Green Bay, WI Development News 2

[jmancuso]

continued from locked thread

[GBSurveyor]

Little old Green Bay now has a thread retired...and we still have a shitty Downtown.
Brief summary of last year:
Nicolet Bank opened
Washington Commons closed
and there is a hole lot of hope riding on Vetter.

We can only hope for what lies ahead. Peace out

[Puant]

Here's to hoping that by the time THIS thread is retired:

• Astor Place is built
• The riverfront boardwalk is complete
• Site 4 has a tower as tall or taller than Astor Place
• The mall has been transformed into something useful
• River Center is complete and vibrant
• I can get a friggin cup of decent coffee on the east side of the river
• There are more decent places to eat drink and be merry

Maybe something big will also be happening in the stadium area. What ever happened to those buildings they planned for Bart Starr Drive / Reggie White Way, etc?

[Bay2Bay]

Originally Posted by Puant en la Baye

Here's to hoping that by the time THIS thread is retired:

• Astor Place is built
• The riverfront boardwalk is complete
• Site 4 has a tower as tall or taller than Astor Place
• The mall has been transformed into something useful
• River Center is complete and vibrant
• I can get a friggin cup of decent coffee on the east side of the river
• There are more decent places to eat drink and be merry

I wouldn't hold my breath on the mall. The other six items seem achievable in the next two years.

[GBSurveyor]

I agree and hope that a majority of the 7 items listed at least get off the drawing board. I can't imagine that something won't happen to at least a portion of the mall property in the next 2 years, but I'm also not holding my breath.

The Stadium area is also a work in progress. The Cambria Hotel construction is under way with the foundation work getting started. I think I heard that there is also a brew pub/restaurant going in around there. As far as the twin tower condo development, I just don't see it happening in the next decade. I hope I'm wrong.
IMO If the Stadium View Bar could be rebuilt just to the south to allow for better sight lines of Lambeau that would be tight but that is as likely as a Brown Co. smoking ban.

[avissers]

You are correct GBSurveyor. At the last Planning Commission Meeting, a rezone and multiple conditional use permit requests were recommended for approval to the Common Council. The area was requested to be rezoned to a commercial district and the conditonal use permits were associated with allowing a restaurant w/ live entertainment and outdoor live music. The applicant indicated it would be about a 21,000 SF Brewpub/restaurant/banquet space and they were hoping to start construction soon. The proposed site of the brewpub would be the parcel directly east of the Cambria Suites hotel, but the area requested to be rezoned to commercial extends eastward to the parcel past Bart Starr Drive.

[gbmphillips]

Spending 12 mil on that boardwalk is a terrible waste of money. If Schmidt’s golden boy needed it for his development he should be providing the financing, but we all know Jimmy will never do anything to upset his golden child.

[gbmphillips]

I hear now that Vetter is saying he may need more room so there is talk of moving the road back, most likely into the Days Inn parking lot so Vetter can get his tower built. Its too bad that his da mayor dies not care about all of the businesses downtown as he does his future campaign cash cow.

[downtownVital.org]

gbmphillips, I'm curious WHY you think its a big waste of money. In my opinion, building great public spaces that benefit everyone in the city and the entire region, and that are open an accessable to all of those people is a great use of public money. One could argue that Grant Park in Chicago only benefits the buildings on Michigan Avenue, or that the Calatrava addition to the Milwaukee Art Museum only benefits properties on the Milwaukee lakefront. However, one needs not spend much time in either of these cities to realize that great public spaces are used by and benefit the entire community. The boardwalk will be Green Bay's main gathering space and as such is a perfectly valid use of TIF monay.

So, I appreaciate differeing views and an honest dialogue on this forum reagarding what's best for the downtown is welcome, but what I'd be curious to see are A) specific reasons WHY the boardwalk is a waste, B) an idea what you think would be better suited for the space, and C) please refrain from peosonal attacks on people. To say, "I disagree with the Mayor and Vetter and thier plans," is helpful in understanding your point of view, but your tone is less than respectful (the same goes for people who want to disagree with Guy Zima). Thanks and welcome to the thread.

[downtownVital.org]

If anyone coming to this thread wishes to refer back to the original Green Bay Dev. thread, it is here.

[gbmphillips]

While the boradwalk will be a nice addition lets be honest here Vetter is the one who benefits the most from it. He is usuing it as one of the selling points of all of his projects. If I remember correctly he said that he would not build without it. Well if that is such a necessity for the success of his projects then he should be picking up the majority of the tab, not the taxpayers. I could see $2mil or so from taxpayers but we should not be bearing all of the cost.

I don't disagree with the projects but just remember the local develeoper did meet all 12 and then all 15 of the obstecles that was put in front of him and yet after doing that da mayor still sent out and worked with Vetter. Ibelievehe reason for this was his ego, it was the previous mayor who actually got thinks moving but the current mayor would not have his legacy then if they had gone with the local guy.

[downtownVital.org]

I'll agree that in many way Juza got a raw deal, I've said that many times. However, I think the reason that Vetter is having more sucess is that he's more experienced in Urban Development (which is to say he has experience, whereas Juza had no experience in this type of development) and Vetter is better at putting together the right plan for a space and coming up with an acceptable financing package. Remember, Vetter's plans contribute more dollars to the boardwalk than did Juza's. In addition, Vetter's plans will bring down public ammenities such as the Flatley Market, the Children's Museum, and the Winter Garden, all of which contribute to the public space of the boardwalk. So in short, I agree with you about Juza but that isn't Vetter's fault, unless you want to fault him for being a more experienced urban developer.

I too have worried about the APPEARANCE of the realtionship between the Mayor and Vetter. However, I do think the only problem is with appearances, I don't think there is unethical dealing, just my opinion. I do think that if the Mayor was a bit more patient with those who disagree with him there wouldn't be these appearnace of problems, but overall I do like the Mayor.

Finally, to your main point of disagreement with the Boardwalk, I guess I have to disagree with your premise. You say you like the plans, but that essentially Vetter is benefiting toom much from them and therefore the city shouldn't pay so much. I don't see that as a very pragmatic way to develop a city. The fact is that if the city only contributes $2 million, the boardwalk won't happen and neither will the related riverfront developments. I believe the boarwalk is, apart from the developments adjecent to it and as a public ammenity alone, worth the city's cost in it. I also think that TIF is the right funding mechanism to get it built and protect the taxpayer. Will it greatly benefit Vetter and his projects, yes, but the city's job isn't to keep developers from benefiting too much.

We can do away with the boardwalk and with it Vetter's projects, but doing so would be like cutting off your hand to spite your face. The right thing in my view for the city is to take this opportunity to build a world-class public ammenity AND allow that to be a tool that makes private development along the river successful. I'd much rather have a winning public project that enables a developer to win than make a losing decision for the public just because I don't want the private developer to win.

[gbmphillips]

But the boradwalk was not tied into the Juza plan and I am sure there are other developers who would feel the same way. I think $12 mil for one project that is being done mostly for one person is not a good way to use taxpayer dollars. Also once it is done who will responsible for the upkeep, Vetter or the city. Someone I know on Broadway said they only put $6 mil ino that WHOLE redevlopemnt, where can Schmidt justify spending 12mil for only a boardwalk. This is a poor use of taxpayer money, I am sure there are many areas of the city that could use a few mllion to improve the area. Why not put a mil into the NEW FISK park instead of forcing people to raise money something east side was not required to do.

[downtownVital.org]

I guess in the end the difference in our perspectives comes down to this: you feel the boardwalk is only for one person, while I feel it is a community resource. When it is built, I will go down there and feel a sense of ownership in it because it will be open to the public and people from throughout the community will gather there.

The cost to the city via the TIF funding is worth it, to me, regardless of what is built next door or who is building it. And it is a good use of taxpayer money becuase the funding, as stated when the council passed the project, will not come from the general levy but from increased taxes generated by development within the TIF district. Furthermore, the Fisk Pool (an excellent project) fundraising needed to raise $500,000 on a $3 million project, or just under 17%. The mayor has stated that all such public projects needed to raise at least 15% before the city would fund the rest. He also stated that this requirement does apply to the boardwalk. So both the Fisk pool and the Boarwalk should be held to the same standard, seems fair to me.

[Fillmore]

I'm not feeling progress. Like the past, downtown developments will fall flat, and part of me thinks a lot of people see it. I'll believe it when I see it. Invest in markets with good leaders.

[GBSurveyor]

Does anyone know anything more specific about the boardwalk? Like how they came up with 12 million? It seems like a high price considering the length, just between Main and Walnut. Also is this a sure thing? Is the financing in place? I am sure the city will have to bond for it. When someone says it is only TIF money, it still is tax dollars, which can be misleading to some.

One thing that is seriously lacking in this area is public space designed for pedestrian scale. I am totally all for the boardwalk and increased public space, I just wish that we weren't always in the dark with these projects. It seems like someone, weather it be the city or someone else maintain a connection with the public (website). This is how the shadow of doubt is cast.

As far as ripping on Vetter... At least he has completed a project. I really don't think he is getting any special treatment. There was an RFP sent out and other developers had the chance to step up, and there were no takers. Where are the local developers???? Who is going to pick to do a complex urban project when no one local has any experience. It is way easier to go carve up some new farm land to put some dwellings that requires everyone to drive everywhere. So the mass exodus of the "young professional" will continue to the larger urban centers and downtown will be left to further decay......

[GBSurveyor]

Avissers...or anyone in the know

Is there a central department in the city that keeps tabs on proposed developments???

I have been wondering about a few items, including:

Marcus Theatre Project- I43 Business Park. The sign has been up for like a year.
Baird Creek Trail
Bay Beach Expansion
University Height Business Park??

I really like how Milwaukee keeps the public informed and wish Green Bay would have something similar.

Milwaukee Department of City Development

[historybuffer]

I don't think Vetter's project reflects the area at all. It's purely investment, with little consideration of setting, and true understanding of the area, and the heritage of the region. All this project indicates, 20 years from now, is that Green Bay was part of the downtown development boom that happened nationwide.

I want to see cutting edge projects, like the Ponte Vecchio proposed, iconic, representative of Green Bay, and Green Bay only. A cutting edge project, so that when a nationally televised Packers game on one Sunday afternoon comes back from a station break, and pans over the town's local assets as corporate logos are superimposed, people nationwide will know this town is vastly different than any other, and not because of one sports franchise.

[Clashman]

Can you give me more information about "the Ponte"? I don't think I'm too familiar with it.

[historybuffer]

Well the Green Bay version wasn't quite the "Ponte Vecchio" in Florence, Italy but the concept was the same. Bridges, get you from one side of the riverbank to the other,
and sometimes end up not looking half bad at the same time.

The proposed bridge for downtown Green Bay took the "Ponte Vecchio" idea of
common, commerce spaces, stores along the span and modernized it.
Here's a link to an image of the original Florence version.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:P...nce,_Italy.jpg

Notice the series of built structures (buildings) piggy backing the span, the Green Bay version was a modernized version of this. I think the concept was floated by a Green Bay wouldbe developer, but never gained traction, possibly too outrageous (not mainstream enough.)