the Discovery Learning Complex) is targeted to break ground June 2009. It will be located on the south side of Wisconsin, from 16th to 17th Streets. A render of the current plan can be seen in during second 28 of the video at this link:
http://www.marquette.edu/engineeringonamission/

There is also a picture of the building below the Video, as part of the background.

Wow. This has become a very depressing thread. When we start talking about MU's new law building as a focal point, you know it's slow out there.
Until the economy imroves, say goodnight to any of the big projects. My prediction: mid November of 2012.

I think we can be safe with (at least) the moderne before november 2012

This is something.


Friday, November 14, 2008
Downtown Milwaukee retail targetedGroup to hire person to lure retailers to downtown
The Business Journal of Milwaukee - by Rich Kirchen

To address downtown Milwaukee’s lack of retailers, a business group has retained a consultant to develop a retail marketing strategy and will hire a staffer to recruit stores.

The Downtown Business Improvement District is spending $125,000 in a one-year contract with Downtown Works, Washington, D.C., which specializes in urban retail and downtown merchandising. The Business Improvement District, which is funded by downtown property owners and the city of Milwaukee, also is seeking a downtown retail coordinator to connect property owners with prospective retail tenants.

“It’s obvious that downtown Milwaukee is under-retailed,” said Beth Nicols, executive director of the downtown BID. “Downtown workers and visitors want shopping opportunities.”

The plan will cover the area roughly bounded by North Fourth Street, Juneau Avenue, North Marshall Street and Interstate 794. While the Shops of Grand Avenue is in the district, the retail recruitment efforts will not include the mall, which has its own staff for that function, Nicols said.

the rafters on city hall should come down this month

The rafters? Holy smokes!:runaway:

The rafters? Holy smokes!:runaway:

And this after they just spent all that money fixing the place up!:banana:

Don't worry guys! If the rafters DO come down maybe the scaffolding will help keep the roof up in their place! :lol:

From the Biztimes Milwaukee

http://www.biztimes.com/daily/2008/11/14/

I emailed the Mayor and got a response. Let's start telling him our ideas more often.

900-car parking garage to rise at "The Brewery" (http://www.jsonline.com/business/34585854.html)
...The ceremony signals the beginning of another project in the redevelopment of the property, dubbed The Brewery, by real estate investor Joseph Zilber and others. The first office tenants are moving in within two to three weeks, and residential tenants will be moving in within six weeks, said John Kersey, president of The Brewery Project LLC, Zilber's investors group.

Site for new downtown hotel sells for $2.5 million (http://www.jsonline.com/business/34585224.html)
...The downtown Milwaukee development site for the new Aloft hotel has been sold for $2.5 million, according to documents filed with the Milwaukee County Register of Deeds.

The parcel, overlooking the Milwaukee River north of W. Juneau Ave., was bought by Milwaukee River Hotel LLC, an investors group led by Wave Development. It was sold by investors group Milwaukee Block 10 Properties LLC, led by developer Robert Ruvin. Excavation work for the 160-room hotel recently started at the site in the Park East area.

I emailed the Mayor and got a response. Let's start telling him our ideas more often.

EastSider, that was so 13 posts ago. :old:


Sorry to call you out, really wanted to use that smily...

EastSider, that was so 13 posts ago. :old:
Sorry to call you out, really wanted to use that smily...

You're good at counting :applause:

:tyty: yes yes...thank you! It is a personal pride of mine!

From.... http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2008/11/19/

Despite the slumping economy, the vacancy rate for class A office market in southeastern Wisconsin dipped in the third quarter, according to Inland Companies third quarter office market report.

The region's class A office space had a vacancy rate of 12.0 percent in the third quarter, down from 12.7 percent in the second quarter, according to the report. In downtown Milwaukee, the class A office space vacancy rate fell to 11.7 percent in the third quarter from 11.9 percent in the second quarter. The top eight class A buildings in downtown Milwaukee (U.S. Bank Center, Milwaukee Center, 100 E. Wisconsin, 411 Building, 875 E. Wisconsin, Cathedral Place, 789 N. Water, 1000 N. Water) are in even better shape. Those eight buildings have a vacancy rate of about 7 percent, according to the Inland report. In the fourth quarter of 2006, those same eight buildings had a vacancy rate of about 11.78 percent, according to Lyle Landowski, vice president of office brokerage for Inland. Expansions by downtown office tenants and the lack of new office buildings has helped bring down the class A vacancy rate, he said. The 411 E. Wisconsin Ave. building has the largest amount of available class A office space downtown, about 100,000 square feet (including a block of 47,000 square feet), Landowski said. The Milwaukee Center is 95 percent occupied, but a 40,000-square-foot space will be opened up before 2010 when Legion Insurance Co. closes is office.

The area's class A office market continues to outperform the overall office market. The overall metro Milwaukee office space vacancy rate was 16.6 percent in the third quarter, down from 17.0 percent in the second quarter, according to the Inland report. The overall downtown office space vacancy rate was 19.5 percent in the third quarter, down from 20.1 percent in the second quarter, according to the report.

THE TRANSERA

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i104/gehrijac/transera1.jpg

The Goll Mansion high rise is opening up a model unit today

http://www.jsonline.com/business/34741709.html

http://www.thetransera.com/index.html

^^ That looks to be a new tallest for the "gold coast" skyline.
http://www.thetransera.com/images/transera3.jpg

wow this place is slow.

^^ That looks to be a new tallest for the "gold coast" skyline.
http://www.thetransera.com/images/transera3.jpg
Oh, but how looks can be deceiving. What that picture doesn't show is either the University Club Tower (36 stories), or the Kilbourn Tower (33 stories), much less the USBank Tower at 42 stories. It seems to me that picture is from the time before either the UCT and the KT were built, and they just "Photoshopped" the Transera into an old pic. However, the "Transera" does look like it will be the tallest within a short surrounding vicinity. It will be a very nice gap filler structure for the near coast skyline.

wow this place is slow.Yes, it is. And how is the development world in New Haven, CT during these days of global economic recession?

Oh, but how looks can be deceiving. What that picture doesn't show is either the University Club Tower (36 stories), or the Kilbourn Tower (33 stories), much less the USBank Tower at 42 stories. It seems to me that picture is from the time before either the UCT and the KT were built, ...

You are correct, but I was referring to the smaller residential skyline east of downtown.

You are correct, but I was referring to the smaller residential skyline east of downtown.So the UCT and the KT are not considered to be part of the "Gold Coast"?

So the UCT and the KT are not considered to be part of the "Gold Coast"?

I wouldn't include them in the "Gold Coast"

So the UCT and the KT are not considered to be part of the "Gold Coast"?

Would Hancock and Aon be considered part of Chicago's Gold Coast?

The picture is pretty new. If I'm not mistaken the 'blue' building on the far left is the new Breakwater and looks to be nearly t/o in that picture. UCT and KT are a bit farther to the left.

http://www.biztimes.com/nf/uploads/Image/reweely11-18-2008/staybridge.jpg

SBT (http://www.biztimes.com/realestateweekly/2008/11/19/delays-push-back-staybridge-suites-opening-to-march)...The completion date for the project has been pushed back several times. About 85 percent of the delays were the result of design changes to the project, Economou said. Those changes expanded the size of the building from 9 to 14 floors, and included other enhancements. In addition the soil condition was worse than expected and foundation caissons had to be drilled 100 feet into the ground instead of 50 feet as orignially planned, he said

A completely random question: Does anybody know why the corners of the top of the US Bank Building are now lit red? Its been that way for a little while now, and I was just wondering if anyone had heard why they decided to do that.

I thought I posted this, but I guess not. The ad for St J's on the Lake claims 70% sold now.

I thought I posted this, but I guess not. The ad for St J's on the Lake claims 70% sold now.

since when?

The last several days in the Journal.

I had seen that same advertisement a few weeks ago. Originally, before the economic crisis, they were supposed to break ground after 60% was sold. I wonder what the new number is...

^^ They better break ground now then because by the time it is done, the crisis will likely be over. I read somewhere that real estate in Milwaukee has fared the best during the economic downturn compared to other large markets.

since when?

The sign in front of the site on Prospect Ave has had 70% stamped across it for about a month now

http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2008/11/24/story12.html?b=1227502800^1737462

"Friday, 2008-11-21
State to sell excess Marquette Interchange land

The Business Journal of Milwaukee - by Pete Millard

The Wisconsin Department of Transportation is preparing a plan to sell an estimated 18 acres of surplus land used as staging areas for equipment and material during construction of the Marquette Interchange project.

The department also will lease an additional 10 or more acres under the network of bridges for parking lots. In the past, Milwaukee County leased several acres for parking lots for employees at the Milwaukee County Courthouse.

There are five parcels in downtown Milwaukee that are expected to be identified as surplus land by DOT officials in December, according to a department spokeswomen. They are:

* A 1-acre parcel at North Fifth Street and West St. Paul Avenue;
* 4 acres at the northwest corner of North James Lovell Drive and West Clybourn Street;
* 11 acres at the intersection of West Vernon Avenue and North 12th Street;
* 1 acre at North 11th Street and West St. Paul Avenue;
* And 1 acre at North 10th Street and West McKinley Avenue near the Park East development corridor."
(see link for rest of article)

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

I keep thinking that the block bounded by James Lovell (7th), Clybourn, 8th and Michigan, where the westbound Clybourn Av 'loop' on-ramp was, will be an ideal site for a 50-60 floor 'signature' tall building - and is likely the most valuable piece of surplus ROW in the entire state inventory.

http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=43.036788~-87.92271&style=h&lvl=17&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=5431667&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1

One is looking directly at this site when driving northbound across the I-43/94 'High Rise' bridge, much like the view of Jacobs Field from eastbound I-90 crossing the Cuyahoga River Valley bridge in downtown Cleveland, OH.

Mike

I keep thinking that the block bounded by James Lovell (7th), Clybourn, 8th and Michigan, where the westbound Clybourn Av 'loop' on-ramp was, will be an ideal site for a 50-60 floor 'signature' tall building - and is likely the most valuable piece of surplus ROW in the entire state inventory.

So, our tallest building (by almost 20 floors) would be positioned in the middle of a freeway interchange and not along our signature lakefront?

I'd take it where we could get it, but I think this is less than likely. Am I nuts to think this would just be some low-level infill? Anything else interesting possible?

I keep thinking that the block bounded by James Lovell (7th), Clybourn, 8th and Michigan, where the westbound Clybourn Av 'loop' on-ramp was, will be an ideal site for a 50-60 floor 'signature' tall building - and is likely the most valuable piece of surplus ROW in the entire state inventory.


I agree with you, Mike. I think that parcel would be great for at the very least, a building on the level of 100 E Wisconsin or taller. The visibility for that corner is tremendous. As for having our tallest building away from the lakefront, the last time I was in Chicago, I'm pretty sure I did not see Sears Tower anywhere near the lake. (And, before anyone says anything, I know the Spire is planned for the lakefront, but it's on hold, so it doesn't count.:))

I agree with you, Mike. I think that parcel would be great for at the very least, a building on the level of 100 E Wisconsin or taller. The visibility for that corner is tremendous. As for having our tallest building away from the lakefront, the last time I was in Chicago, I'm pretty sure I did not see Sears Tower anywhere near the lake. (And, before anyone says anything, I know the Spire is planned for the lakefront, but it's on hold, so it doesn't count.:))
In my opinion, having a new tallest somewhere around the lake front is fine, but I also see one being on or around the riverfront as an ideal place. To me, that's always been the center of downtown.

Excellent.

Wednesday, December 3, 2008 - 2:47 PM CST
Rezoning clears way for Postal centerThe Business Journal of Milwaukee

Oak Creek aldermen on Tuesday approved plans for rezoning 64 acres at the southwest corner of College and Pennsylvania avenues, clearing the way for construction of a mail processing and distribution center for the US Postal Service.

The new 858,000-square-foot center will house all mail processing and distribution operations currently located at the US Postal Service’s downtown Milwaukee facility at 345 W. St. Paul Ave. The new processing center will serve 672 postal locations throughout southeast Wisconsin and will replace three processing facilities, including one at the downtown Milwaukee post office.

“The relocation of this postal facility from downtown to Oak Creek is consistent with our long-term vision for the airport corridor,” said Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker.

Earlier this year, the US Postal Service acquired the 64-acre parcel from Cobalt Partners in Milwaukee. Cobalt’s principals, Scott Yauck and James Heffernan, said they are “thrilled to be working with the Postal Service on a project that has so many benefits, both locally and regionally.”

Construction is expected to begin in the next 12 to 14 months, and will take about two years to complete. The center will bring 2,200 jobs to Oak Creek and will be one of the largest light industrial buildings developed in the region in recent years, Cobalt officials said.

So it finally dawned on me yesterday... we keep talking about what prime realestate the post office is on downtown... but even if you demolish that building the railroad tracks will still be there and amtrak at least will still need to use them. What can you put up there that wouldn't be ruined by having active rail lines right on the river? If you've been in a building near railroad tracks as a train goes by you know that it shakes the whole building. What residential or commercial property owner would want that?

So it finally dawned on me yesterday... we keep talking about what prime realestate the post office is on downtown... but even if you demolish that building the railroad tracks will still be there and amtrak at least will still need to use them. What can you put up there that wouldn't be ruined by having active rail lines right on the river? If you've been in a building near railroad tracks as a train goes by you know that it shakes the whole building. What residential or commercial property owner would want that?

Don't a lot of new construction and conversion condos in downtown Chicago have a similar situation and seem to do just fine...

I've been eyeing up the post office site and the empty spaces across St Paul and can't shake the idea of a NEW TRANSIT CENTER off. That bus hub on the lake just does not work and if we do ever bring back rail, the old Public Service Building is pretty much unusable as a hub because it's been converted to a pretty successful office building.

We could build something in that space that works as a functioning bus hub for now, but set up to be easily converted to a streetcar or light rail hub later.

I'm thinking something along the lines of the Cincinnati Riverfront Transit Center:
http://www.cincinnati-transit.net/transitcenter.html

or the Seattle Downtown Bus Tunnel:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_Bus_Tunnel

Oh, but how looks can be deceiving. What that picture doesn't show is either the University Club Tower (36 stories), or the Kilbourn Tower (33 stories), much less the USBank Tower at 42 stories. It seems to me that picture is from the time before either the UCT and the KT were built, and they just "Photoshopped" the Transera into an old pic. However, the "Transera" does look like it will be the tallest within a short surrounding vicinity. It will be a very nice gap filler structure for the near coast skyline.

No, they are out of picture. The photo otherwise was not edited besides the addition of the new building. Besides, neither Kilbourn or UCT are Gold Coast.

Also, I was back in Milwaukee last weekend....holy fuck City Hall looked spectacular.

http://img379.imageshack.us/img379/9958/tnimg9340mb1.jpg

Expletives aside, I completely agree. With that scaffold covering it for so long, I'd forgotten what a gem she is. A recent editorial in the Journal Sentinel said that it should be lit at night and I couldn't agree more.

CGII, you have such a way with words. ;)

Whats going on towards the top of the tower in that picture? Is it still covering work thats going on up there?

ACLU files complaint over interstate lanes

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-wi-interstatecomplai,0,2059519.story

Associated Press
2:56 PM CST, December 4, 2008
MADISON, Wis. - A civil rights organization is demanding federal officials investigate state plans to expand Interstate 94 south of Milwaukee.

The Wisconsin Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union has filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Transportation saying the changes would put minorities at a disadvantage. The state wants to widen the interstate from six to eight lanes and change exits.

The ACLU argues the changes would hurt development in heavily minority Milwaukee and help the city's white suburbs while saving travelers only a minimal amount of time. The organization also contends the Wisconsin Transportation Department hasn't evaluated whether more money should go toward bus routes minorities need.

Wisconsin DOT officials didn't immediately return messages for comment.


I don't usually like a lot of the actions of the ACLU... but whatever we can do to stop the wasteful spending on this I-94 project I'll get behind!

I've said it once, I'll say it a thousand times... I-94 towards IL does not need expanding and those whole guidelines for safety are fine... but is it really worth the expense to redo a road that doesn't need to be redone yet??

Park East Parcel for Sale after deal falls through (http://www.jsonline.com/business/35537244.html)

By Tom Daykin of the Journal Sentinel

Posted: Dec. 4, 2008

Milwaukee County officials are putting a Park East parcel back on the sale block after an earlier development proposal for the site fell through.

The county-owned parcel, totaling 2 acres, is bordered by N. Milwaukee St., N. Water St., N. Broadway and E. Ogden Ave. An informational meeting for prospective bidders is set for 1:30 p.m. Dec. 17 at the county's real estate services department, 2711 W. Wells St.

Chicago-based RSC & Associates in September dropped plans to build 175 apartments or condominiums, and 185,000 square feet of commercial space, on the vacant block. RSC President Richard Curto said the project was doomed by a big drop in leasing activity among retail and restaurant chains, and a slowdown in the downtown condo market.

http://assets.bizjournals.com/story_image/214023-0-0-1.jpg

More condos being marketed as apartments (http://milwaukee.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2008/12/08/story6.html)

The surplus of condominiums in downtown Milwaukee is prompting at least one development firm to rethink its strategy by offering almost half of its 82-unit River Renaissance building to the apartment rental market.

Rivren Group LLC, Milwaukee, which completed the River Renaissance building at 102 N. Water St. in August, has 44 condos under contract and is one of the largest and first condo projects in Milwaukee to offer both apartments and condos, according to Milwaukee-based Appraisal Resources Group.

http://assets.bizjournals.com/story_image/213162-0-0-1.jpg

Columbia Sports coming to 5th Ward (http://portland.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2008/12/01/story4.html)

Columbia Sportswear Co. plans to open a buyers mart and showroom for corporate clients in the sprawling South Water Works project currently being renovated by Milwaukee’s Lighthouse Development Co. in the city’s 5th Ward.

ACLU files complaint over interstate lanes

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-wi-interstatecomplai,0,2059519.story



I don't usually like a lot of the actions of the ACLU... but whatever we can do to stop the wasteful spending on this I-94 project I'll get behind!

I've said it once, I'll say it a thousand times... I-94 towards IL does not need expanding and those whole guidelines for safety are fine... but is it really worth the expense to redo a road that doesn't need to be redone yet??
What's wasteful about it?

I-94 needs roadbed-up replacement and the difference in cost between six lanes and eight lanes is very, very small. The least wasteful thing to do is to do it RIGHT to begin with, rather than go cheap and have to come back in a couple of years to redo it all over again because it wasn't enough. THAT is wasteful!

And the economic health of the entire eastern half of the state (including up here in the Appleton area) is critically dependent on the health of that part of I-94, as well as that of the other Milwaukee-area freeways - whether YOU like it or not!

Mike

I think recent freeway projects have had some short-sighted planning. It bugs me that the new mchange didn't create space for a future rail expansion. The 94 project is similar because the discussion on it got shut down.

If DOT isn't going to commit to rail expansion, they should at least plan for it in new projects so we have a later option.

What's wasteful about it?

I-94 needs roadbed-up replacement and the difference in cost between six lanes and eight lanes is very, very small. The least wasteful thing to do is to do it RIGHT to begin with, rather than go cheap and have to come back in a couple of years to redo it all over again because it wasn't enough. THAT is wasteful!

Because the change from six to eight lanes will do nothing to help traffic.

Not only are the extra lanes NOT NEEDED now or anywhere in the near future... especially when compared to other parts of our freeway system... but they redid I-94 from the IL border to Milwaukee right before the Mchange project began...

That seems like a really short period of time to resurface and then completely redo the roadway! Plus, correct me if I'm wrong, but most of the changes coming about seem to have to do with the new safety standards in on/off ramps and whatnot... and not actually needed to replace then entire roadbed.

Plus it may seem like a good deal because the cost increase is only a small chunk of the total cost... but holy crap, do you know what we could do with that money instead?? It's a lot of money when by itself!

^^ Actually, if I'm not mistaken, that actual road bed for that part of 94 is quite old and will be in need to being totally rebuilt. It has been resurfaced from time to time, but at some point the entire thing needs to be dug up and rebuilt, and such is the case here. Just part of the cost of maintaining infrastructure.

That said, adding the extra lane will cost quite a bit of money (even if not as a percentage of the total project), and I remain unconvinced that the addition will do much more than induce further demand on the route, and further sprawl in SE Wisconsin.

As an aside, I'm sure the DOT has calculations for this sort of thing, when you increase the number of lanes from 3 to 4 in each direction, surely you don't increase capacity by 25%. So, approximately how much more capacity would the extra lane add?

Here's a good chart showing pavement life:
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/d2/i94/docs/feis-113.pdf

Generally a highway starts out with a new base and 10 or so inches of concrete as the pavement. That lasts a long time, usually 25 or more years. Then they'll mill the top of the concrete smooth and put a layer (or two) of asphalt down. That's overlay #1, and because the base is still pretty good, it lasts a decent number of years. But subsequent overlays last fewer and fewer years, because the base isn't good anymore.

Most people think pavement goes bad from the top down, but that's not the case. Cracking and the subsequent chipping and potholes come from instability in the road's base. And that is caused by years of water seaping and from our freeze/thaw cycles. No matter how pretty the road surface looks right after an overlay, it is only as good as the material it sits upon.

Anyway, the bottom line for I-94 to Illinois is that the base is over 50 years old and needs replacement. I think it is worth the extra $200 million to add the extra lane now. Of course I also think it is worth $200 million to have the KRM up and running, especially while I-94 is being reconstructed. (once people see how great the train is, they won't go back.) Furthermore, I think it could all be paid for easily with the appropriate gas tax.

I tried to find out what the capacities for a six lane vs eight lane freeway are, but was unsuccessful. I think it depends on the congestion level, though. If they are both in free-flow conditions, I don't think the 4th lane is a 33% increase, but probably close to 20-25%. But as congestion increases, it will indeed approach the theoretical 33% mark. Four lanes bumper-to-bumper going 5 mph can definitely have 33% more cars than three lanes in the same condition.

I think recent freeway projects have had some short-sighted planning. It bugs me that the new mchange didn't create space for a future rail expansion. The 94 project is similar because the discussion on it got shut down.

If DOT isn't going to commit to rail expansion, they should at least plan for it in new projects so we have a later option.

Explain to me please, where is there any room in the Marquette ROW for rail expansion? It's an intersection, and even in systems like Denver's where the rail shares the ROW, it diverges near interchanges, and not just near major system interchanges like the Marquette, but near the service interchanges as well. And that's in the Tech Center area of Metro Denver, where there is tons of space, not in a tight area like Downtown Milwaukee. What do you suggest they did, more "urban removal" like the '60s and '70s?

I felt that between the two major project being considered (I-94 & the Zoo Interchange) that the interchange was more urgent. I-94 from the state line to Milwaukee is in decent condition and can handle the current load. The Zoo Interchange is considerably undersized and inefficient. I was shocked when the state decided on the I-94 project.

As for the Milwaukee-Chicago corridor, I am hopeful that between the new high-speed rail bill (http://www.mercurynews.com/valley/ci_11127065) and the new administration's infrastructure bill that we can get some serious high speed rail in place for the Hiawatha. This will take on added significance should the US be awarded the 2016 Olympics in Chicago. 40 minute trip from Milwaukee to downtown Chicago would be wonderful. From all accounts, this passage (as one of the more profitable) would be one of the first on the list for the new midwestern rail initiatives.

40 minute trip from Milwaukee to downtown Chicago would be wonderful.

I think this is quite an understatement. This would be f'ing amazing for the region and would be an amazing benefit for Milwaukee. It would certainly speed up the "merger" of Milwaukee and Chicago.

And why on Earth would you want to speed that up? The last thing I want is for FIBs thinking Milwaukee is a suburb.

What do you suggest they did, more "urban removal" like the '60s and '70s?

Really?

Freeway rail integration can be difficult and more costly, but it's not uncommon in major cities. The planning failure occurred in rebuilt freeways segments (94, 43), not in the interchange. Some places even take designated car lanes away, but the efficiency and effectiveness of that is a debate in itself.

Surface area underneath the interchange itself is abundant, visible to anyone driving down St. Paul (which by the way would be a great location to build a rail extension to the intermodal station).

DOT planners need to focus on integration instead of expansion.

http://media.jsonline.com/images/DORM10p1.jpg

The Common Council's Zoning, Neighborhoods and Development Committee on Tuesday unanimously approved a planned $45 million residence hall for 700 University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee students, setting the stage for final council approval next week.

Journal Sentinel - Business (http://www.jsonline.com/business/35843074.html)

DOT planners need to focus on integration instead of expansion.
They need to do both, plain and simple. The expansion of all of the major freeways in SE Wisconsin is needed to handle traffic loads, not ten years from now, but twenty, thirty, even forty years from now. Despite the region's climate, SE Wisconsin and NE Illinois's population will continue to increase over the next forty years. And all of these people need to go to work, go to school, go to the store, and go to whatever and where-ever.

A high speed rail is a great idea. But it won't be the end all to be all. Not by a long shot. Hell, I even think that the KRM is STILL a viable option, if the State of Wisconsin or whomever gets their head out the sand. I know a commuter train and high speed rail are not the same, but why not have both. And expand the freeways as well. Remember we're talking infrastructure that's needed for the year 2040 and beyond.

Just my two cents worth.:)

40 minute trip from Milwaukee to downtown Chicago would be wonderful.

As much as I would love that time (and the speed required), realize that that sort of time/speed isn't on the radar at this time. The MWRRI (http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/state/docs/railmidwest.pdf) is the most optimistic thing out there right now, and plans 110 mph service taking 64 minutes from Milwaukee to Chicago, which is a 25 minute reduction from the current time.

This country BADLY needs to update and modernize its infrastructure, and building trains for those medium-range trips would be ideal. A 40 minute or less trip from downtown Milwaukee to downtown Chicago would do WONDERS for Milwaukee. Combine that with Wisconsin's proposal for high speed rail between Milwaukee and Madison, and we could have a real powerful triangle of economic growth.

Many people looking to escape the density and expense of Chicago would no doubt scoop up housing in downtown Milwaukee, and would therefore support some local Milwaukee businesses and also drive a growing housing market. This, in turn, could attract more businesses as Milwaukee's access to Chicago makes it a cooler place to live.

This country is SUPPOSED to be #1, yet somehow we are not even close when it comes to infrastructure, especially when it comes to transportation. Let's not upgrade to some half-assed technology that shaves off 20 minutes, let's go all out and start building real high speed rail like they have in Europe.

Perhaps I'm just being an idealist dreamer, though...

Lets not put the cart before the horse here. We're struggling to get support of these ugrades let alone ones that would cost way more money. Lets take a lesson from the conservative party over the years... when they want a final outcome they get legislation and things approved a little at a time so in the end they finally get to their goal. One step at a time! :)

Am I the ONLY one who wants to just slooooow down on the whole light rail / Chicago rail expansion thing?? We already have Amtrak and County buses!! :gaah:

*Puts fire suit on, in preparation for the flaming* :guns1:

Lets not put the cart before the horse here. We're struggling to get support of these ugrades let alone ones that would cost way more money. Lets take a lesson from the conservative party over the years... when they want a final outcome they get legislation and things approved a little at a time so in the end they finally get to their goal. One step at a time! :)

Good point. I'm part of Generation Y though, and I want complete satisfaction now.

But seriously, if they are going to spend an enormous amount of money making it go only 110 mph, they should just scrap it and wait until they can do something better. We need something that makes the consumer feel like the train is actually a technological leap in public transport, something "new" and "exciting," not just a slightly faster version of what was there before. While European, Asian, and other countries are putting together plans for connecting their close cities with Maglevs or trains that go almost 200 mph, we are still using all this third-rate old technology? Why can't we install these faster trains?

A Midwest united under REAL high speed rail would be an amazing thing. I am especially excited because, due to their proximity to Chicago, Milwaukee and Madison would probably be by far the most affected by it.

Am I the ONLY one who wants to just slooooow down on the whole light rail / Chicago rail expansion thing?? We already have Amtrak and County buses!! :gaah:

*Puts fire suit on, in preparation for the flaming* :guns1:

have you ridden the County busses lately?

Good point. I'm part of Generation Y though, and I want complete satisfaction now.

But seriously, if they are going to spend an enormous amount of money making it go only 110 mph, they should just scrap it and wait until they can do something better. We need something that makes the consumer feel like the train is actually a technological leap in public transport, something "new" and "exciting," not just a slightly faster version of what was there before. While European, Asian, and other countries are putting together plans for connecting their close cities with Maglevs or trains that go almost 200 mph, we are still using all this third-rate old technology? Why can't we install these faster trains?

A Midwest united under REAL high speed rail would be an amazing thing. I am especially excited because, due to their proximity to Chicago, Milwaukee and Madison would probably be by far the most affected by it.

Agreed, I think you need to get Milwaukee to Chicago in under an hour. If we can't break 110mph, then I'm not sure it will make much of a difference in ridership.

In reading about the Maglev in China, it only costs about a billion dollars a mile. So, if we can get 90 billion or so, we'll be all set. ;)

Monorail, monorail, monorail...

Here's something different. It was last night. I haven't found anything written on the result.
http://www.renewthevalley.org/files/pdf/ValleyPassageInvitation.pdf

This also reminds me, there was talk a couple years ago of building an elevator from the deck on the 35th St. viaduct to the floor of the valley. I have seen nothing further about that. I remember they got a grant for that, too.

But seriously, if they are going to spend an enormous amount of money making it go only 110 mph, they should just scrap it and wait until they can do something better.

Agreed, I think you need to get Milwaukee to Chicago in under an hour. If we can't break 110mph, then I'm not sure it will make much of a difference in ridership.

Oh boy. I don't think supporters of rail are in any position to say that 110 mph trains aren't fast enough and therefore we should wait for something better. Speeding up to 110 much does make a real improvement, as in over 25%. Even just going between Milwaukee and Chicago, it's a big deal, but when trying to build a system of which that is just a (albeit key) link, it's even more important. If people from Green Bay or the Fox Cities want to get onto the system, that extra speed is vital in making the system viable. Should entire regions wait to get service because people in Milwaukee will only save 25 minutes instead of spending orders of magnitude more to save 45? Think of it this way, the entire Midwest could benefit for this rail service, and if as a side effect travel time between Milwaukee and Chicago has to come down a little, I think you guys can accommodate that burden.

This also reminds me, there was talk a couple years ago of building an elevator from the deck on the 35th St. viaduct to the floor of the valley. I have seen nothing further about that. I remember they got a grant for that, too.
To answer my own question, I've been told that it was cancelled for now because that grant never did get approved.

Oh boy. I don't think supporters of rail are in any position to say that 110 mph trains aren't fast enough and therefore we should wait for something better. Speeding up to 110 much does make a real improvement, as in over 25%. Even just going between Milwaukee and Chicago, it's a big deal, but when trying to build a system of which that is just a (albeit key) link, it's even more important. If people from Green Bay or the Fox Cities want to get onto the system, that extra speed is vital in making the system viable. Should entire regions wait to get service because people in Milwaukee will only save 25 minutes instead of spending orders of magnitude more to save 45? Think of it this way, the entire Midwest could benefit for this rail service, and if as a side effect travel time between Milwaukee and Chicago has to come down a little, I think you guys can accommodate that burden.

My point was really just that a real high speed train (150mph+) would unify the midwestern region in a way never seen before. Since the visionaries behind this bill are going for Midwestern pride and unification, I think going faster is absolutely necessary. The midwest (even Chicago) has long suffered from the identity issues that go along with being relatively invisible to the rest of the country, and we could really use something like this. Even if the rest of the country still doesn't care about it, we will no longer care, because we are a region that has much to be proud of.

Getting from downtown Milwaukee to downtown Chicago in significantly under an hour (such as 40 minutes) would be an enormous boon to the regional economy and would probably catalyze an economic boom in Wisconsin. It has always been my belief that the "real" Midwest is Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, and Wisconsin, which have always been their own region apart from the rest of the Midwest, and a real high speed rail would effect and unify these states more than any others.

Since Milwaukee and Madison would be by far the nearest major stops from Chicago hub, as well as midpoints on the track between two most economically powerful Midwestern cities, Wisconsin would probably be more effected by such a rail than any other state in the midwest. I've always felt that Wisconsin was kind in a sad state; a state with so much potential that just wasn't firing off the way it could. I feel that this train, if it was fast enough, could really be the catalyst. There are lots of reasons bright and talented people should want to live here.

Anyway, at 110mph, the news headlines will mostly be met with disinterest and apathy from the target market. Very little will happen in regards to both regional unification and economic development. Most people in Chicago, and even Milwaukee, will simply not care. In fact, my guess is that it would only be making things slightly more efficient for the people who already use the train. It just doesn't carry the "punch" to actually really interest people or excite them. A train going 150 mph or more from the Twin Cities, through Madison to Milwaukee and Chicago certainly could carry that punch --- it is far, FAR better than any other options, which needs to be the case to pull Americans out of their cars.

What these analysts need to realize is that, just as a movie with a good script can suck, if you don't deliver the interesting "image" to the consumer, even something that is quite good can just come across as boring... and something that just seems like a faster normal train ride, even if it isn't, would certainly lack that punch.

Anyway, that was way longer than it should have been.

In an ideal world, of course 150 mph is better than 110 mph. The problem is cost, and 150 mph is going to cost (probably) significantly more. The key, as with all things, is to bring the greatest value. Basically, your arguing that we should build for 150 mph primarily because if this doesn't garner enough news, not enough people will use it, and that extra 40 mph is somehow going to make all sorts of news. I disagree.

Almost all routes that HSR will serve are significantly undeserved. Taking examples of Madison or Minneapolis to Chicago, there is for all practical purposes no service (I believe there's one train a day, and not at great times). With HSR, even at a measly 110 mph, there's service! Certainly enough that people will take note. I just really doubt that most people who aren't paying much attention to this right now are going to suddenly jump out of their seat over the difference between 110 and 150 miles per hour, when right now they are getting little or no service at all.

In an ideal world, of course 150 mph is better than 110 mph. The problem is cost, and 150 mph is going to cost (probably) significantly more. The key, as with all things, is to bring the greatest value. Basically, your arguing that we should build for 150 mph primarily because if this doesn't garner enough news, not enough people will use it, and that extra 40 mph is somehow going to make all sorts of news. I disagree.

Almost all routes that HSR will serve are significantly undeserved. Taking examples of Madison or Minneapolis to Chicago, there is for all practical purposes no service (I believe there's one train a day, and not at great times). With HSR, even at a measly 110 mph, there's service! Certainly enough that people will take note. I just really doubt that most people who aren't paying much attention to this right now are going to suddenly jump out of their seat over the difference between 110 and 150 miles per hour, when right now they are getting little or no service at all.

I agree that adding some additional service between Madison-Milwaukee-Chicago is good, no matter the speed. However, the upgrade of existing lines to a milestone that is not substantial in today's age will not increase traffic enough to justify the cost. Saving 20 minutes on a trip from Milwaukee to Chicago is nice, and a good thing. But, cutting my time in half and creating that symbolic link between the two cities (under an hour), would do wonders for Milwaukee.

It's about marketing and creating a splash, but it's also about the actual time. Under an hour is a commute time. If I'm a company, I can easily have offices in both cities and have a quick connection. Chicago-based companies could take advantage of the cheaper labor force in Milwaukee. Milwaukee-based companies could have quicker access to the Chicago business networks. Also, there becomes a real opportunity to draw Chicagoans up to Milwaukee for a day for special events, festivals, art shows. I know all that is possible now, but if you cut an hour or more off of my round trip time -- that is significant.

Also, it would take less than half of the time it takes to drive. Right now, many people look at the time and opt for the freedom of their cars. They realize the err of their ways when they enter the clogged concrete arteries -- but they keep doing it. Rail become a much better value proposition.

I agree that adding some additional service between Madison-Milwaukee-Chicago is good, no matter the speed. However, the upgrade of existing lines to a milestone that is not substantial in today's age will not increase traffic enough to justify the cost. Saving 20 minutes on a trip from Milwaukee to Chicago is nice, and a good thing. But, cutting my time in half and creating that symbolic link between the two cities (under an hour), would do wonders for Milwaukee.

It's about marketing and creating a splash, but it's also about the actual time. Under an hour is a commute time. If I'm a company, I can easily have offices in both cities and have a quick connection. Chicago-based companies could take advantage of the cheaper labor force in Milwaukee. Milwaukee-based companies could have quicker access to the Chicago business networks. Also, there becomes a real opportunity to draw Chicagoans up to Milwaukee for a day for special events, festivals, art shows. I know all that is possible now, but if you cut an hour or more off of my round trip time -- that is significant.

Also, it would take less than half of the time it takes to drive. Right now, many people look at the time and opt for the freedom of their cars. They realize the err of their ways when they enter the clogged concrete arteries -- but they keep doing it. Rail become a much better value proposition.

Couldn't have said it better.

What we really need is that symbolic "link" in the minds of the citizenry. If you could get from downtown Milwaukee to downtown Chicago in 40 minutes for a reasonable price, the housing boom in Milwaukee would probably be unparalleled. Chicago people are already snatching up riverside condos to get away from the city, and if you shave a full 42 minutes off the trip, the effect would be enormous. I imagine, over time, downtown would see much more development and PERHAPS businesses may even start to move in as Milwaukee/Wisconsin retains its gentry better and becomes a cooler and more desirable place to live. Just as slums like Wicker Park in Chicago are gentrifying, so can entire cities practically... and IMO Milwaukee is better fit for that than just about any other city.

Even if Milwaukee experienced rapid development, it would still hold onto it's "small" character, especially compared to Chicago, and I think it could become a very, very charming city. The lake, the river, all the old buildings that have or could be renovated...

Badgers 77: "Since Milwaukee and Madison would be by far the nearest major stops from Chicago hub....".

I checked the Rand McNally atlas to see if your statement was very accurate. A high speed rail route from Chicago to Madison is proposed to go through Milwaukee. The distance from Chicago to Milwaukee is 92 miles. The distance from Milwaukee to Madison is listed at 77 miles. Therefore the high speed rail route from Chicago through Milwaukee to Madison is about 169 miles. The distance from Chicago to Indianapolis is 179 miles. I wouldn't call being 10 miles closer to Chicago enough to consider Madison and Milwaukee "by far the nearest major stops to Chicago hub". Indianapolis is also close - only ten miles further from Chicago via high speed rail, than Madison. Also, sorry but I don't know that Madison is considered a "major hub". The "major" metro areas in the Midwest are Chicago, Twin Cities, Detroit, St. Louis, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Kansas City, Columbus, Indianapolis, and Milwaukee. All, well over 1.5 million people. Madison is a nice city - but its population puts it in the Mid majors in the Midwest - along with Grand Rapids, Dayton, Toledo, Des Moines, Peoria, Ft. Wayne, etc.

The Milwaukee Road line is never going to support real high speed rail so long as it is shared with Metra and CN freight. That's a fact. 110MPM is only 31MPH faster than today's peak speeds. Not impressed.

.... Madison is a nice city - but its population puts it in the Mid majors in the Midwest - along with Grand Rapids, Dayton, Toledo, Des Moines, Peoria, Ft. Wayne, etc.

:lol: Mid majors?... How NCAA!

Badgers 77: "Since Milwaukee and Madison would be by far the nearest major stops from Chicago hub....".

I checked the Rand McNally atlas to see if your statement was very accurate. A high speed rail route from Chicago to Madison is proposed to go through Milwaukee. The distance from Chicago to Milwaukee is 92 miles. The distance from Milwaukee to Madison is listed at 77 miles. Therefore the high speed rail route from Chicago through Milwaukee to Madison is about 169 miles. The distance from Chicago to Indianapolis is 179 miles. I wouldn't call being 10 miles closer to Chicago enough to consider Madison and Milwaukee "by far the nearest major stops to Chicago hub". Indianapolis is also close - only ten miles further from Chicago via high speed rail, than Madison. Also, sorry but I don't know that Madison is considered a "major hub". The "major" metro areas in the Midwest are Chicago, Twin Cities, Detroit, St. Louis, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Kansas City, Columbus, Indianapolis, and Milwaukee. All, well over 1.5 million people. Madison is a nice city - but its population puts it in the Mid majors in the Midwest - along with Grand Rapids, Dayton, Toledo, Des Moines, Peoria, Ft. Wayne, etc.

Semantics. The Madison area has over 500,000. I'd consider Des Moines a major stop, too. You almost seem offended by what I said, though. What's with that?

And Milwaukee would be by far and away the closest, followed by Madison like you said, and frankly, I think Madison would benefit more than Indianapolis, at least relative to it's population. In my own experience, Illinois people are generally more interested in Wisconsin, despite their propensity to deride us, than they are in Indiana. If Milwaukee or Madison started developing quickly and becoming "cool", I'm pretty sure they'd come in like a flood, especially to Milwaukee.

Like I said, Minnesota/Iowa/Wisconsin/Illinois are just really kind of their own part of the Midwest. I think most people in these areas sort of feel that way, too. Indiana is noticeably different, where things just start to get really more conservative and where there is a tangible social "shift" that can be felt, like in Missouri. I mean, it's a lot more Ohio/Kentucky than it is Illinois/Michigan/Wisconsin/etc.

But I'm not saying that Indianapolis wouldn't benefit from the connection. I'm sure it would immensely, just as about every other midwest city would. But they need to go faster than 110mph.

http://www.jsonline.com/business/36087949.html

I hadn't realized that the office towers and condos were eliminated from the original plans for the Catalyst project. That's too bad. Now it's a much less impressive project than we all were excited about two years ago. It's understandable why it was drastically scaled down. But now it's nothing to write home about. And obviously, it may never happen during these very tight credit recessionary times.

Office was never supposed to be part of the project. There was one condo tower and one hotel tower.

I still think the main goal of that site is to bring traffic to Grand Ave and provide conventioneers with another entertainment option, and a retail/hotel development accomplishes that.

http://www.jsonline.com/business/36087949.html

I hadn't realized that the office towers and condos were eliminated from the original plans for the Catalyst project. That's too bad. Now it's a much less impressive project than we all were excited about two years ago. It's understandable why it was drastically scaled down. But now it's nothing to write home about. And obviously, it may never happen during these very tight credit recessionary times.

I honestly hope this scaled-down nothing does not happen. Yes, the economy may be the prime culprit, but this Ghazi goup seems to be less than thorough with their projects. This is not a case where something is better than nothing. With the emergence of the Pabst project, another ho-hum plan like the revised Ghazi proposal is unacceptable. That land, although vacant for some time, is just too valuable to settle for a half-ass project.

Office was never supposed to be part of the project. There was one condo tower and one hotel tower.

I still think the main goal of that site is to bring traffic to Grand Ave and provide conventioneers with another entertainment option, and a retail/hotel development accomplishes that.

So basically the writer of the article didn't really know and embellished. That said, I'm pretty sure the development still has the two towers. They're both still in the marketing publications:

http://www.catalystmilwaukee.com/

skyking Although the Epicentre in Charlotte was scaled back as well, the Ghazi portion of that project has been very successful. Further Ghazi seems to be able to land retail tenants others have failed at so I'm still pulling for the scaled back project to go forward.

I honestly hope this scaled-down nothing does not happen. Yes, the economy may be the prime culprit, but this Ghazi goup seems to be less than thorough with their projects. This is not a case where something is better than nothing. With the emergence of the Pabst project, another ho-hum plan like the revised Ghazi proposal is unacceptable. That land, although vacant for some time, is just too valuable to settle for a half-ass project.

I totally agree...if one or both of those towers are eliminated, or shrunk down to 20 stories or less, screw it. That site is (basically) in the heart of downtown and it would be a waste not to put something of great significance there, in terms of not only substance but height as well.