M i l w a u k e e

166

D o w n t o w n P l a n

167

NeighborhoodConnections

M i l w a u k e e

168 NEIGHBORHOOD CONNECTIONS

Neighborhood Connections

As described in Chapter Two, the overarchinggoal behind the preparation of this plan is to

add value to the city of Milwaukee. This chapter ofthe plan considers Downtown’s relationship toother parts of Milwaukee and recommends actionsto ensure that improvements in the Downtown"add value" to the rest of the City as well.

The analysis that follows is based on severalassumptions:• The jobs, services and cultural opportunities thatexist downtown should be available to everyone inthe metropolitan area.• Downtown is interdependent with the remainderof the city and particularly with the neighborhoodsclosest to it. Neighborhoods benefit from proximi-ty to a healthy Downtown; Downtown benefitsfrom proximity to healthy neighborhoods.• There are cultural, arts, entertainment, and retailattractions in Milwaukee’s neighborhoods andMilwaukee’s appeal as a destination is amplifiedwhen both Downtown and neighborhoods are mar-keted to visitors to the city.• The sharing of benefits between neighborhoodsand Downtown is maximized when real and per-ceived barriers are removed and travel betweenneighborhoods and Downtown is facilitated.

This plan recognizes that Downtown does not existin isolation. Downtown exists because of the ser-vices it provides to the rest of the city and to themetropolitan area. It needs the people of GreaterMilwaukee to staff its work places, patronize itsbusinesses and cultural institutions, and attend itsschools and colleges. Even as the housing recom-mendations of this plan increase the number ofDowntown residents to 27,000 over the next twodecades or more, the residential population will beonly one-third of the size of the current Downtownworkforce. Increasing the residential populationwill strengthen Downtown but will not reduce itsdependence on the larger community.

The analysis considers two categories of neighbor-hoods: the neighborhoods that are immediatelyadjacent to Downtown, which are called GatewayNeighborhoods, and the neighborhoods that arecentrally located within the city but do not share aboundary with Downtown.

Gateway Neighborhoods

Because of their adjacency to Downtown, theGateway Neighborhoods are closely identified

with it. The boundary between Downtown andthese neighborhoods is sometimes vague and par-ticular blocks on the border justifiably may beclaimed by both. The Gateway Neighborhoodshave their own residential base and developmentcharacter that give them a separate identity. Map Ashows the Gateway Neighborhoods with namesthat were assigned to them in a recent communityidentity project of the Department of CityDevelopment. Map B shows the commercial areasthat serve them. In three of the commercial areas,the merchants and property owners have organizedbusiness improvement districts (BIDs) to promoteand improve their areas.

Avenues West and Historic King Drive were thefocus of recent, joint public-private planning stud-ies. Brady Street recently completed a highlyregarded streetscaping project. Marquette

D o w n t o w n P l a n

169Neighborhood Connections

University recently completed and the MilwaukeeCity Plan Commission and Common Councilhave endorsed a Campus Identity andBeautification Plan that emphasizes keeping WestWisconsin Avenues as the university’s "mainstreet," open to public traffic and linking the cam-pus to Downtown. These planning studies call forthe Gateway Neighborhoods to use their proximi-ty to Downtown as a marketing opportunity, tosee the population of Downtown visitors andworkers as a market for the neighborhoods’ stores,restaurants, services, and housing units.

The greatest impediment to the GatewayNeighborhoods’ tapping the Downtown market isreal or perceived barriers between them andDowntown. For example, in interviews withDowntown and neighborhood representatives andin the public workshops and briefings on the draftDowntown Plan, it was often mentioned that thePark East Freeway was seen as a barrier that separat-ed the Historic King Drive and Brewers Hill neigh-borhoods from Downtown. Removing that barrieris seen as a way to encourage more visitors, businessinvestment, and potential residents to come to theneighborhoods.

The plan recommends the following actions toremove barriers and maximize connections betweenthe Gateway Neighborhoods and Downtown:

1. The Downtown Plan and other city plans call forchanges to major thoroughfares. These improve-ment projects should be designed in ways that facil-itate access between Downtown and the GatewayNeighborhoods. Map C shows connections thatneed special attention. In most cases these streetsalso carry bus routes and transit amenities shouldalso be provided.a) On West Wisconsin Avenue, establish a smoothtransition between the Marquette University cam-pus and Downtown as part of the implementationof the Campus Identity and Beautification Project.b) Consider establishing two-way operation of WestWells Street and West State Street in the AvenuesWest and Marquette University Neighborhoodswhen two-way operation of those streets is begun inthe Downtown.c) Maintain a direct connection between West Fonddu Lac Avenue and Downtown in the Park Eastreplacement and Hillside Interchange reconstruc-tion projects.d) Create a smooth transition between North OldWorld Third Street and North Dr. Martin LutherKing, Jr. Drive as part of the Park East replacementproject.e) Maintain the connection to Brady Street and theLower East Side via North Water Street as part ofthe Park East replacement project.f ) Enhance the connection to the Walker’s PointNeighborhood as part of the Sixth Street Viaductreplacement.

2. The Downtown Plan and other city plans call fornew pedestrian connections, particularly as part ofcompletion of the RiverWalk. Additional connec-tions should be included.a) The RiverWalk to LakeWalk connection viaBrady Street should be included.b) Continue the RiverWalk system along the southbank of the Milwaukee River in Walker’s Point.c) Include the connections between the HenryAaron State Trail in the Menomonee Valley and the

Downtown.d) As redevelopment of the Park East and PostOffice occur, consider additional pedestrian con-nections across the rivers as part of those develop-ments.

3. The design of new buildings and sites can openvistas or close them, create inviting entrances orintimidating walls. Care should be taken during thedesign of large redevelopments, particularly thePark East redevelopment, to avoid recreating a per-ceived barrier between Downtown and HistoricKing Drive, Brewers Hill, Brady Street and theLower East Side. Superblock sized parcels shouldnot be created, individual redevelopment parcelsshould not exceed the size of typical blocks, 300 feetby 600 feet.

4. Implement the Downtown trolley providinggreater accessibility to all of the Downtown foreveryone. Emphasize the connections between theCitywide bus system and the trolley with newenhanced shelters, signing and schedules.

5. Extend the Downtown trolley to serve immediateadjacent neighborhoods including MarquetteUniversity, Walkers Point, King Drive, Brewers Hilland Brady Street. The Brady Street loop is alreadysuccessful and an excellent prototype.

Map A

Map B

Map C

M i l w a u k e e

170 NEIGHBORHOOD CONNECTIONS

Proposed land use for Neighborhood 10

Existing land use for Neighborhood 10 Neighborhood Strategic PlanningAreas

The Community Development Block GrantProgram defines the area surrounding

Downtown into 17 Neighborhood StrategicPlanning Areas. From these surrounding areas twocase studies were chosen to determine a methodolo-gy for strengthening these areas in a manner whichwould also benefit Downtown. Neighborhoods 10and 15 were chosen for land use, bus service andpedestrian precinct analysis.

Review of these two Neighborhood Plans revealedthat the existing neighborhood units do not con-form to the classic definition of a mixed-use, walka-ble neighborhood. A classic neighborhood is definedas an area of single and multiple use residentialbuildings focusing upon a mixed-use, civic and openspace core. It can be idealized as a circle defined inarea by a five-minute walking distance (1,300 to1,500 feet) from the core. This distance also appliesto the optimum walking distance to transit stops(pedestrian precinct). The classic neighborhood isapproximately 150 to 160 acres in size.

Analysis reveals that these areas are actually largeresidential districts; some could contain eight to 10classic neighborhoods. According to this definitionof a classic neighborhood there are 185 possibleneighborhoods within the 17 NeighborhoodStrategic Planning Area. These are hypotheticallyshown on the following map.

The existing land uses within Areas 10 and 15 wereanalyzed. Of particular significance was the locationof the commercial/retail uses. The traditional neigh-borhood has a center/core where retail/commercialuses are concentrated. Field visits to Areas 10 and15 revealed the existence of concentrated, historicmercantile architecture. This location and charactertestifies to the prior existence of significant, thrivingneighborhood retail and social centers linked toDowntown by a streetcar system. Further analysisrevealed that the "main streets" have been widenedand the sidewalks narrowed. These two actions indi-cate the supremacy of the automobile and a dimin-ished respect for the pedestrian. This change in pri-orities has undermined the cohesion of these cen-ters. Another repercussion disseminates non-resi-dential uses from the core into residential areas fur-ther undermining a walkable assemblage of uses.

Downtown will be more successful if it is well con-nected to and supported by healthy neighborhoods.The following methodology provides an analyticalprocess for recreating healthy neighborhoods.

First the existing bus lines were mapped. Thenexisting land uses were overlaid on the bus lines. Byapplying the ideal neighborhood template first tothose locations with a bus line and commercial landuse concentrations a pattern began to emerge. Thebus lines serve many of the traditionally definedneighborhood centers. When the pedestrianprecinct circle was applied to the remaining areas, itbecame clear that most were served by a bus linewithin a five to eight minute walk. The bus lines arewell located.

Unfortunately many of the bus lines did not pro-vide direct access to the Downtown. Patrons mustincur long trips with one or more transfers to reachDowntown. Further analysis revealed that the head-way and the complexity of the system make it diffi-cult and cumbersome to use. Also, the image of bustransit, particularly the bus stops does not make it

D o w n t o w n P l a n

171page title

Proposed land use for Neighborhood 15

Existing land use for Neighborhood 15an entirely positive experience. The type of vehicles,stops, location, and routes need to be reevaluated tobest serve every neighborhood as designated on the"Neighborhood Map."

Overlaying the bus lines on the land uses indicatesthat many of the pedestrian precincts do not have aclearly defined core. These areas will have to bereconstituted in order to evolve into a transit-ori-ented neighborhood. In areas without a core, someretail, a small park, transit stop and improvement tothe pedestrian realms are recommended.

Adopting the neighborhood overlay concept(defined size with mixed-use core) and one or moreof the linkage recommendations, every neighbor-hood within the 17 Strategic Planning Areas can beenhanced by the Downtown and the Downtownwill be enhanced by the neighborhoods.

Restructuring the connections to Downtown isrequired. This can take several forms. General rec-ommendations for identifying and reconstitutingneighborhoods are provided:

1. Redefine classic neighborhoods and pedestrianprecincts based upon the five-minute walking dis-tance. The center of each neighborhood should con-tain some mixed-use buildings and a transit stop.

2. Mixed and multiple-use commercial cores shouldbe located where two bus lines intersect, particular-ly when mixed-use retail currently exists there.

3. Between the mixed-use cores both sides of signif-icant streets with transit should be edged withmedium-density residential uses.

4. Maintain existing institutional locations and uses.

5. Create more parks, particularly at the neighbor-hood scale.

6. Recreate traditional streetscapes.

7. Increase services and shorten headway on criticallines. Improve bus stops and pedestrian realms inneighborhood areas.

8. As redevelopment of the Park East Freeway andthe Post Office occur, implement the City roommulti-modal transfer facilities thereby making theconnections to all of the Downtown easier andquicker.

9. Implement the Satellite Accessed Transit System,an "on demand" van service that is neighborhoodfriendly.

10. Implement the streetcar network. This providesa circulator for Downtown that is able to carry sig-nificantly more passengers at lower operating coststhan the trolleys. The streetcar can be extended tothe University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee and upFond Du Lac Avenue connecting the Downtown tomany additional neighborhoods, educational facili-ties and job opportunities.

Adopting the neighborhood overlay concept(defined size with mixed-use core) and one or moreof the linkage recommendations, every neighbor-hood within the 17 Strategic Planning Areas can beenhanced by the Downtown and the Downtownwill be enhanced by the neighborhoods.

M i l w a u k e e

172 Implementation

Implementation

The implementation program for the plan hasthree parts: adoption and dissemination, regula-

tory review and the pursuit of the catalytic projects.

Adoption and Dissemination: the main goal of theplan is to influence private sector decisions regard-ing Downtown development. It is recommendedthat, through the existing partnership that spon-sored the plan, the plan (or summary of it) wouldbe widely distributed to property owners and poten-tial developers so that they will be aware of the typesand pattern of development that will foster a morevital Downtown. It is also recommended that theMilwaukee City Plan Commission adopts theDowntown Plan as part of the city’s ComprehensivePlan. This action will provide formal status to thePlan and establish it as an official guide for publicdecision making.

Regulatory Review: Upon adoption of the Plan, theDepartment of City Development should updatethe City’s Downtown zoning and other land useregulations to conform to the Plan. TheDepartment should also prepare design guidelinesapplicable to the Downtown development projectsthat are subject to discretionary review, such as pro-jects within redevelopment areas.

The Catalytic Projects: The implementation ofsome of the Phase One projects has begun; imple-mentation of the remaining Phase One projectsshould be started immediately. The Phase TwoContingency Projects represent sites that are notnow ready for redevelopment, but may becomeavailable in one to two years. The Department ofCity Development should continue to monitorthese sites so as to be able to guide owners or devel-opers at the appropriate time.

D o w n t o w n P l a n

173Bibliography

Bibliography

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SERIES

Market Study, Engineering, and Land Use Plan for the Menomonee Valley, October 1998

Milwaukee’s Principles of Urban Design, 1998

A Plan for Milwaukee's Lakefront, January 1994

Historic Preservation Planning Recommendations for Milwaukee's Central Business District,September 1993

PLANNING STUDIES

Beer Line "B" Master Plan and Neighborhood Code; prepared for the Redevelopment Authority of theCity of Milwaukee by Engberg Anderson Design Partnership, et. al.; May 1999.

Millenium Momentum Plan; prepared for Milwaukee World Festival, Inc., by Eppstein UhenArchitects; 1999.

Historic Third Ward Development Plan and Lake Access Study; prepared for the Historic Third WardAssociation by the Historic Preservation Institute of the School of Architecture and Urban Planning,University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee; February 1999.

North Harbor Tract Development Plan; prepared for the Board of Harbor Commissioners of the Cityof Milwaukee by JJR Incorporated, et. al.; draft 1998.

Marquette University Campus Identity and Beautification Plan; prepared for Marquette University bySasaki Associates; Fall 1998.

Redevelopment Plan for the Historic King Drive Business Improvement District, Milwaukee,Wisconsin; prepared by Trkla, Pettigrew, Allen & Payne, Inc. and Edwards & Associates, Inc. for theHistoric King Drive Business Improvement District and the Milwaukee Department of CityDevelopment; 1997.

The Avenues West Area: Urban Design, Market and Development Concepts Analysis; prepared byTrkla, Pettigrew, Allen & Payne, Inc. and Melaniphy & Associates, Inc. for the Avenues WestAssociation and the Milwaukee Department of City Development; October 1988.