[mkelx]

Anyone know what type of vehicle they are showing on the eway website? I’m guessing it’s just a placeholder but I’m curious what is out there since I know the KRM had one option for mixed rail traffic and that model is defunct.

I know their website say Bombardier but not sure what model

 

[transit_oriented]

Anyone know what type of vehicle they are showing on the eway website? I’m guessing it’s just a placeholder but I’m curious what is out there since I know the KRM had one option for mixed rail traffic and that model is defunct.

I assume that’s just a stock photo that maybe they grabbed from Bombardier since they are working with Bombardier. This model looks pretty close: Bombardier Flexity Swift - Wikipedia. This is what they use in the Twins Cities, so would make sense.

I believe these are designed to be able to run both on a tram network and on main railway line.

 

[UWsteve2009]

$240M is the estimated price-tag for the museum. From the article, "The development, construction and equipment of the new museum space will cost $170 million. A total investment of $240 million is expected, including site purchase, transaction costs, endowment funds, movement of the collections and the Betty Brinn Children's Museum development. "

https://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2021/02/22/milwaukee-public-museums-new-site-will-cost-240m.html?cx_testId=40&cx_testVariant=cx_33&cx_artPos=2#cxrecs_s

Importantly, Evers is proposing $40M in the State's budget for it. Of course, since the GOP hates Milwaukee, I will be shocked if even $1 ends up in the final budget.

"Included in the proposed state budget was more detail about the new museum's physical space. The 230,000-square-foot building will include 80,000 square feet of exhibit space, which will feature permanent exhibits, a temporary gallery for traveling exhibits, planetarium and a vivarium (butterfly wing). The new museum will also have a welcome lobby, cafe, retail store and underground parking structure. Along with public space, the new museum will have 43,000 square feet for collections research and storage as well as classrooms, an auditorium, events space and workshop for exhibit maintenance. The Betty Brinn Children's Museum will occupy 30,000 square feet in the museum. The new children's museum will be funded through private funds, according to the proposed state budget."

Between Betty Brinn, MPM, and the state building, those are 3 key re-development sites. Have we heard anything on what the plan is for any of the sites?

 

[MKE-bound]

For the current Betty Brinn location, would just the museum space be available, or that entire pavilion?

 

[MKE-MSP-CHI]

Nothing in the article about what happens to those spots.

If I had my way though, I'd turn the MPM into mixed-use residential. Would also be a great time to shut down the 6th street entrance ramps and I'd consider closing off James Lovell to have contiguous parkland from 9th the 6th. My though is that if people lived along the park, they'd get tired of it being such a shit-hole day after day. That's two whole blocks which could be readily developed. I think you'd need to have it factor into a long-term site redevelopment plan. I'd like to have a green lawn running the entire length of the park, have a reflecting pool building up to a central fountain in the middle with food kiosks and pavers to allow dining around the fountain. I'd keep the paths on the side but have them surrounded trees and flower beds.

Betty Brinn, folks already know I'd love to see the whole plaza torn down (while saving the Calling) and used as an opportunity for residential density on the Ernst and Young lot, on the current Betty Brinn Pavilion building, and on the side of thr park closest to Mason. I'd have a smaller but better park really focusing on the footbridge and around it. The reconstructed garage I'd use as place for monumental murals that complimented the museum that would rotate. Adding some towers there would add so much depth to the skyline and continue to make the lakefront an 18 hour community. We've already discussed what we could do with other parkland knowing it can't be redeveloped.

 

[WisBearcat]

I think the fact that its going to be 3 or 4 years at the best until the museum opens means that we are a long ways off before thinking about what happens to those sites. With the number of changes at MacArthur Square with the Public Museum and State office buildings, and the Public Safety Building coming over the next decade I would hope that the city/county looks big picture at what that area can be and not just piecemeal replacing each of the individually. I don't know all the issues with the state office building, but I personally would love to see it saved and repurposed as residential or hotel.

 

[EasyK83]

there Needs to be a mixed use development at that site. It’s a shame Marcus has killed every single option at that site for decades but I would be ok letting it sit ala The couture site for a little bit to make sure we get it right.

I mean we probably should wait on saying that we should wait as long we did with the Couture site.

 

[brewcitymilwaukee]

I’ve said it 100 times but I hope MPM gets demolished, the safety building gets demolished, the state office building gets demolished and eventually the police headquarters and everything gets brought down to grade.

Usually hesitant to increase parkland because you need a decent amount of development to fund not developing land but I think cleaning up MacArthur square would be the final tipping point for Kilbourn town. Literally every part of Kilbourn town is under construction or has a proposal and this would be the park that fronts the deer district, MATC, the convention district and is not even a block from Wisconsin Avenue, Pabst complex and Marquette. It literally touches on every single part of the neighborhood and the park sucks in its current form.

 

[dtloken]

How do you activate it as a park though? It needs stuff of interest on the periphery. Part of that is bringing it down to street grade, but I think you need some significant mixed use development in the area in conjunction with re-doing the square/park.

 

[UWsteve2009]

That's where I was hoping you could get good mixed used development from the state office and MPM. Those are crucial blocks to making macarthur interesting in the fact you would finally hit a tipping point in terms of residential in the area if done right. You also need to better tie in the convention center and deer district to that area.

 

[atjacobmajor]

State office building isn't pretty but I'm hesitant to demolish things that need not be. Throw some paint on it and convert it into affordable housing.

 

[brewcitymilwaukee]

How do you activate it as a park though? It needs stuff of interest on the periphery. Part of that is bringing it down to street grade, but I think you need some significant mixed use development in the area in conjunction with re-doing the square/park.

I think it has enough stuff around it to be activated as listed above. MATC alone I believe has over 30k students and not much green space. (Well actually there are other campuses, part time students and online courses ) but it still has 30K STUDENTS.

However, if someone does want to add development onto it, it needs to have a small foot print so you can see around the park and actually access it. The museum is terrible along with it not being at grade because you can’t access it from the south or east. The court house blocks it from the west, the safety and police building block it from the north. You can squeeze in between buildings but I don’t even know if I knew that park existed until a few years ago when I had jury duty.

 

[atjacobmajor]

Another thing - I'd love to see the park developed with indigenous plant life. I love our local grasses and plants - they are far superior to the sterile and sad excuse for "nature" consisting of mowed grass and trees that currently exist there. Three bridges and Lakeshore State Park Island are excellent examples of this.

 

[dtloken]

I think it has enough stuff around it to be activated as listed above. MATC alone I believe has over 30k students and not much green space. (Well actually there are other campuses, part time students and online courses ) but it still has 30K STUDENTS.

However, if someone does want to add development onto it, it needs to have a small foot print so you can see around the park and actually access it. The museum is terrible along with it not being at grade because you can’t access it from the south or east. The court house blocks it from the west, the safety and police building block it from the north. You can squeeze in between buildings but I don’t even know if I knew that park existed until a few years ago when I had jury duty.

I'm going to go ahead and say there are definitely not 30k students on site at downtown MATC. I'll eat my hat if I'm wrong there, but that's more than UW Milwaukee. But that whole section of downtown feels absolutely dead; sure there's offices, school, municipal facilities but at the street level it's utterly devoid of anything of interest to walk to. If I'm downtown I'm not going to go out of my way to walk down those desolate (and overly wide) streets to find a park next to the freeway. It's simply a place to go through on your way elsewhere and not be, we need to fix the be problem.

Get restaurants, cafes, residences, etc. surrounding it and then you're talking. At any rate this is a long term project that is a decade away or more, I think we'll see more interest going that way as the Deer District fills out (esp. the old Bradley Center site).

 

[brewcitymilwaukee]

Yes, there are obviously not 30K students all attending class on that campus at once. That’s why I went on my mini rant about how not all of them are there all the time or even ever but that’s a MASSIVE number of people even whittled down is maybe 8k kids on campus in one day. I bet you more of them would cross the street to study instead of going home or staying indoors if the access was better.

I’m not against any development but it has to be buildings with a very small foot print that are taller. The museum needs to be demolished. You can’t renovate a building that cuts off the entire area to the south which by the way is the best access for the park at this time.

 

[UWsteve2009]

Yes, there are obviously not 30K students all attending class on that campus at once. That’s why I went on my mini rant about how not all of them are there all the time or even ever but that’s a MASSIVE number of people even whittled down is maybe 8k kids on campus in one day. I bet you more of them would cross the street to study instead of going home or staying indoors if the access was better.

I’m not against any development but it has to be buildings with a very small foot print that are taller. The museum needs to be demolished. You can’t renovate a building that cuts off the entire area to the south which by the way is the best access for the park at this time.

MATC milwaukee has 36,000 students
MSOE 3,000
Marquette-12,000
UWM-28,000

Frankly that is a ton of college students in the downtown or near downtown. I think the jeffers idea of getting more to live downtown will only help the area. Maybe we can find more residential options for them near campus as well. It's easy when you can tap into MU and MSOE as well. Heck, even some UWM programs are in pabst.

 

[VVisconsin08]

Honestly - I think if the Couture and Ascent are successful, I feel like we could see another residential proposal in the future in the Betty Brinn spot. It could also lend itself to be a new HQ site similar to the lot on the other side of the Couture. The proximity to the Hop and the lakefront make the site an attractive development site - add in a grocery store in the Couture and we essentially have the foundation for a full blown self sufficient neighborhood.

Another thought would be a new museum of some sort. Whatever it is would have to be architecturally significant though. Something that compliments the Art Museum and Discovery World while also making it's own presence known. Something from Frank Gehry would be a great fit there in my opinion.

 

[dtloken]

MATC milwaukee has 36,000 students
MSOE 3,000
Marquette-12,000
UWM-28,000

Frankly that is a ton of college students in the downtown or near downtown. I think the jeffers idea of getting more to live downtown will only help the area. Maybe we can find more residential options for them near campus as well. It's easy when you can tap into MU and MSOE as well. Heck, even some UWM programs are in pabst.

That's total enrollment, not actual on site students. Yeah, there are a lot downtown but you can't simply take the total enrollment and add it up. MATC especially has several facilities in the county. Also online only enrollment, etc. Not sure why some of you are so insistent on replacing a dysfunctional park with another park but not actually addressing the primary issue of it being isolated from anything else of pedestrian interest for several blocks. Placemaking.

 

[MKE-MSP-CHI]

I understand the desire for access around the park, but I like the idea of buildings fronting the park that actually engage and interact with it. Something American cities do way too much is surrounding parks with roads. Having buildings essentially opening onto a lawn or a plaza is a common and much loved facet of European urbanization. I also like the idea of a gradually decending park. I'd tear most of it up to build underground parking that could accommodate the residential and retail users. Find a developer with vision and a firm specializing in urban park rehabs. We're at least ten years away, but when the Deer District fills in...this should be ready.

Hope the City / County are coordinating already.

 

[brewcitymilwaukee]

I understand the desire for access around the park, but I like the idea of buildings fronting the park that actually engage and interact with it. Something American cities do way too much is surrounding parks with roads. Having buildings essentially opening onto a lawn or a plaza is a common and much loved facet of European urbanization. I also like the idea of a gradually decending park. I'd tear most of it up to build underground parking that could accommodate the residential and retail users. Find a developer with vision and a firm specializing in urban park rehabs. We're at least ten years away, but when the Deer District fills in...this should be ready.

Hope the City / County are coordinating already.

I think the biggest must is the entire thing needs to be marketed as one redevelopment including the state office building since the entire campus besides the court house and possibly the police headquarters is at the end of its useful life. The freeway ramps need to be demolished too.

I want to see the entire campus with a master plan and not done piece by piece.