Eyes on Milwaukee
26-Story Tower for Prospect Avenue
Here are all the details on proposed $55 million project: renderings, floor plans, diagrams.
Get a daily rundown of the top stories on Urban Milwaukee
Here are all the details on proposed $55 million project: renderings, floor plans, diagrams. Back to the full article.
Photos - Page 3
Attractive, but I’d really like to see these developers build something more memorable on a national scale. We need some more iconic designs to push a stronger unique identity for MKE. Push the envelope!
I really like the design. Nice height and massing. Love the varied texture and color–especially the dark and the spot orange at the top. Finally a new building on the lakefront that isn’t all white. While it’s not iconic, I’d venture to say that the orange at the top will make this a bit of a landmark in that people will refer to it in giving directions, etc. We’ll see if it gets approved.
That said, I’m with you, Todd, about getting some more iconic buildings in Milwaukee. I’d love for companies or developers who commission designs to ask and pay for something really bold. Even go so far as to work with some of the leading star-chitects. (I’m one of those who don’t think “star-chitect” is a bad word. You want people to come to your museum, buy Picassos.). The last icon for Milwaukee was the Calatrava, and what an impact that had on the city. Positive in terms of publicity and civic pride, but negative in that everyone wants to build white on the lakefront, now. The new NML tower and commons is a very handsome design. It’s gorgeous. And, it’s not quite iconic as was promised before th unveiling of the design. Personally, I’d like to see some real cutting-edge design like we’re seeing in Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Asia. Most of America doesn’t go that far it could really be a calling card for Milwaukee, architecture-wise.
I love seeing all the new development in Milwaukee and in downtown especially. It’s probably going to continue for given the historic, generational migration back to cities the country is experiencing. And, there will be another downturn. Good design–and even iconic design–needs to happen before then.
Yes more exceptional architecture is needed. Include a ground level public vest pocket park. Green relief adds beauty and decreases urban stress.
Also, my rant: WHAT only three 3 bedroom units! We need more affordable 3 bedroom units to sustain long term young 30 something family residents downtown. I live right near the proposed site and see a constant exchange of transient residents. They don’t stabilize a neighborhood. Young families do and require an infrastructure that would add value to our livability downtown.
It is nice to see this real estate being put to good use. I respect the historical architecture that is in this area but realistically this is top dollar property. That being said buildings from the 60s-70s that have failed to upgrade are an eyesore and I would not class as historical.
I couldn’t agree more with Ron. I am a young professional, who is planning to leave the city to start a family because there is no way to afford city living and have the room for a family. I also did a short stint in the apartment leasing industry. We had a significant waiting list for our 3 bedroom apartments and we had a dozen of them. I find it confusing when I see so many 1 bedroom apartments being built. Couples generally want 2 bedroom apartments, whether they are young professionals or baby boomers. A lot of young singles, still have room mates. I don’t see the desire for 1 bedroom apartments but maybe that’s just me.
I like the design but I’m not surprised it isn’t “envelope pushing” as it’s a rental building. I’d imagine hiring a well known architect or firm for design, like Studio Gang from Chicago, may push the price of the units beyond what the developer is comfortable putting into our market.
Looking at the floor plans I’m happy to see the one bedrooms have bedrooms with exterior walls, rather than being hidden behind the kitchen with no windows. Though it’s really odd that on floors 5-20 Unit 4 has a balcony that appears to be in front of the bedroom of Unit 5.
For all that carefull consideration, I was assuming the Goll mansion would’ve been integrated into the design … using the facade and first floor rooms? That would’ve been daring and innovative. Tacking on a tower to the rear looks a little silly.
@Gary I think you are looking at the renderings of the prior project, which was named Transera. The current plan is to move the Goll Mansion to an available site, and build the tower pictured in the renderings.
@Hereiam
The current renderings of the new project show the mansion in place in front of the development. As stated in the article, it is apparently only moving 40 feet west on the property.
@Devin You’re right, I apparently need some more coffee.
They could slap a Minimart onto the front of old house in front of the tower (an old Milwaukee tradition along major thoroughfares); paint it orange to tie in design elements from the tippy-top of the tower. Looks like there’s enough room for a parking lot and bike stanchions too. Good work!
I’m not a Milwaukee native, but I have lived on the Eastside for many years. It’s great that all this housing is going up, but I agree with Ron S. Where’s the housing for families, who want to live in these areas?
This is just another way of segregating an already segregated city. On the one hand, the City of Milwaukee is looking more vibrant and on the other it remains one the most poverty-stricken and violent in the nation.
A tale of two cities.
Yeah, it’s not like the many families already live in the ample stock of large duplexes & single family houses. Where’s the outrage that they also can’t live in apartments, where’s Nik on this!?!
Tim….. I agree, if people would like to raise a family in Milwaukee, there are many single family homes all over the place including the eastside. Let’s not pretend young white couples are leaving because of a shortage of three bedroom apartments.
I would be very concerned about mandating that developers must include a certain number or percentage of 2BR and/or 3BR units. My worry is that this would both increase the price of housing and reduce the amount of housing being developed.
But if we are concerned that not enough larger 2BR/3BR units are being developed, rather than require a certain amount, I’d prefer that we offer incentives to provide them – something like an increase in allowable height or total number of units if a project includes some amount of larger units. In other words, a project can be X% taller or can include X% more units than otherwise permitted if some number of larger units are provided.
Sure Eric, encourage the developer to think beyond the formula they are currently using to develop to the market needs and to the long term best interest of a vibrant stable people-centered unban Milwaukee.
Landscape architects, architects and urban planners have been creating some exceptional livable city environments around the world. Why shouldn’t Milwaukee develop a 21St Century vision. That would appeal to millenniums and others. How about stimulating the economy by identifying tax free zones and other incentives to encourage small business to flourish e.g. business incubators. Young creative spawn innovation and growth.
BTW: there’s an odd photo of the Goll home in the local German language press published when the building was brand new: it shows the back of the house from the south-east corner of the lot? I’m just saying.