Milwaukee Leads Great Lakes Cities
Its waterfront redevelopment is many decades ahead of Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland and Buffalo. Part IV of a series.
Cleveland’s 12-Mile Long Industrial Riverfront
Cleveland’s downtown lakefront includes the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, but is otherwise dominated by port facilities, stadium parking lots, limited access highways, and a railroad corridor. Photo courtesy of the U.S.G.S.
Burke Lakefront Airport in Cleveland occupies approximately the geographically equivalent space in Cleveland as the former Maitland Field occupied in Milwaukee. While Cleveland’s downtown airport remains in use and prevents public access to a nearly 2-mile section of lakefront, Milwaukee’s downtown airport was replaced by exceptional public amenities (Henry W. Maier Festival Park and Lakeshore State Park). Photo courtesy of the U.S.G.S.
Cleveland’s downtown lakefront on Lake Erie has also been the focus of significant public investment over recent decades, including the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum, a Great Lakes Science Center, and FirstEnergy Stadium (home of the Cleveland Browns). A fundamental long-term challenge for revitalization of Cleveland’s waterfront is that the Downtown is separated from its lakefront areas by a continuous active rail corridor with 5 to 6 sets of tracks as well an 8-lane highway. The lakefront itself is occupied by a downtown airport, parking lots for the stadium, and facilities for the Port of Cleveland. Other than the area immediately adjacent to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and the Science Center (which includes a waterfront plaza and walkway, and which represents 10 percent or less of the actual downtown lakefront), the lakefront is either inaccessible or lacking in any public amenities or green space. The waterfront to the east of Downtown is bordered for four miles by Interstate 90. To the west, the first public access and green space is in Edgewater State Park, located almost 2 miles from Downtown. Cleveland, like Milwaukee, is blessed to have a downtown river that forms an estuary. However, in spite of some commercial and residential development along portions of the lowermost one mile, the next 12 miles of the Cuyahoga River are continuously bordered by industrial land uses, making the type of restoration that has occurred along Milwaukee’s urban rivers a project that will likely be not be duplicated in Cleveland during this century.
Buffalo’s Freshwater Landscape
Buffalo’s waterfront areas on Lake Erie and the Niagara River have also been a focus for revitalization during recent decades, with some significant development of waterfront housing, marinas, and public green space. The greatest long-term challenge for Buffalo’s waterfront is that it is bordered for a 10 mile stretch by restricted access highways (the New York State Thruway/I90 going north from downtown, and the Buffalo Skyway going south from Downtown). These are permanent features of Buffalo’s urban waterfront, and a blighting feature that reduces access to the waterfront, increases noise levels, reduces property values (for a majority of adjacent parcels) and blocks waterfront views. Although in some locations, a several-hundred foot wide area has been redeveloped for residential or recreational uses, in many areas the highways directly border the Lake Erie and Niagara River waterfronts.
Except for several marinas, the waterfront areas to the south of downtown Buffalo are occupied almost exclusively for five miles by vacant industrial land, port facilities, wetlands, and rail facilities. The first lakefront residential area to the south is a small neighborhood in Blasdell which overlooks Woodlawn Beach State Park. But even this small area is bordered on three sides by large industrial facilities. To the north of downtown Buffalo, residential neighborhoods are present for approximately the first six miles, but are all separated from either the Lake Erie or Niagara River waterfronts by the New York State Thruway. Further to the north, the next 5 miles of waterfront on the Niagara River are occupied by a one-mile wide strip of heavy industrial land that includes a General Motors stamping plant, DuPont Chemical facility, and a Dunlop River plant. Similar to Milwaukee, Buffalo has an urban river (the Buffalo River) that forms an estuary with Lake Erie near the Downtown. However, while the Milwaukee River has nearly completely transitioned to non-industrial uses, the first 6.5 miles of the Buffalo River are still bordered almost exclusively by active or abandoned industrial facilities.
The lack of public access and the limited development that has occurred along portions of Chicago’s downtown urban rivers during a period of residential development matched by few cities in the world, is likely attributable to the much lower environmental quality of Chicago’s rivers, and provides compelling evidence that the transformation that took place in Milwaukee was not inevitable and is significantly linked to the environmental improvements. Whereas the Milwaukee River has transitioned nearly completely to non-industrial uses with continuous public access, vast stretches of the riverfronts of Buffalo, Cleveland, and Detroit remain occupied by industrial facilities or vacant former industrial lands.
A final intriguing thought (and one that flips the standard narrative of northern industrial decline) is that the extraordinary waterfront transformation that took place in Milwaukee is something that might only be possible in a “Rust Belt” city. Without that industrial decline, the waterfront lands might remain occupied by active industrial facilities. Without the industrial legacy and post-industrial decline along the riverfronts, wholesale transformation that included essentially continuous public access would not have been possible. And that transformation has in turn set the stage for a redevelopment of the city along more modern lines, as a vibrant city stressing environmental quality and recreational amenities that can attract high-end residential development, clean industry and a vast array of restaurants, bars and other entertainment-oriented development that can attract suburban day trippers and tourists.
David Holmes is a Milwaukee-based environmental scientist and urban revitalization consultant, currently pursuing a Doctorate in Freshwater Sciences at the UW-Milwaukee School of Freshwater Science.
Article Continues - Pages: 1 2
Freshwater Mecca
-
Milwaukee’s Extraordinary Freshwater Future
Feb 20th, 2015 by David Holmes
-
Milwaukee’s Riverwalk Vs. San Antonio’s
Feb 4th, 2015 by David Holmes
-
Milwaukee’s Clean Water Advantage
Jan 21st, 2015 by David Holmes
Despite all this, won’t the Streetcar bankrupt Milwaukee and eventually Wisconsin? All kidding aside, great article!
Having traveled less than extensively and more than rarely, I have a sense that Milwaukee is doing something special and moving forward slowly but steadily in a positive direction. I think people here in WI & MKE take for granted what is happening… I think it’s something about being surrounded on 2 sides by Great Lakes that makes us all a little insular.
This may be off topic, but I’m so frustrated by the constant daggers thrown at Milwaukee when I see so much positive happening. I agree Tim…. we take for granted what is a beautiful and livable city. I know we have our issues with crime, poverty, education… etc., but there are so many committed people here working hard to improve life for everyone. We live in a post industrial city and if you were around here in the 70’s you would understand how far we had to go to get to this point.
As a resident of Milwaukee, I meet people every day from all walks of life. Everyone has an opinion depending on their circumstances and that’s great. What troubles me is the efforts by some, for political reasons only, to tear the city apart, to place blame where it doesn’t belong and to drive wedges between people that should be working together to solve problems. .
Great article. It is frustrating to visit these other cities and see how much of their waterfront is inaccessible. Do we have the Milwaukee socialists to thank?
David, thanks for your thorough research and broad perspectives comparing various Great Lakes cities. This info can help inspire Milwaukeeans to continue following a smart, sustainable approach to development. I was not aware of the extent to which Milwaukee is so unique, both for its accessible preserved lakefront and revitalized riverfront and clean rivers.
Bruce, the Milwaukee Socialists (from 1890s till 1960) do deserve some thanks for their vision and nuts-and-bolts good, clean government. The term “Sewer Socialists” was given to those early pragmatists who made sure good sanitation was put in place as the industrial era geared up.
Far-sighted city planners had already started setting aside parkland by then. They hired Frederick Law Olmsted in the early 1890s to design Lake, Riverside & Washington Parks & Newberry Blvd (when he was working in Chicago on the Columbia Exhibition World’s Fair). Of course, New Urbanists and preservationists have been working to keep our natural treasures and make the most of them.
Thanks for another installment of this brilliant series.
I wouldn’t credit Milwaukee’s successes, and they can be counted on one hand, to far-sighted city plannning, although they have been cautious in their process of decison making. Many scars have occurred from planning decisions from individulals that are NOT experts in their fields. i.e Erie Plaza, Bay View Bus Stop, Park East corriodr, etc. Is the streetcar next on that list?
Great article! Very informative. Having lived in the Buffalo, Chicago and Milwaukee and spent time in Cleveland and Detroit,I definitely support you view about Milwaukee being the most progressive in regards to waterfront development and accessibility. From the early urban parkway planning of Olmsted to the New Urbanism of former mayor John Nordquist, Milwaukee has done it right and hopefully continues to do so long into the future…
Great read! I have lived on the East side since 74. I love this city and remember the blight of the 70’s and 80’s and the progress that has been made. Unfortunately I will be moving when I retire due to the high property tax.
Apples and oranges when comparing Chicago to Milwaukee. Chicago’s waterways are a FEDERAL interstate and Milwaukee’s a cul-de-sac. The first act of Congress under the USC was reaffirmation of The Northwest Ordinance. All tributaries of the St. Lawrence, Mississippi AND it’s CARRYING POINTS (ie: Chicago Canals) shall be forever free and COMMON HIGHWAYS. Wow… Waterway precedent going all the way back to the very first act of congress in 1789! Whoever came up with the rubbish that this is a post-industrial world? Chicago is still an industrial city and it’s waterways are the backbone of it’s industrial economy. Like I said, the Chicago Area Waterway’s (CAW’s) are a waterborne interstate to the world. The CAW’s made Chicago and it’s still defining Chicago. You don’t build condos and golf courses along an interstate… A federal waterway interstate that is defined by industrial commerce. NEWSFLASH: You will always need somebody to ship the bulk comodities to market. The inland waterways are still the cheapest way to ship products to market. AND unlike the Seaway, Chicago’s other waterborne door to the world is open year ’round. Barges and tonnage on The CAW’s move even through the thickest ice. Once an ancillary transportation system is becoming more and more intermodal with rail and truck. That’s what places like Milwaukee and Detroit need to be afraid of in a highly competitive national & global economy. Winner take all.
You dreamers will always need somebody to pay the bills and drive the industrial ecomony. Chicago is still a working city with two waterborne doors to the world. The only city on the Great Lakes you can compare Chicago to is Toronto. Would Toronto advocate closing the Seaway… You have to be kidding.
This is all coming from me, a person who grew up in Buffalo, New York. @ one time the two biggest cities on The Lakes were Chicago and Buffalo. Since 1959 and the Seaway, it’s now Chicago and Toronto. Buffalo has now become “Radiator Springs” within the interlake and global transportation system thanks to the Seaway.
Again… You simply can’t compare apples with oranges. Federal interstates with cul-de-sacs. A state like Indiana and it’s ports on Lake Michigan and the Ohio River stand to lose 1.7 Billion dollars a year if the CAW’s is separated from The Lakes. They can have development and riverwalks in downtown Chicago… BUT, residential and recreational development simply does not soley define a place like Chicago like it defines cul-de-sacs like Milwaukee. Industry and recreational/residential interests need to co-exist in a place like Chicago.
Take a look @ this. 10’s of MILLIONS of tons transit the CAW’s each year… And it co-exists with 10’s of 1,000’s of recreational/pleasure craft.
http://www.iowadot.gov/compare.pdf
Chicago is a market center. In our streamlined transportation system, there is only one other market center on The Lakes: Toronto, Ontario. Milwaukee, Detroit, Buffalo, Cleveland are simply not in this league ANYMORE… Detroit was the last to fall. Milwaukee still clings to Chicago’s other door to the world. These cities were waterborne transportational hubs @ one time, but the systems are streamlined now and depend heavily on a city’s global positioning. Milwaukee needs to go the route it is going… Chicago doesn’t need to be all in. I am not going to say this article is insane, it is not… But, it is clueless to what actually is happening out there in the real, working, industrial world. We are the “bread basket” of the world because of the Inland Waterways and if we don’t start getting our collective heads out of you know what, that ag industry will shift to places like The Amazon River… It already is. I am not anti-green, but I am totally not anti-industry… We need industry to pay the bills. We chase it off in the name of going green, we will just pollute other places in the world 1,000 fold more!
This is a reply to Victor above in comment #8. If you are leaving because of high property taxes, who else is leaving? How is this residential/recreational & green model sustainable if you are not sticking around and paying the taxes? Who’s paying the bills?
Don’t get me wrong, it’s great what Milwaukee is doing and it works for Milwaukee. Yet, what’s going to happen when taxes go through the roof and industry doesn’t exist. How can people take vacations, become tourists when there are no good paying industry jobs. Mimimum wage @ riverwalk bistro hustling 5 dollar lattes can only get a city so far. As in Victor’s case… When he retires and actually has time to recreate, he’s leaving for lower taxes! WOW!
Thanks everyone for reading and for all of the positive comments,
Thamus (regarding comment 9):
My comparison of Milwaukee to Chicago was for the downtown and near downtown rivers that in Milwaukee, have undergone a dramatic transformation. Milwaukee’s Harbor and estuary are also subject to federal jurisdiction even if you would view them as a cul-de-sac relative to the Chicago Area Waterway System (CAWS).
I will confess to not having fully investigated all of the details regarding the operation of the CAWS. Therefore, I spent some time reviewing a report published in 2012 by the Great Lakes Commission on an Evaluation of Physical Separation Alternatives for the Great Lakes and Mississippi River basins by way of the CAWS. This report includes a comprehensive analysis of all functions of the CAWS.
According to this report, the total freight handled by CAWS of about 16 million tons represents only about 3% of the total freight moving through Chicago each year (67% is moved by truck and 30% by rail). What I suspected, but did not previously confirm, was that the vast majority of freight moving through CAWS is shipped through the Calumet Harbor via the Calumet SAG Channel rather than through the Chicago River. It appears that the amount of freight shipped by water through the downtown and the Chicago Harbor Lock is less than 1% of the total shipped through CAWS (or about 102,000 tons of cargo in 2010). Therefore, the economic benefits from continued use of the Chicago River for moving freight would seem to be pretty small relative to the opportunity cost associated with not having developed these portion of Chicago’s freshwater landscape in a manner comparable to Milwaukee.
Even if Chicago were to end use of the Chicago River in the downtown area for shipping of freight of other industrial uses, Chicago would hardly be lacking in industrial waterfront areas, with nearly the entire south end of Lake Michigan still dominated by industrial infrastructure and industrial facilities (from Burns Harbor through South Chicago) as well as nearly the entirety of the Calumet River and the Chicago Sanitary and Shipping Canal. There are probably thousands of acres of this land, where the waterfront location is no longer essential to the operation of the industrial facility, as well as thousands of acres of land that are vacant brownfields serving no economic purpose.
Although the transformation of Milwaukee’s waterfront areas is attracting billions of dollars of residential, office, and mixed use development, this has not been at the expense of the industrial economy. The Menomonee Valley area presents a great example for Chicago and other cities where industrial area has been revitalized for new industrial uses that now include quality of life amenities available to the workers in these facilities.
Milwaukee’s industrial present is alive and well and involved in many ways with the water initiative and the transformation of Milwaukee’s waterfront landscape. There are at least seven Fortune 1000 manufacturing companies based in Milwaukee with their headquarters or major facilities located within 2 miles of the Global Water Center. These include Johnson Controls, Rockwell Automation (located two blocks west of the School of Freshwater Science), Joy Global (overlooking the Hank Aaron Trail and Menomonee River), Rexnord Corporation (which moved its headquarters into the Global Water Center), A.O. Smith (with a research facility in the Global Water Center), Harley Davidson (which built its Museum on the a lot surrounded on three sides by the Menomonee River and Canal), and Gardner Denver (which just moved its headquarters to a location a half block from the Milwaukee River). The water initiative and/or quality of life amenities for workers at these companies (such as the revitalized waterfront landscape located in close proximity to their facilities) is most certainly relevant to these industrial companies and their competing and succeeding in the “real, working, industrial world.”
Thanks for the reply. A lot of what you said is informative yet, only tells one side of the story. Right now as I post, the lock on the Calumet River (O’Brien Lock) is closed for repairs. There were two seperate closures for about 45 days each. The first closure was from November to Decemeber. From mid-December to mid-January, the lock was reopened and freight was passed. The second closure was started on January 21st and is currently ongoing till around March 11th. Right now, all the freight is moving through the Chicago Harbor Lock. Hundreds of barges have passed through Chicago Harbor since the closure on January 21, 2015. The first closure, the same thing happened. When the numbers come out for 2014 and 2015, you will see a big jump in Chicago Harbor Lock’s tonnage. Of course this is a departure from Chicago Harbor Lock’s normal traffic of recreational craft and passenger vessels… BUT, they play a vital role in being a backup route/detour when one part of the CAWs is down for repair or closed to navigation… Just as O’Brien Lock and Dam does. Of course navigation is just one mission for the CAWs. There is also flood control, sanitary, and water diversion. The system is bought and payed for the most part. The O’Brien Lock was built in 1960 for 6 million dollars tacked on to Seaway appropriations. Right now a 60 day closure costs the economy/business 18 million dollars. That’s bang for our federal taxpayer’s buck! The CAWs is one of the few things in gov’t turning a profit and paying the bills… And they want to separate it for a huge taxpayer cost that has very weak ROI. Then, taxpayers like Victor above will leave the area because the taxes are too high?
I ask the question, what happens when one part of the CAWs is down for repair? The Inland Waterways and its connection to the CAW’s is vital in many ways to the economic health of the area and the nation. As a “common highway” “forever free” it can’t be choked off w/development or spearated from the Great Lakes. Part of this waterway “interstate” also plays an important part when it comes to the 10’s of thousands yearly recreational craft and passenger vessels transiting the area. The CAWs is the only way to enter the Inland Waterways to and from the Great Lakes (western end). The CAWs is vital and needs both Chicago Harbor and Calumet Harbor to function properly… It’s Chicago’s waterborne door to the world. The southern vessels that play all summer long in Milwaukee transit the CAWs to get to Milwaukee and other points on The Lakes. Chicago Harbor Lock is one of the busiest locks in the country.
The 3% in freight might seem small, but it represents a very important ancillary (which is becoming more intergrated into modern intermodal shipping systems) mode of transportation especially for bulk commodities that would be difficult to ship by rail/truck. Once the figure out the container condundrum, I am sure the intermodal freight facilites will become more important. The CAWs also represents an important avenue for ovesized shipments that can’t be shipped any other way. Shipments that are vital to national security. Also, factor in what the New Panama Canal will bring to the Inland Waterways. The system in Chicago is working perfectly fine, even with all that “wasted space.”
Again, thank you for the reply. Please don’t interpret my comments as being negative. Again, Chicago is in league of it’s own. What works for Milwaukee is great and Milwaukee should take pride in that without having to compare itself with other cities… Especially Chicago. Cities like Buffalo, Cleveland, and Detroit do need to look @ what Milwaukee is doing right.
Please excuse all the typos, poor spelling, etc… My quick reply was intended not to take away from anything positive Milwaukee is doing. I mentioned my roots to Buffalo and how hard they are trying to turn things around. Buffalo could learn a lot from Milwaukee. I do see the environmental agenda though. Chicago simply works differently and always will. Chicago will change, but it will change around what it needs, not because what others are doing. Again, its river systems simply operate differently. This will be my last reply so there can be more constructive thoughts on the very interesting article written.
Thanks Thamus. You make a lot of good points. The balance between new residential and recreational uses and existing industrial uses is a challenge for Milwaukee’s waterfront areas as well. In nearly all instances that I can recall, the City has been adamant about retaining industrial jobs (and maintaining the key transportation infrastructure provided by the Port of Milwaukee) even when these are located in waterfront areas that might otherwise be attractive for non-industrial development. The updated plan for the Menomonee Valley rejects any residential use in much of the Valley. So far, the focus on retaining established industrial companies does not seem to have impeded the significant progress in enhancing the waterfront areas. The School of Freshwater Science has coexisted with a bulk liquid asphalt storage facility on one side and a coal storage facility on the other. The coal piles will soon be departing with the conversion of a nearby power plant to gas, at which point the coal storage property will finally transition from 100+ years of industrial use to what will likely be a cleaner non-industrial use. Everything in its time….
Nearly all of the residential and other new development in waterfront areas in Milwaukee has occurred on vacant former industrial parcels or in vacant or underutilized former industrial buildings. I think the key perspective for Milwaukee that I wanted to bring through the comparison with Chicago is that the riverfront revitalization that occurred in Milwaukee was not something that was inevitable but was due to a unique set of circumstances that included a decades earlier cleanup of the river, the foresight to create the Riverwalk network, and the opportunity presented by the industrial decline and the abandonment of large sections of the riverfront by industries.