Arena Discussion Thread - Gov. Walker onboard w/jock tax pg. 4

ColeWorld23 · Post #41 » by **ColeWorld23** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 3:18 am

FYI the Johnson Controls building has been in the works for about 3 years. The Streetcar would just be an extra bonus for it.

Mr Anonymous · Post #42 » by **Mr Anonymous** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 3:57 am

Years from now (not that many either) we're going to laugh at the thought we wouldn't be able to fill up the Park East with development. Milwaukee Metro is projected to be the hottest metro market in the entire nation for 2015. The Midwest is the last region to experience the full impact of the housing and real estate recovery and Milwaukee is the #1 value in the region. Houses in Bay View don't last a week on the market due to all the small business owners from Chicago looking to move north and open up shop here. Less competition, repetition, and lower start up cost are all major pluses here. Side note on that: we're going to have some nice new dining and specialty shopping options here real soon. Deep dish anyone? Get yourselves ready, Milwaukee is about to enter the 21st century.

HaroldinGMinor · Post #43 » by **HaroldinGMinor** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 5:52 pm

Mr Anonymous wrote:Years from now (not that many either) we're going to laugh at the thought we wouldn't be able to fill up the Park East with development. Milwaukee Metro is projected to be the hottest metro market in the entire nation for 2015. The Midwest is the last region to experience the full impact of the housing and real estate recovery and Milwaukee is the #1 value in the region. Houses in Bay View don't last a week on the market due to all the small business owners from Chicago looking to move north and open up shop here. Less competition, repetition, and lower start up cost are all major pluses here. Side note on that: we're going to have some nice new dining and specialty shopping options here real soon. Deep dish anyone? Get yourselves ready, Milwaukee is about to enter the 21st century.

Cue myopic Milwaukeean response about FIB's and not wanting Chicagoans in Wisconsin.

Post #44 » by **paulpressey25** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 6:11 pm

Mr Anonymous wrote: Houses in Bay View don't last a week on the market due to all the small business owners from Chicago looking to move north and open up shop here. Less competition, repetition, and lower start up cost are all major pluses here.

This is why I think Barrett (and Doyle before him) were completely missing the boat on rail. Put in a true high-speed rail system from downtown Chicago to downtown Milwaukee and I think you'd get massively more economic impact for Milwaukee than by spending $124mm to $1.5 billion on a trolley/streetcar within the city of Milwaukee.

If you can get people back and forth to jobs and housing from MKE to CHI and vice-versa in under 45 mins via rail that would be a game changer. A place like Johnson controls can then attract talent from Chicago. Further, Chicago employers could set up lower cost operations in MKE.

HaroldinGMinor · Post #45 » by **HaroldinGMinor** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 6:39 pm

paulpressey25 wrote:
Mr Anonymous wrote: Houses in Bay View don't last a week on the market due to all the small business owners from Chicago looking to move north and open up shop here. Less competition, repetition, and lower start up cost are all major pluses here.

This is why I think Barrett (and Doyle before him) were completely missing the boat on rail. Put in a true high-speed rail system from downtown Chicago to downtown Milwaukee and I think you'd get massively more economic impact for Milwaukee than by spending $124mm to $1.5 billion on a trolley/streetcar within the city of Milwaukee.

If you can get people back and forth to jobs and housing from MKE to CHI and vice-versa in under 45 mins via rail that would be a game changer. A place like Johnson controls can then attract talent from Chicago. Further, Chicago employers could set up lower cost operations in MKE.

The problem with that is Chicago won't want to pay for any of the cost since they won't be seeing much benefit. It would have to be federal money which was there for the Chicago to Minneapolis line (which went right through Milwaukee) but Walker canned it.

crkone · Post #46 » by **crkone** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 6:49 pm

HaroldinGMinor wrote:
paulpressey25 wrote:
Mr Anonymous wrote: Houses in Bay View don't last a week on the market due to all the small business owners from Chicago looking to move north and open up shop here. Less competition, repetition, and lower start up cost are all major pluses here.

This is why I think Barrett (and Doyle before him) were completely missing the boat on rail. Put in a true high-speed rail system from downtown Chicago to downtown Milwaukee and I think you'd get massively more economic impact for Milwaukee than by spending $124mm to $1.5 billion on a trolley/streetcar within the city of Milwaukee.

If you can get people back and forth to jobs and housing from MKE to CHI and vice-versa in under 45 mins via rail that would be a game changer. A place like Johnson controls can then attract talent from Chicago. Further, Chicago employers could set up lower cost operations in MKE.

The problem with that is Chicago won't want to pay for any of the cost since they won't be seeing much benefit. It would have to be federal money which was there for the Chicago to Minneapolis line (which went right through Milwaukee) but Walker canned it.

That wasn't a true high speed line. There needed to be a straight shot MKE to Chicago line that takes 30-45 minutes.

crkone · Post #47 » by **crkone** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 6:53 pm

But it is about way more expensive for true high speed rail.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-true ... ion-2009-5

Post #48 » by **paulpressey25** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 6:54 pm

crkone wrote:
That wasn't a true high speed line. There needed to be a straight shot MKE to Chicago line that takes 30-45 minutes.

Correct. The train money Doyle arranged was for MKE to Madison. He and Barrett needed to tell Obama that route was worthless and the money should be used for true high speed rail between Chicago.

HaroldinGMinor · Post #49 » by **HaroldinGMinor** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 6:59 pm

"All else being equal, high-speed rail will cost 10 to 12 times more than moderate-speed rail."

You really think that would be supported by the "it was never really high speed rail to begin with!" crowd"?

And it was high speed from Chicago to Minneapolis. MIlwaukee to Madison was part of that route.

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/passengerrai ... allmap.pdf

Post #50 » by **paulpressey25** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 7:06 pm

HaroldinGMinor wrote:

You really think that would be supported by the "it was never really high speed rail to begin with!" crowd"?

It would have gotten my vote even if it cost more. That project would have made a ton of sense. Part of the problem with the Madison rail thing was that there just wasn't demand between MKE and Madison. There was no one in the business community demanding a route for that. You would have gotten the business community on MKE/Chicago.

HaroldinGMinor · Post #51 » by **HaroldinGMinor** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 7:13 pm

paulpressey25 wrote:
HaroldinGMinor wrote:

You really think that would be supported by the "it was never really high speed rail to begin with!" crowd"?

It would have gotten my vote even if it cost more. That project would have made a ton of sense. Part of the problem with the Madison rail thing was that there just wasn't demand between MKE and Madison. There was no one in the business community demanding a route for that. You would have gotten the business community on MKE/Chicago.

It wasn't Milwaukee to Madison. It was Chicago to Minneapolis. Milwaukee and Madison were stops along the same route.

KidA24 · Post #52 » by **KidA24** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 7:28 pm

paulpressey25 wrote:
Mr Anonymous wrote: Houses in Bay View don't last a week on the market due to all the small business owners from Chicago looking to move north and open up shop here. Less competition, repetition, and lower start up cost are all major pluses here.

This is why I think Barrett (and Doyle before him) were completely missing the boat on rail. Put in a true high-speed rail system from downtown Chicago to downtown Milwaukee and I think you'd get massively more economic impact for Milwaukee than by spending $124mm to $1.5 billion on a trolley/streetcar within the city of Milwaukee.

If you can get people back and forth to jobs and housing from MKE to CHI and vice-versa in under 45 mins via rail that would be a game changer. A place like Johnson controls can then attract talent from Chicago. Further, Chicago employers could set up lower cost operations in MKE.

Considering idiotic WIS-DOT is now on the verge of 300M in spending to widen the I94 corridor and completely revamp the Miller Park Way interchange to 76th St, the idiocy continues.

If the streetcar is a part of a bigger project (like, say, trains from the suburbs to downtown) then it makes sense. "Get to the main depot, street car from there"

Instead, they are going to make it easier to drive downtown. Ridiculous.

Thunder Muscle · Post #53 » by **Thunder Muscle** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 7:53 pm

I really don't have a side on this, but is Milwaukee's commuting traffic that bad to where people would actually use a street car type deal? For me with public transit, unless it is really convenient and an extreme value (time and/or money), I'd just opt to drive. I guess if it takes you an hour to get downtown and with a train it would be like 15-20 minutes, and you're not far from the depot, then I can see it. But I don't know if MKE's traffic is so bad that people would stop driving in droves to use the train. I could be wrong, I'm not down there daily.

MartyConlonOnTheRun · Post #54 » by **MartyConlonOnTheRun** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 7:59 pm

Thunder Muscle wrote:I really don't have a side on this, but is Milwaukee's commuting traffic that bad to where people would actually use a street car type deal? For me with public transit, unless it is really convenient and an extreme value (time and/or money), I'd just opt to drive. I guess if it takes you an hour to get downtown and with a train it would be like 15-20 minutes, and you're not far from the depot, then I can see it. But I don't know if MKE's traffic is so bad that people would stop driving in droves to use the train. I could be wrong, I'm not down there daily.

Traffic can get pretty bad west of Milwaukee. But you would have to go through it anyways to get to the streetcar. This is made for people already downtown.

EastSideBucksFan · Post #55 » by **EastSideBucksFan** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 8:04 pm

Thunder Muscle wrote:I really don't have a side on this, but is Milwaukee's commuting traffic that bad to where people would actually use a street car type deal? For me with public transit, unless it is really convenient and an extreme value (time and/or money), I'd just opt to drive. I guess if it takes you an hour to get downtown and with a train it would be like 15-20 minutes, and you're not far from the depot, then I can see it. But I don't know if MKE's traffic is so bad that people would stop driving in droves to use the train. I could be wrong, I'm not down there daily.

Street car is going to be mostly for Live Downtown / Work Downtown crowd.

Parking for working folks in downtown is a huge chunk of change ($80-100/month)

drew881 · Post #56 » by **drew881** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 8:47 pm

paulpressey25 wrote:[

This is why I think Barrett (and Doyle before him) were completely missing the boat on rail. Put in a true high-speed rail system from downtown Chicago to downtown Milwaukee and I think you'd get massively more economic impact for Milwaukee than by spending $124mm to $1.5 billion on a trolley/streetcar within the city of Milwaukee.

If you can get people back and forth to jobs and housing from MKE to CHI and vice-versa in under 45 mins via rail that would be a game changer. A place like Johnson controls can then attract talent from Chicago. Further, Chicago employers could set up lower cost operations in MKE.

For me, intercity travel comes before intra-city travel. If Milwaukee had commuter rail lines extending out into the burbs, it makes it that much easier to get downtown to catch the train. Likewise, if it has the trolly, you have a system that can move people to jobs once they get off the train from Chicago.

Still don't like that the trolly is being built just downtown to start. You can have a lot more impact by building a single diagonal line across the city's highest need areas, and possibly to the airport.

EastSideBucksFan · Post #57 » by **EastSideBucksFan** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 9:00 pm

Looks like Bucks hired some lobbyists.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolit ... 88761.html

Post #58 » by **paulpressey25** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 9:08 pm

EastSideBucksFan wrote:Looks like Bucks hired some lobbyists.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolit ... 88761.html

I hate the way former politicians on both sides of the aisle get rich peddling influence as lobbyists. But the fact the hired Jeff Fitzgerald tells you they've got a good path with the GOP majority to have their preferred funding case heard.

aValpo · Post #59 » by **aValpo** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 9:11 pm

EastSideBucksFan wrote:Looks like Bucks hired some lobbyists.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolit ... 88761.html

Hiring Fitzgerald is one of the smartest things the new owners have done so far.

Post #60 » by **MickeyDavis** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 9:46 pm

I agree with PP, I hate that these guys can so much money "lobbying" their former colleagues. That said, I agree that hiring Fitzgerald was the right move to make. Kohl would have never hired him.