MILWAUKEE | Development News

[ctwickman]

If you ever drive from Detroit to Milwaukee, and it is during anytime even NEAR rush hour around Chicago, you'd know real quick why this is a superb idea. Last time it took me over almost 3 hours just to get around Chicago with the traffic.

[Markitect]

Here is a pair of editorials about Harley-Davidson's museum proposal that take different views on the project.

From the Journal Serntinel, the article mentions how the museum/office campus would be a strong tourism draw, a catalyst for future development in the Menomonee Valley, and a strategically located link between Downtown to the north, the Valley to the west, and Walker's Point to the south.

However, the preliminary site plans call for surface parking lots on multiple corners at 6th and W. Canal Streets--the gateway to the Valley on the west and the Harley campus on the east!

The project architects on board, Pentagram of Nwe York City and Jim Shields of HGA in Milwaukee, discuss some of their own ideas, and also hint that they'll work with Harley to make the site plan more urban, so a small neighborhood could eventually grow up around the museum/office complex.

Another possibility is to replace the corner surface parking lots with a mixed-use parking structure, like has been done in other parts of the city--which would definitely add an urban character to the proposal (despite claims from elsewhere that parking structures won't allow Harley enthusists to show off their bikes--which is why the prelim site plan calls for surface lots instead!).

Read it: Chrome-plated plan needs reflection


Next is an opinion piece from the Business Journal, which hints that development in the Valley might more suited to entertainment/tourist-type venues rather than industrial and office uses as defined in the City's development plan for the Valley. It cites Potowatomi Bingo Casino and Miller Park as precendents for such development. However, it fails to note that those projects had existed and were well underway years before the City released it's development plan for the Valley, which calls for family-supporting job creation through industrial and office uses, not high-turnover, lower-wage jobs associated with tourism and entertainment developments. Common sense would be that any projects proposed for the Valley since the City released its plan in 1998 ought to follow the recommendations laid out in that plan.

On the site plan/parking issue, the article says that the City should not get hung up on the design so much that it prevents the museum from getting built. Essentially, if a parking sturcture proved to be too expensive, the museum should be built with the surface lots instead--thereby throwing good urban design and planning that has been done up to this point in previous years out the window for the sake of getting this project built.

Read it: Don't look Harley gift horse in mouth

[Markitect]

Should the City approve Harley-Davidson's proposal for a museum/office complex at 6th and Canal Streets, the Department of Public Works facilities currently located on the site will have to be relocated--at taxpayer's expense: $27 million of taxpayer's expense, to be exact (up from last week's estimate of $19-$22 million).

Concerns were raised at the Common Council's Zoning, Neighborhoods and Development Committee meeting yesterday over this cost increase and the parking issues discussed the other day. The Committee decided to hold off on sending the proposal on to the next stage of the approval process to review these concerns.

See the Journal Sentinel article for specifics: Costs rev up for museum - Harley plan calls for taxpayers to chip in $27 million

Also, here is an overview of the Menomonee Valley looking west. The proposed site is at the tip of the "penninsula" formed by the Menomonee River and South Menomonee Canal.

[Mikey711MN]

That's a great site...I wonder if there are any pictures of it with the new 6th Avenue viaduct completed.

[ctwickman]

There are much better sites that are available than that one. Heck, the entire middle of downtown where the Park East Freeway used to be. It's unfortunate the great entertainment projects keep getting spread around the city where not as many people can live and walk to them.

[Markitect]

Think Big Picture, here.

There is a benefit to scattering such entertainment venues aorund the city, rather than isolating them in a certain area--it forces people to go through the city, rather than sheltering them all in one place. That is good because it creates traffic and a sense of vibrancy in those areas through which people pass, which is especially important to business owners in those corridors and nearby areas.

Walker's Point business owners wouldn't benfit as much if, for example, the Harley museum was built somewhere Downtown. The museum would be a great traffic generator (an increase in customers) for them. You know how easy it is to get around Milwaukee, so people shouldn't have any problems going from, say, a hotel Downtown, to the Harley museum, then out to catch a game at Miller Park, and then hitting up the casino on the way back, with a stop in Walker's Point for a late dinner before heading back to the hotel. Or how about heaidng out from a hotel, checking out PabstCity for a while, and then heading over to the Haroley museum, and back Downtown to see the Art Museum, dinner in the Third Ward, drinks in Bay View, and back to the hotel... Those are just a couple examples.

If anything, spreading out these projects will act as a catalyst for improving transportation options in the city. This way, for instance, a light rail line could travel through the city, linking all these high traffic venues, and you have a built-in ridership. The bonus is that the light rail line would act as a catakyst for new development along the routes, in the neighborhoods through which it travels.

As far as wanting to locate the museum closer to where people live, it's a nice thought, but isn't cruicial to the project. While the museum would be a great benefit to the entire city, it's not supposed to be a traget for local neighborhood residents--it's mainly a tourist attraction. So having Joe Milwaukeean able to walk to the Harley museum from his house two blocks away shouldn't be a major determining factor in where to locate the museum. At least the Valley site is relatively centrally located, close to Downtown and other nearby neighborhoods; it could be out in suburbia somewhere.

[ctwickman]

I disagree. If anything, I am always criticized of thinking TOO big picture. There is a place for everything. Scattering entertainment around the city is not a good thing IMO--there needs to be districts. Milwaukee is plain and simply not big enough to scatter these places all over and have each area become interesting. Just imagine if State Street in Madison was scattered all over--the energy of Madison would be dead. Milwaukee is just not big enough and does not have the population/crowds to spread the entertainment wealth, sort of speak.

I'm all for development, but I think the Valley would do much better as zoned light industrial and business, something like a 21st Century office park. Keep the entertainment all in one location to make it more exciting, since this is what entertainment is all about. If Harley's museum, Water Street bars, Miller Park, and the Casino were all within walking distance to each other, Milwaukee would plain and simply be a more exciting place to live. It would be Milwaukee's own little Times Square--but instead, once again the city always settles for mediocrity--it's like Milwaukee is destined for mediocrity and good ideas in bad locations. The Bus Depot across from Pieces of Eight and the Post Office along the river front, not to mention the location of the Casino, Miller Park, etc., are just simply bad locations. These projects raise the property values around them, sure, but I would rather have them raise the value of downtown so we could get some more residential and scrapers going up. The Valley was destined to be redeveloped anyways. I'm more interested in bringing companies and new businesses into that area than entertainment such as casinos and museums. Entertainment always works better when it is in a district. The same with any business--it's why auto dealers always open up next to each other. Why the longest lasting and most successful bars and clubs are usually in some sort of strip such as Water or Brady. I want the best for this city. Putting Harley away from such a beautiful downtown is not it for the visitors or residents. I was embarassed when I had my friends from North Carolina up here and we had to drive to the Casino after we were downtown on Water. Entertainment works best when you can walk around and explore. This city should always strive for the big picture and the elite--the weekends crowds in Leicester Square in London are a great example of districting entertainment. I could go on and on with examples such as the Vegas strip, Museum campus in Chicago, Times Square in New York, Chelsea for clubbing, heck... Summerfest! Part of the very experience of entertainment is walking and watching the crowds, and feeling like your are "part of something." It's the very essence of entertainment. Try clubbing in New York in Chelsea where you walk along the strip with the late night crowds, and then try clubbing in Atlanta where you have to drive a few miles to get to another club. One experience is definetly better than the other.

[Markitect]

Originally Posted by ctwickman

I'm all for development, but I think the Valley would do much better as zoned light industrial and business, something like a 21st Century office park.

For the record, I'm not fully supporting the Harley museum in the Valley. Like you, I'd rather see the entire Valley revitalized the way the current official plans outline--and that is to become a mixed-use 21st century urban industrial/office park with an abunance of family-supporting jobs. There are going to be some other things in there as well--like recreational/natural/greenspaces and probably some small retail that supports the other uses (like places for workers to grab some lunch, etc.). And some of the design requirements will be pretty cool, in terms of what the codes will likely address as far as building performance and environmentally sensitive design is concerned.

but instead, once again the city always settles for mediocrity--it's like Milwaukee is destined for mediocrity and good ideas in bad locations.

That statement is a bit premature to be applied to the Harley museum. The City isn't anywhere close to approving anything yet.

Aslo keep in mind that there are certain projects around town that the City had little to no say in (i.e. Miller Park) or were done iin an era when the urban-mindedness that exists today was virtually nonexistance back then (i.e. Post Office).

[CityGawd5]

The Bus Depot is not across the street from Pieces of Eight. It's way down the street.

ctwickman, I disagree with your views as well; the city does not need to focus on getting more high-rises built. Downtown is on the rebound. It's time to start working on the neighborhoods--you know, where the citizens live. A project like this which, as Markitect stated, would jump-start the local economy in Walker's Point and probably catalyze new development. It's my personal belief that to repair a broken city you must work from the inside out, improving the city's image and the citizens' perception of their community before you can begin physical work on the neighborhoods. However, Milwaukee's image has come a long way. Downtown is back, so lets bring the city back, too.

[ctwickman]

The Bus Depot is not "way" down the street from Pieces of Eight unless you count the driveway the "street." Besides, what's your point in even bringing that up--you know what I meant full well. The Bus Depot is in one of the worst locations it could be considering it's a..... BUS DEPOT. That is one of the most prime locations in all of the city for real estate, and we have a BUS DEPOT there!! Don't tell me it was a great decision to put it there and not in a more central location, rather than prime lakefront property.

BTW, you don't disagree with me at all. You and I want the same things for this place. No citizens really live in the Valley where this museum is going CG5 so I don't see how putting a museum complete with SURFACE parking lots is going to revitalize an area that is zoned for light industrial and offices. I'm not sure that making the Valley Milwaukee's "entertainment district" is the wisest of all decisions, especially considering some of the amazing real estate that's open near the most popular bars in the city. There is a good location for everything, and I happen to think the Bus Depot, Miller Park, the Post Office, the Casino, and the proposed Harley museum all would serve the citizens and the city better if they were in different locations. I would have liked us to be more patient with Miller Park and if necessary to have waited until the Park East was down to put it more central to the city like Wrigley. Instead we have a Park that is empty most of the time, and about 10 acres of surface parking lots. Same with the Casino--don't you think it would have better to have some great offices and business in that area? That would have cleaned up and revitalized the Valley just fine. Put the Casino closer or within walking distance from Water Street, or heck, where the Bus Depot is!! LOL

A city is only as cool as its districts and Milwaukee doesn't have many because we keep spreading entertainment around. I don't know if you guys have ever spent a good deal of time in London, but next time you are there spend some time and some weekend nights in Leicester Square for a good idea of what I'm talking about. It's like Summerfest every night because it is a walkable square with all the entertainment you could ever ask for within a radius of a few blocks. Milwaukee is no London, but at least we have an example to work toward. Instead this city never has any patience--it's we need this and we need to put it here and let's do it fast so we can revitalize things. I mean, the way this city has been built up and planned is a joke compared to Chicago and what great decisions they have done with their lakefront, etc. This city always thinks too fast and always thinks small. I met with a few of the mayoral candidates last summer since I do young professional imaging P.R. for metro-Milwaukee and all of them agreed--I didn't even have to bring this stuff up, they brought it up to me! Sorry to sound pessimistic, but there are a lot of mistakes that this city has made, and you'd be surprised by the amount of corruption and sweetheart deals that I have been learning about that pretty much is the cause of many of these mistakes. If I explained to you how the new Milwaukee Theatre came to be and the bidding process that was involved it would make you sick.

Alas, I just don't want to see another mistake made here, and the Harley museum in the Valley would be one *IF* they can put it in a better location. If they are going to use my tax dollars as incentive, then I, and the rest of the taxpayers, should have some definite say as to where this thing goes. This isn't "bend over for Harley" time. If Harley wants to fund it 100% on its own, it's free to even put it in Brookfield for all I care since I'm not helping pay for it. As soon as this becomes a TIF district though, the citizens should be allowed a say.

I've said all I can say... I honestly don't have time to argue CG5--the only reason I wrote all that is because it is 5 AM and I have insomnia tonight, otherwise I rarely respond to these threads. It's all just a matter of opinion anyway. Milwaukee *IS* headed in the right direction, I just think it would be headed even further in the right direction if we made some better location choices and grouped together our entertainment.

[CityGawd5]

I don't have time to argue with someone who has no idea what they're talking about.

Uh oh...I'm being a jerk.

So, against my better judgement, let me try anyway. You really think that putting a casino downtown would have been a good idea? You honestly believe that putting in a giant casino that would require plenty of parking, where people go to do nothing but gamble and if they eat or see a show they stay in the casino, you really think it would be great to have that downtown? Which we're trying to revitalize?

A city is only as good as its inhabitants. If you have hundreds of thoudsands of healthy, happy inhabitants, you're awesome. If you have vital, dense, walkable neighborhoods, you're doing great. If you have a great transit system that links the happy healthy people in the vital neighborhoods to each other and each others' nrighborhoods, you're golden.

If you concentrate everything in the heart of the city and leave the neighborhoods to fend for themselves, you're Denver.

[ctwickman]

You don't need to argue with me, and you have no idea what I do for a living to know that I have "no idea what I'm talking about." It's a matter of opinion where the best place to put these places is because no one can know the future impacts of other locations. Naturally opinion does not equal fact so you can't state "I have no idea what I'm talking about" anymore than I can with you.

I know the Casino is helping to "revitalize" the Valley, but it is turning it into something that it is not meant to be, and that is an entertainment area. And a bad, spread out one at that. The Valley would have been revitalized eventually anyway, just not with entertainment but with mixed-use light industrial and offices. Do you honestly believe that prime real estate within the nexus of three freeways and right next to one of the major ports in this country would have stayed a brownfield forever? I believe light industrial and a tech park is a better use of the Valley and would help this city a lot more than a Casino which is just a drain on the poor. I would love to see a beautiful office park with great business access to Wisconsin's largest city, three of it's major freeways, and it's major port--and then possibly see some suburban companies relocate there from Brookfield. You think this would be a bad thing if this happened and the Casino were within walking distance to the major hotels downtown instead of where it is now?

Keep all the entertainment downtown. The Valley is and always will be prime property for light industrial and offices--I'd like to have it districized as such rather than throw a Casino and a Harley museum in there, complete with surface parking lots not less (!), where there won't be any pedestrian traffic. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Milwaukee is just plain and simply not big enough to spread our entertainment around if we are to make this a pedestrian friendly city. Activities and entertainment need to be grouped together so we can see a lot more foot traffic downtown and turn Milwaukee into much more than an automobile dependent city, which it is. Milwaukee could have a tiny version of Times or Leicester Square if things were put in the right place. I just don't see revitilization via entertainment being important to the Valley when it is zoned light industrial, and there is plenty of opportunity to make it one of the nation's premier office park locations. No one is saying to let the neighborhoods "fend for themselves." It's just a different vision and OPINION, so let it rest, and lay off the belittling of other people when you disagree with them. We're just discussing opinions of and visions of cities CASUALLY, but you sound almost offended that someone would disagree with your vision for the city.

[djcody]

omg, drama drama drama!

[CityGawd5]

My profession has nothing to do with the fact that casinos aren't good revitalization developments. The aim of a casino is to offer an all-inclusive entertainment destination. That means that the owners want people to come--and STAY at--their casino, not go out on the town. I know lots of people that just go to the casino. It's not like it's far from downtown at all, as you make it sound, but they don't ever leave the casino. It's their sole destination. Why? Because it's all-inclusive. Why leave when there are nice restaurants and entertainment opportunities under the same roof as the slot machines?

[Mikey711MN]

As a sidebar: doesn't an addition of a casino dessimate the surround retail market? It makes sense that it would do so, but it is something I have seen no proof/statistics about.

Btw, CG5, your signature is hilarious. But my milkshake's better than yours. As you know I could teach you, but I'd have to charge...

[CityGawd5]

La la la la la... *ding*

[Markitect]

A long battle lies ahead for a group of Navy verteans who want to dock the USS Des Moines heavy cruiser along Milwaukee's lakefront as a tourist attraction. The group has been working for years, trying to stir up support and donations (they need $20 million) for the proposal from various veteran's orbaizations, politicians, business owners, and citizens, but receiving approval may not be smooth sailing.

In addition to all the necessary approvals from regulatory agencies (the DNR, the Army Corps of Engineers, etc.), opponents of the proposal have some legitimate concerns regarding how the large ship (as long as two football fields and as tall as a 6-7-story building) will impact the lakefront in Veteran's Park.

It seems the parking and fencing issues are the most valid. There are existing parking lots nearby at McKinley Marina and behind the War Memorial Center, but there doesn't seem to be any word whether the proposal would require those lots to be enlarged. It would be a shame if even just a small portion of the park would have to be paved over to make more room for cars. The notion of fencing off an area around the ship also is still somehwat vague; but I don't think throwing up fencing along the lakefront (chian-link or even those fancy wrought iron type fences--to keep people away when the ship is not open for tours) near the ship isn't a great idea either.

I think the criticism about the ship's size relative to the old Coast Guard Station (which will hopefully be rehabilitated as a Native American educational center) is somewhat less valid, since the ship will be quite a ways away, on the other side of the marina.

Considering a ton of money still needs to be raised before the ship, drydocked in Philadelphia, can be taken out of mothballs (assuming the project even gets approval), it may be a while before Milwaukee sees this ship come in, if at all

You may be wondering, why choose the USS Des Moines, a relativey obscure Cold War-era heavy cruiser, and not the USS Wisconsin, a more appropriately-named and famous WWII battleship? A group once looked into bringing the Wisconsin to Wisconsin, but discovered in the early planning process that the ship was too big to traverse the locks in the St. Lawerence Seaway and Great Lakes. Incidentally, the bigger battleships are named after states, while the smaller heavy cruisers are named after state capitals.

As always, see the Journal Sentinel article for more on the story: Defense mounts against Navy gunship - Park preservationists question local ties, cost of bringing USS Des Moines to lakefront

Some renderings of the USS Des Moines proposal:






Of course, anchoring the ship in Veterans Park near the Milwaukee County War Memorial makes quite a bit of sense, thematically. Also fitting with that theme, is the America's Freedom Center, which was proposed a while back as an extention of the War Memorial Center (though I think some of the architecture and site work for that project is absolutely horrible).

Have a look through the America's Freedom Center's website: America's Freedom Center

Aerial view of the proposed Freedom Center:



A view from Veterans Park:



Looking from the Art Museum plaza:



A view from Lincoln Memorial Drive:



These projects, while they may be good for the city, spark the debate over a more coherent, controlled vision for the lakefront and park system. These things really need to be planned accordingly, keeping in mind that the quality, beauty, functionability of our lakefront and parks should not be sacrificed for a bunch of tourist attractions. These projects must tread carefully or they won't happen.

[CityGawd5]

The building looks very very cool, but I'm not in favor of the name. "Freedom Center"? Blech.

[Markitect]

The planned exhibits inside the building (there's a walk-through on the website) are very interesting, but I don't really care for how they've essentially burried the entire thing underground--especially on the lake side, a good chunk of it just looks like a big grassy mound (which also destroys the "hovering" effect of the War Memorial in the background.

The name is indeed quite silly; I don't know why they just don't associate it as part of the War Memorial anyway, since it's basically an addition onto the building. It'd be great if it could be some sort of low-slung building, like the Art Museum addition--that way it wouldn't detract from the lake or the War Memorial.

[CityGawd5]

Actually, I'm a big fan of the design. It doesn't look like it will be close enough to the War Memorial to wreck the "hovering effect," though these are small pics. And the way it sort of emerges from the hill and then has that big swooping glass wall...it's very attractive. In a city where EVERYTHING gets criticized for wrecking the goddamned view of the lake for a tiny portion of the massive coastline, I think this building does a good job of making a statement while also appeasing the nay-sayers and NIMBY's.