Championing Urban Life In The Cream City



Neighborhoods

Photos of the Neighborhoods from our Flickr group

Hometown UWM Site Meeting - Review

Sep 4th, 2008 | By Dave Reid | Category: Hometown Gas Station, UWM

This meeting was appropriately held at the Urban Ecology Center. It was appropriate because one of the key opposition concerns around the Hometown site was its location along the Milwaukee River. Although the location was different many of the same citizens were attendance. UWM brought with it the same group from the previous meeting, David Gilbert from the UWM Real Estate Foundation, UWM Director of University Housing Scott Peak, Vice Chancellor for University Relations and Communications Tom Luljak and UWM Chief of Police Pamela Hodermann.

The Mandel Group appeared well prepared and attempted to show that this was a green project in part because the Hometown site is currently a vacant gas station with environmental issues. Further they had materials showcasing a long list of brownfield development projects that they’d been involved in. The dorm’s most recent version is a “U” shaped complex designed to minimize the frontage along the river. It will have 105 parking spots, a cafeteria, first floor retail, and it was specifically pointed out that there will be no mechanical facilities on the roof.

Many of the audience member questions revolved around UWM’s need for new dorms, how will they control the students, and taxes. Members from UWM indicated the need for beds is strong because they currently provide only 12% of housing for students. This is an issue because it hurts student retention and that students living in university-run housing perform better than students living outside of university housing. Tom Luljak pointed out that during “this past year we [UWM] spent a lot of time quantifying the crime in terms of neighborhood disruptions” and that “in the last year as we tallied up the number of citations issued by Pam’s department and the Milwaukee Police Department we found the minority of the students cited lived in university housing”. Additionally, there were a couple citizen complaints regarding their belief that UWM doesn’t pay taxes and how that is unfair to them as the taxpayer. But what seemed lost on the audience was that UWM will be making payments in lieu of taxes (PILOTS) to cover their impacts on city services.

The most vocal opposition came from Sura Faraj, a former candidate for third district alderman, who said “I appreciate the university but this is not the site”. She then went on to argue that density isn’t green and that “the most sustainable thing you can do is not build on the Milwaukee River”. This seems misguided because promoting high population density is actually one of the greenest efforts available. Density allows you to develop less land and share energy use which are both green priorities. Ann Brummitt, The Miwaukee River Work Group Coordinator, added that they support the view-shed because “we believe very strongly in the face of a lot of people not agreeing with us in scenic beauty”, but as noted in the comments below she says “Mandel has met every criteria we asked for”.  So it appears now that despite Sura’s objections, the Milwaukee River Work Group believes Mandel Group has proposed a workable solution and as Ken Leinbach, the Executive Directory of the Urban Ecology Center, indicated in reference to Mandel’s proposal that “they have meet that criteria”. UPDATE It appears now that The Milwaukee River Work Group is supportive of Mandel’s proposal so this has been updated to reflect their sentiment.

Unrelated to the night’s topic, two audience members brought up UWM’s efforts of expanding into Wauwatosa and argued UWM should do this in downtown Milwaukee. Tom Luljak attempted to say it was about partnerships and not real estate but also then talked up the Wauwatosa site’s natural area and how it could be used for research. Before he finished Alderman Kovac butted in with “what about Downer Woods”, reminding Luljak that UWM already has a great natural space right on its campus.

In the end what stood out, in stark contrast from the Prospect Mall site meeting, was that although opposition remained present at this meeting, it had a much calmer tone leaving the door open to amicably developing this site. In fact a handful of residents supported the project saying “I hope this site is approved”, “we might as well make it a positive” and “I’m kinda of excited about this site”.

Our thoughts on the last meeting can be found in the Prospect Mall UWM Site Meeting - Review article.



UWM Prospect Mall Parking Lot Dorm Renderings

Sep 4th, 2008 | By Jeramey Jannene | Category: Prospect Mall, UWM

Boulder Ventures provided us with a rendering of their proposed dorm for the Prospect Mall parking lot on the east side of Prospect Avenue. Click on the image for a full-sized rendering.

The site as it stands now looks as such. Again, a high-res image is available by clicking on the image itself.

Clearly the dorm would be an improvement over the stand-alone Qdoba and surface parking lot. It might even help hide the gas station.

Our full review of the meeting where Boulder Ventures presented their vision for the site is available in a past article.



Prospect Mall UWM Site Meeting - Review

Sep 3rd, 2008 | By Jeramey Jannene | Category: Prospect Mall, UWM

UPDATE: Renderings have now been made available to us by Boulder Ventures.

The Maryland Avenue School played host to a tension-filled meeting to discuss one of three proposals for the location of the new UWM dorm. The proposal on the table was the nearby Prospect Mall parking lot location proposed by Boulder Ventures.

The meeting began with Alderman Nik Kovac introducing those in the audience who would take questions. They included Robert Schmidt from Boulder Ventures and their project consultant Doug Weas, David Gilbert from the UWM Real Estate Foundation, UWM Director of University Housing Scott Peak, Vice Chancellor for University Relations and Communications Tom Luljak and UWM Chief of Police Pamela Hodermann.

Following the introductions by Kovac, Robert Schmidt gave a presentation with Doug Weas. Their presentation hit all the high-level facts of the building and Doug drilled into so more low-level aspects including what aspects of the building would qualify it for LEED-certification. As Robert Schmidt listed off many nearby amenities for freshman (the proposed residents) the crowd began to moan and groan “bars”. Other details of the development included in the presentation included that it was to be 8 to 10 stories tall with 40 to 45 students per Resident Assistant (an average amount) on each floor. The first floor was to be entirely retail with 37 parking spots (some of which would be surface spots). Students would enter from Ivanhoe Place and go to the second floor where all of the standard dorm facilities would be. There would be 70 keycard protected parking spots for students separate from the parking for the retail facilities.

At the conclusion of Boulder Ventures presentation it was clear that their presentation may have been tailored to the wrong audience. While the presentation may have sold the university, city officials, and other Milwaukeeans on the proposal, their presentation I think did little to ease the fears of the Not-In-My-Backyard (NIMBY) Water Tower Landmark Trust and Greenwich Village neighborhood associations who were at the meeting. That said, I’m not sure there is anything Robert Schmidt could have said that would have pleased the attendees.

As a current Milwaukee college student at MSOE, an almost 22-year-old, and a friend to well over 100 UWM students, I would like to address some the fear about students and bars. Freshman aren’t 21, and therefore can’t legally enter bars. If they are entering bars without fake IDs, then you have a problem with a bar (and I would safely say these bars don’t really exist on the East Side, my under-21 friends continue to search though). This raises the fake ID question, to which I will boldly assert that no more than 5% of college students in Milwaukee have a fake ID and use it. That percentage is even lower for freshman, the proposed residents of the new UWM dorm. Many claim to have one (from an older sibling or whomever) but never use it, presumably out of fear that it wouldn’t actually work because it doesn’t actually look like them. The point of my detailing this is that under-21 students don’t really go to the bars in Milwaukee, especially during their first year in college (they don’t have friends that can go yet, therefore have less interest in going). The bars could be in the bottom of the building, the students still wouldn’t be going to them.

The development would be located on the former Prospect Mall parking lot and including the land that currently that the Qdoba is currently on. The gas station (not owned by Boulder Ventures) would be left unchanged. Prospect Mall, currently empty, would have far greater support for redevelopment with the dorm located across the street. Schmidt indicated that locating the dorm across the street, would help Boulder reach their vision for Prospect Mall. The vision includes removing the current false facade so that the original brick is visible (similar to the nearby Alterra) and adding two to three stories on the top of the mall. The old spaces would presumably be filled with retail, while the upper levels could be offices. Questioning later in the meeting revealed that the mall lost all but one of its tenants after Marcus closed their cinema (which Schmidt said they attempted to negotiate with to stay to no avail). The final remaining tenant was relocated because the cost to keep the entire mall open for one tenant was too high.

Now what college students do like to do when they’re bored and the opportunity presents itself is go to keg parties. As a number of the UWM representatives indicated the keg parties got out of hand (i.e. got busted by the police) when they were held by freshman and students who had never lived in the dorms. Tom Luljak had information from enrollment figures indicating that with the opening of RiverView dorms, 300 less students lived off-campus. This means less stress on the neighborhood and less opportunities for out of control keg parties. Another new dorm is only going to further improve things for neighbors, by making it possible for more owner-occupancy or family rentals with more students living in campus housing. At the end of the day what you end up with is fewer big keg parties. Small gatherings of students where underage drinking happens will still exist, but I don’t think any complaints originate from neighbors when students drink moderately inside without making noise or littering the sidewalk. If mandatory freshman on-campus housing happens (which is what UWM is working towards), crazy keg parties are going to be very few and far between.

Back to the presentation.

Immediately following the presentation, the first question was a statement from a nearby neighbor asking everyone in the audience to join together and oppose the project. This included the belief that UWM had broken a promise with the neighborhood never to have underclassmen live in dorms in this neighborhood. Tom Luljack clarified that the memorandum of understanding that was signed indicated only that upperclassmen would only live in the nearby Kenilworth building (exposing a problem with memorandum of understandings in that everyone hears what they want to hear regardless of what ends up written).

UPDATE: We have obtained the Memorandum of Understanding and posted it for you to interpret.

During Luljak’s initial answer he was interrupted almost immediately by someone in the audience. Interrupting UWM representatives and the Boulder Ventures team became the norm for the rest of the night, which was certainly disappointing to those actually looking for a reasonable and civil discussion.

After Doug Weas and UWM were grilled repeatedly for breaking a promise they claimed not to have made (and claim to have a memorandum that backs that up), it was time to move on to other things the neighborhood thought was wrong with the project.

Neighbors were concerned about the historical nature of their neighborhood and how this dorm would affect that. While the neighbors certainly have a valid interest in preserving their historic homes, it’s very ironic that they’re interested in protecting a large surface parking lot, empty shopping mall, and Qdoba restaurant (to which they later indicated was a major safety concern because of delivery trucks). The reality of the situation is that the new dorm would be largely hidden by a seven story building immediately east of it and consistent with new development in the area including the next door Whole Foods (Medical Commons building) and Columbia-St. Mary’s hospital complex. These developments are not threatening to the neighborhood because they are infill developments replacing underdeveloped properties. As long as residents don’t sell their homes to absentee slumlords they have nothing to worry about (and as stated earlier, there will be fewer and fewer slumlords if UWM gets its way and eliminates a large amount of their tenant base. The historical factor kept popping up again and again throughout the meeting, and it was really humorous to watch people defend a massive surface parking lot as if it had historical significance.

The issue of parking was brought up. It was clear that residents don’t believe that dorm residents don’t bring cars to campus (as they sign an agreement that they won’t if they don’t rent an on-campus parking spot), despite UWM’s assurances they do (including having the agreement on hand). In my personal experiences (and post-meeting survey) I was able to come up with only person who brought a car to school “illegally” freshman year (and hid it in the Columbia property parking garage). The simple fact of that matter is that the cars are generated by commuters and off-campus residents. The dorm would actually reduce the number of cars in the neighborhood. The dorm is also located directly on the 30 bus route (which students can ride for free with their Upass) and would also be serviced by the UWM shuttle bus (currently serves Kenilworth and Riverview every 15 minutes until 10 p.m.). This is not to mention the cutting-edge car sharing program UWM has implemented in partnership with Zip Car. UWM does a good job promoting and demanding a car-free lifestyle.

Despite facts in opposition, the meeting attendees almost unanimously voiced their concern via booing, hissing, and actually talking that the proposed dorm would make their already heavily congested neighborhood a nightmare. The stance that appeared to be held by many was that “we need to have our cars and Park Lafayette was the final straw, we can’t let anyone else have cars in our neighborhood other than us.” Numerous people suggested a 700-car parking garage for the dorm or a parking stall for every bed. They also indicated that both the hospital construction site (soon to be a non-issue) and the Qdoba delivery trucks (could and would be redesigned with the new dorm) were creating traffic hazards.

Neighbors had concerns with the density of the project and the process by which zoning would be changed. Alderman Nik Kovac responded to these questions. He stated his position that he believed much of North Avenue should be up-zoned to allow for higher density, mixed-use projects to be built with ease. Alderman Kovac didn’t comment if he thought this development (proposed at 8 to 10 stories) would be out of character for the neighborhood, although I think the new, dense hospital complex across the street makes the thought that it wouldn’t ridiculous.

A few people demanded that the neighborhood associations bond together to prevent the dorm from being built from where they didn’t want it to (which appears to be anywhere).

A couple clearly individuals attacked UWM’s use of diesel buses to move students from the dorms to the campus as not environmentally friendly. While concern over the noise of the buses may a legitimate issue (and something hybrid buses could help with), attacking a heavily-used bus line as not being environmentally friendly is just funny.

Sura Faraj, Riverwest resident and former 3rd District Aldermanic candidate, spoke up criticizing the lack of a discussion on the “nitty gritty” of the building being green. She dismissed the partial green roof and demanded a full green roof. She also said that it wasn’t worth discussing a building being built in an urban location, replacing a parking lot, and being located along a transit route, because that just happened with the site. She dismissed these things as not green, just part of the site. She called for the university to be proactive with the building. Basic LEED certification wasn’t enough for her, she wanted the university to aim for Gold or Platinum certification, the highest of LEED certifications. Urbanism, a naturally green lifestyle, that discourages car use, generates less run-off than suburban buildings, and consumes less power is apparently not enough for some.

The final large concern of the night was safety. Not that the students were criminals (which had been largely insinuated for the rest of the night by many), but that they attract crime. Many members of the audience complained of an increase in crime around UWM in the past few years (to which UWM was largely dismissive of and said they didn’t think stats fell on the neighbors side). The paradoxical issue of putting more cops on the street always causes an increase in reported crime was never discussed, even though putting more officers was repeated over and over again. Others suggested that North Avenue was now a crime-haven and that the dorm would only attract more criminals that would mug the new students. The discussion of safety ended without any real resolution and really had no bearing on this specific site. The simple fact is that by putting more eyes on the streets (be it waiting at a bus stop, walking down the street, or simply someone looking out their window) lowers the odds of getting mugged. The proposed dorm would be a good step to building a safer neighborhood by leveraging one of densities inherent advantages.

At the end of the meeting, Kovac pulled no punches indicating his support by telling the UWM representatives that he fully supported building the proposed engineering campus downtown.

It will be interesting to see what comes to the table the rest of the week. At the end of the meeting I was highly discouraged to see such an angry NIMBY crowd oppose something that could actually improve the entire east side of Milwaukee without damaging their homes.



One Way to Replace The Hoan Bridge and Build a Better Milwaukee

Sep 2nd, 2008 | By Dave Reid | Category: Bay View

The replacement of the Hoan Bridge and its associated freeway ramps with a grade level route offers many opportunities but will also require the rerouting of a portion of the 40,000 motorists that travel over the Hoan Bridge each day. Although 40,000 motorists seems like a lot of traffic, history has shown in both the removal of the Embarcadero Freeway in San Francisco and the Park East Freeway here in Milwaukee that traffic patterns will change and the grid system will be able to support the rerouted traffic.

To put this rerouted traffic on to the grid a few changes will be required to link the Lake Parkway in to the system. First I-794 should be replaced with an at grade extension of the Lake Parkway. Although this will undoubtedly cause the loss of federal dollars it will also reduce some of the traffic taking this route merely by removing the interstate from maps. The road itself could be rebuilt as a parkway which would run in the current footprint of the freeway and then turn west to connect with Greenfield Avenue across a new lift bridge. Although once across the river the majority of the traffic would follow S. 1st Street into downtown, with the addition of a rebuilt S. Barclay Street and a new lift bridge connecting Walkers Point to the Third Ward the traffic could find a multiple of routes into downtown. To facilitate this rebuilding of the grid some properties on both sides of the river will need to be acquired but this is surly less expensive than a complete rebuild.

Specifically in order to connect across the river to Greenfield Avenue a road connecting to the new bridge would require the relocation of Kaszube’s Park and the acquisition of some surrounding property. This relocation could actually offer an opportunity to create a larger park that could be better separated from industrial properties in the area. This new park could be developed as a greenbelt running between the parkway and the lakefront. Further the remains of the freeway demolition could be utilized to create an expanded park much like the new Lakeshore State Park.

This is just one idea of how to possibly replace the Hoan Bridge and create a better Milwaukee in the process. Surely the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (”Wisconsin DOT”) will be investigating a variety of options in the coming months but hopefully the Wisconsin DOT will look at this as more than a demolition project and find a way to work with the city to build a better Milwaukee.
View Larger Map



Seven Reasons To Replace The Hoan Bridge

Sep 2nd, 2008 | By Jeramey Jannene | Category: Fifth Ward, Hoan Bridge, Interstate 794, Port of Milwaukee, Walker's Point

Both the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and The Business Journal of Milwaukee have covered the Wisconsin Department of Transportation’s announcement that they’re examining options for the future of the Hoan Bridge as the day nears when it will need costly repairs. We thought it was time to weigh in.

The Journal Sentinel article leads off by saying the idea has “crashed and burned” because the mayors of St. Francis and Cudahy like the bridge. Which is all well and good, except last I checked the bridge is in Milwaukee so perhaps talking to Milwaukee elected officials would have been a good idea? Being an interstate, it is state-owned, but to deny Milwaukeeans a comment on the issue is a little too much.

A critical aspect of the discussion that the Journal Sentinel article ignored was that any proposal will not simply include tearing down the bridge. It will include replacing the bridge. Certainly simply removing the bridge would be a fiasco, replacing it does not have to be if street-level lift bridges are placed at the right points.

We have come up with seven good reasons to replace the bridge with a street grid system.

1. The bridge does not generate economic development along the land it runs, a replacement that was integrated with the city street grid would. The increased traffic would be great for businesses, both existing and new. The increased accessibility would further encourage more residential development in the area.

2. The bridge is going to be costly to repair, and will continue to cost taxpayers money in the future. Replacing it with a street grid based system will be more cost-effective both now and in the future.

3. The bridge is a risk for MMSD. This reality was driven home in 2000 when the bridge partially collapsed directly above MMSD’s Jones Island facility (the end destination of your toilet).

The Hoan Bridge was the site of a near disaster in December 2000 after two of three support beams failed, causing nearly 200 feet along the northbound lanes to buckle and sag by three to four feet. It left the span in a near collapsed state. In late December 2000, demolition experts used explosives to remove damaged sections of the bridge that crossed over the MMSD’s Jones Island treatment plant.

“We were genuinely concerned it was going to fall on critical conduits of the MMSD plant, cutting off electricity to our facility,” Shafer said.

The DOT spent more than $16 million to demolish and rebuild the damaged area before the Hoan Bridge reopened for traffic in November 2001.

4. Never the “Bridge To Nowhere” ever again. While the bridge was built and left unconnected for a number of years early in its life, it was also closed for almost an entire year in 2001 following the partial collapse. Replacing the bridge with the street grid will give drivers options in the event of one road closing.

5. Replacing the bridge will still leverage existing assets like the Lake Parkway, but will also allow easier access to areas like Walker’s Point/Fifth Ward and the south side of the Third Ward. At the same time synchronized lights should make getting downtown just as easy.

6. We’ve done this before, and have been largely successful. The conversion of the Park East Freeway, an elevated freeway on the north side of downtown, was a huge success when you look at traffic flow. It’s just as easy to get down McKinley Avenue as it was to get down the freeway. We can apply the same principles from the Park East Freeway freeway-to-boulevard conversion to the Hoan Bridge.

7. The Hoan Bridge is currently inaccessible for bicyclists and pedestrians. Any replacement will presumably serve both of those groups better, as well as being better for mass transit riders. Currently riding the bus over the bridge may be a pleasure, unless you need to get to somewhere in the middle where you are forced to back track. A street grid solution will allow riders to get to more locations much more easily.



Senator Russ Feingold to Address Milwaukee Common Council

Aug 30th, 2008 | By Jeramey Jannene | Category: Common Council, Milwaukee City Hall, Russ Feingold, Willie Hines

As part of the President’s Speaker Series, Council President Willie Hines Jr has invited Senator Russ Feingold to address the Common Council on September 2nd. There is a reception before the meeting at 8:30 a.m., followed by the meeting at 9:00 a.m. The meeting and reception are both open to the public.

Feingold recently boldly stated his support for protecting the Great Lakes

“These shippers should know that we’ll do what it takes to protect the Great Lakes, and nothing should be completely taken off the table.” Read more.

If one questions the strengths of Feingold’s convictions they need only to look at his adamant opposition to bills like FISA and the Patriot Act where he was labeled a “maverick” for standing virtually alone in protecting the rights of all of us in Wisconsin and the rest of the country.



Public Meetings On Final Sites For New UWM Dorm

Aug 26th, 2008 | By Jeramey Jannene | Category: Brady Street, East Side, Hometown Gas Station, Milwaukee River, UWM

Public meetings for each dorm site have been announced.  At each meeting the development teams will explain the proposal.  The developer of the proposed site and UWM representives will be available for questions at each meeting.  As a refresher we have included our opinion on each of the sites as described (we have not see the proposals yet).

If you want to see fireworks, the best meeting to go to will be the Hometown site.  The controversial (in application, not nearly as much in theory) river overlay district is going to empower the NIMBY (not-in-my-backyard) crowd to assume they have ownership over the entire river corridor and probably engage in quite the debate filled with half-truths and well-spun facts.  Bring your thinking cap and evaluate everything you hear, as individuals will certainly bend facts to attempt to make a point.

Dave Reid and myself will be at the meetings on the 2nd and 4th, but will unfortunately have to miss the meeting on the 3rd.

Tuesday, Sept. 2 • 6:30pm • Maryland Ave. School - 2418 N. Maryland Ave.
Boulder Venture’s proposal for the Prospect Mall parking lot, between Ivanhoe Pl. and Kenilworth Pl.

Site #1 - The Prospect Mall
Actual Location: Prospect Avenue between Ivanhoe Place & Kenilworth Place
What’s There Now: Former Prospect Mall, currently empty, along with surface parking lot across Farwell
Note: We have heard that this project would potentially only use the east side of Prospect, the surface parking lot and Qdoba. We are unsure how it would integrate into the currently empty mall. If this is true, it could change our ranking (see bottom of article) of the site.  UPDATE We contacted Boulder Venture to clarify this question but they are unable to comment on the proposal at this time.

Pros

  • Close to other dorm (Kenilworth) and close to campus
  • On an existing bus route (30)
  • Uses a currently unused property
  • Would help area businesses by delivering 500 new customers
  • Would please students to be close to other students

Cons

  • Would create another cluster of students possibly creating more neighborhood backlash

Wednesday, Sept. 3 • 6:30pm • Urban Ecology Center - 1500 E. Park Place
The Mandel Group’s proposal for the old Hometown gas station, on the NE corner of North Ave. and the Milwaukee River

Site #4 - Hometown Gas Station
Actual Location: 1436 North Avenue
What’s There Now: Abandoned gas station

Pros

  • On North Avenue near entertainment district
  • On existing transit route (21)
  • Inbetween both Riverview and Kenilworth dorms
  • Next to river
  • Easy for current UWM Shuttle to stop here on route from Riverview

Cons

  • Would draw ire of many residents because of Milwaukee River Overlay District due to its spot along river
  • Nearby residents would certainly raise a fuss about parking, congestion, regardless if it were true or not.

Thursday, Sept. 4 • 6:30pm • Holy Rosary Hall - 2011 N. Oakland Ave.
Phelan Development and Towne Investment’s proposal for the SE corner of Farwell Ave. and Royall Pl.

Site #2 - Near Brady Street Site
Actual Location: 1744 N. Farwell Avenue, Southeast Corner of North Farwell Avenue and East Royall Place
What’s There Now: Surface Parking Lot

Pros

  • Would deliver 500 new customers to Brady Street area
  • Replaces existing surface parking lot
  • Close to entertainment for students
  • On existing bus route (30)

Cons

  • Would be furthest dorm from campus


Oshkosh Truck Looking At Leasing Janesville General Motors Plant

Aug 25th, 2008 | By Jeramey Jannene | Category: Jim Doyle, Neighborhoods

Our previous article on Janesville’s coming problems might not be as big of a problem as previously thought.  Sources have confirmed that Oshkosh Truck has discussed with General Motors the possibility of leasing the Janesville plant along with utilizing the soon-to-be unemployed GM workforce.

Oshkosh Truck is rumored to be interested in the facility because of the established workforce in Janesville and the high ceilings in the soon-to-be-former SUV production facility.

A source detailed that Oshkosh Truck was looking at another facility near Janesville, but that deal ended around the time GM announced a major round of layoffs at the Janesville plant.

It’s important to note that this is just a rumor at this point, but multiple sources have been able to piece together details for us.  This includes a confirmation that talks have actually taken place.

While not an issue directly affecting Milwaukee’s most urban neighborhoods, we thought it wise to follow-up on our previous article.  We’re still not convinced that future for Janesville we described won’t come one day, but at the moment it appears Janesville will have a few years before any form of crisis may ensue.



A Better Approach to Reduce Drunk Driving

Aug 23rd, 2008 | By Dave Reid | Category: Government, Neighborhoods

“Gasoline and alcohol don’t mix,” says the American slogan.  Of course they do.  Our urban planners mix them all the time and in great doses.  See the zoning codes for confirmation. - Ray Olderburg, The Great Good Place

As a society we say “don’t drink and drive” but in this case actions speak louder than words.  Zoning and land use policies have an impact on the built environment that often promotes driving and limits other transportation options.  These regulations to some extent mandate how we get home from work and unfortunately how we get from the tavern, home.  Many regulations are involved in this problem but with adjustments to the three below a real reduction in drunk driving can be promoted.

  • Minimum parking requirements for bars and taverns
  • Zoning that insures separate land uses
  • Zoning that promotes low population density and discourages mass transit

In most communities throughout the U.S. minimum parking requirements exist for various land uses.  Unfortunately these minimum parking requirements encourage automobile travel and even extend to taverns.  For example, Franklin, Wisconsin’s Unified Development Ordinance: Zoning, Development and Land Division requirements show, in the table on page 254, the parking requirements for various land uses including bars or taverns.

Use
Minimum Required Parking Spaces per 1,000 Square Feet of Floor Area
Other Required Standard(s)
for Off-Street Parking Spaces


Bar or Tavern
10
Or 1 space per 2 seats or stools, plus 1 space
per employee, whichever is greater


Clearly this indicates that a significant number of patrons have the expectation of driving to a bar or tavern and that this is an acceptable practice.  Not only does this set the expectation of available parking but it goes a step further and actually encourages people to drive because they know a space will be available.  If parking were limited this could encourage other modes of transportation such as walking, mass transit, or cab service to become the preferred method and thus reduce the number of drunk drivers.

Many zoning regulations came out of the efforts to separate polluted industrial factories from residential homes but unfortunately this was just the start of separating uses.  The separation of uses has spread to the point that now in many communities it is illegal to have a store or a tavern in the neighborhood.  Without the corner tavern that is accessible by foot, or by mass transit then people have little choice but to drive.  This has added to our long run increase of the number of vehicle miles traveled and although the Alcohol-Related Fatalities and Fatality Rates by State report put out by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration points out that the number of fatalities per vehicle miles driven has dropped we can do more.

Alcohol-related traffic fatalities per vehicle miles driven has also dropped dramatically — from 1.64 deaths per 100 million miles traveled in 1982 down to 0.56 in 2005 (the latest year for which such statistics are available).

Specifically the next step in reducing alcohol-related traffic fatalities is to reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled.  This gets to the heart of urbanism, in that walking can be a primary mode of transportation. This would go a long way towards the reduction of the number of drunk drivers by simply taking them of the road.

Similiar to the problems created by the separation of land uses, zoning for low density development encourages people to drive by making the distances between home and destination further apart.  The report Urban Sprawl and Public Health, put out by the Department of Environmental and Occupational Health at the Rollins School of Public Health of Emory University, makes the connection between density, the availability of mass transit, and automobile fatality rates.

The NHTSA data do permit comparison of automobile fatality rates by city.  In general, denser cities with more extensive public transportation systems have lower automobile fatality rates (including drivers and passengers but excluding pedestrians):  2.65 per 100,000 population in New York, 6.98 in Philadelphia, 5.57 in Chicago, 2.54 in San Francisco, and 4.17 in Portland, compared to 9.97 in Houston, 12.55 in Phoenix, 11.53 in Dallas, 10.65 in Tampa, and 11.21 in Atlanta.

Although these numbers attest to all automobile fatality rates the connection between density, access to mass transit, and automobile fatalities is apparent.  By increasing population density and providing a variety of mass transit options people have choices of how to travel to their destination of choice.  Further by having a higher population density this generally supports the availability of entertainment options nearby and again allows for people to make better transportation choices when drinking.

I’ve touched on just a few of the zoning regulations that promote drunk driving and alluded to the solution.  The solution I propose can be called Smart Growth, New Urbanism, Urbanism or just plain old city living but all of these refer to one essential idea.  The idea of creating neighborhoods where you can live, work, and play.  Essentially we need to get people out of their cars before they get to the tavern.  To be clear I’m not arguing that city living will be the end of drunk driving.  But when we legislate that you drive to the bar and when we build the physical environment so that people are encouraged to drive to the tavern, then the end result will be drunk drivers.  So if we want to change this outcome and combat drunk driving we need to begin by changing our regulations to encourage dense, walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods.



RedPrairie Moves Further Away From Talent Sources

Aug 22nd, 2008 | By Jeramey Jannene | Category: Delafield, Interstate 94, Park East

RedPrairie’s relocation story has been a funny one, especially now that it appears they’ve finally decided to move to Delafield. To understand what’s going on it appears you don’t have to read between the lines, you just have to read the lines.

Flash back a couple years and you’ll remember RedPrairie had a CEO by the name of John Jazwiec who was constantly in the news. Jazwiec was a resident of the East Side, living in a plush house near Lake Park. Rumors at the time were centered around the company relocating from a suburban location on 94 to Park East land near the Milwaukee River. A back and forth game ensued with Jazwiec claiming he was ready to move the company out of Wisconsin, because they couldn’t find the talent they needed here. Then Jazwiec claimed he was robbed in his own home and was ready to start his own police force for his block before resigning his post and leaving the area rather abruptly. The Park East plans, which appeared to be rocky at best at the time, were suddenly off the map.

Today the company is led by R. Michael Mayoras, a Delafield resident. Well guess which relocation site is at the top of the list? One in Delafield.

If we as outsiders know anything it’s that the CEO of RedPrairie appears to have a lot of power to affect where or where not the company may be located.

The damaging thing for RedPrairie in moving to Delafield is that they’re moving further away from their future workforce. It’s nearly impossible that they could have an intern from Marquette, UWM, or MSOE that would be capable of getting out to Delafield and back on a regular basis. If Red Prairie begins to complain about not being able to find the talent they need again (as Jazwiec did openly before), it’s purely self-inflicted. As MSOE, UWM, and Marquette continue to train top-notch engineers and future business leaders looking for employment, RedPrairie is moving further away.