http://urbanmilwaukee.com/2014/07/11/op-ed-build-nba-arena-next-to-potawatomi-casino/
Build NBA Arena Next to Potawatomi Casino
City could create TIF district in valley on little-used land, state assemblyman proposes.
By Rep. Josh Zepnick - Jul 11th, 2014 10:05 am
The 5-county sales tax created to build Miller Park for the Milwaukee Brewers continues to ache in taxpayer minds. The shadow of that political fight looms over the plans to create a new location for the Bucks to play NBA, which is frankly not America's favorite pastime. Having said that, I applaud my friend Herb Kohl's desire to continue his passion and investment in the team; he is a genuine leader who has helped build Milwaukee for the better.
But, the current debate over a new arena is flawed and does not reflect what we learned from the Miller Park financing effort. Let's start with biggest impediment to a smart discussion: insistence on a downtown location and especially near the current footprint or somehow adjacent to an expanded convention center.
There is absolutely no serious economic argument that a new Bucks area would catalyze increased economic development Downtown. There are many cities that have successfully built just outside their central business district in what would be called "underinvested areas" and it works: Chicago, Washington DC, and Portland, OR to name a few.
The Trailblazers play in a revitalization area just east of downtown across the Willamette River with easy access to Interstate 5 and Portland's successful MAX light rail system. The Bulls play just west of Greektown with Interstate and transit access. And, in Washington DC, the Verizon Center sits in Chinatown with Metro access and easy route to I-395. All three cities have strong economies, are pedestrian and transit friendly, and their downtown commercial activity appears to be healthy even with heavy suburban options.
Milwaukee has for a longtime struggled with its Downtown, particularly the West vs. East tug of war for economic development. East of the River has historically been the more successful while west of the river gets less juice, complicated by the huge dominance of large public structures that don't generate tax dollars: Milwaukee Police HQ, jails, County Courthouse, MATC, etc.
The idea that a new arena would boost things like housing, shopping or tourism ONLY if the facility is located Downtown does not fit reality or other cities experiences. Yet we as taxpayers and in my case as an elected official, are being asked to pull our wallets out to help pay the bills.
Raising taxes or, even worse, creation of a Super TIF would be a slap in the face to Milwaukee taxpayers, whose neighboring counties have taken votes to block raising taxes. A Super TIF is simply taking money out of the General Fund, using locally generated sales and income taxes with a district boundary, and paying for the arena instead of what they are designed for: paying for universities and technical colleges, K-12 public schools, transportation projects, health care and safety net service, public safety and prisons.
Instead, there are other options and one of them happens to be in my Legislative District, an area that is ripe for new neighbors. And the location I have in mind follows the thinking and planning I believe is necessary for a successful project regardless of where it ends up: minimal use of public dollar with no tax increase, connecting to a larger vision for Milwaukee's Downtown, seeking out a distressed or "under-utilized" piece of land, and importantly, strong connections to the Interstate and transit system.
Using a more traditional TIF model, the new NBA arena would fit perfectly just north of the Potowatomi Casino and Hotel off 13th and Canal. Existing structures are owned by the city of Milwaukee which uses this land for DPW trucks and traffic signal stuff. The other location that would involve negotiation and/or eminent domain action, is the Keep Greater Milwaukee Beautiful parcel, across the Menomonee Canal.
Neither KGMB or the city are now paying taxes on those properties, making a TIF more useful and effective.
There are huge benefits to this location:
It's currently under-utilized and contributes little to the tax base of the city.
Other options exist for City DPW vehicles and equipment other than the Menomonee Valley.
Similarly, KGMB services could be connected with nearby Mill Valley or Miller Compressing.
I-94 eastbound has an exit at the doorstep of 13th street and St. Paul.
I-94/43 North has an exit at 10th street, seconds away from this location.
Alternative highway access is already provided for I-94 via Canal Street at Miller Park.
The 6th Street viaduct connecting with Canal Street, provides further auto and bus access from Downtown to the north, and to the South Side through Walker's Point and the up and coming Fifth Ward.
The Milwaukee Intermodal Station is blocks away and a TIF project could include financing to extend the downtown Streetcar to the new Arena and head north to Marquette University, ultimately connecting with the Convention Center, Pabst Brewery development, and Park East corridor.
Most likely, the proposal would site the arena where KGMB is located, with some additional acquisition necessary.
Parking structures would go where the City DPW property sits.
Heated and properly lighted sidewalks could connect Marquette University campus via 13th street with the new arena — no small point given that Marquette's basketball team would play at the arena including the games during NCAA playoffs.
Skywalks could connect the Potawatomi Casino and Hotel, keeping in mind the bulk of Bucks games are during cold or inclement weather. To the extent out of towners and tourists are key markets for NBA games, having a nearby attraction like a casino and hotel is important. On the flipside, the likelihood of someone coming to a Bucks game, dropping over $100 on tickets and parking, and then saying "heck, let's go shopping for an hour or two and spend more money" is pretty unrealistic.
If fiscally workable, the TIF could build further public support and help the city of Milwaukee by adding non-contiguous parcels in the area for a complete commercial and residential overhaul: improved sidewalks, sewers and streets, greening and rehab of older housing stock, and workforce development assistance for under and un-employed residents. Likely areas would be just north of Marquette and west of the Freeway; as well as the South Side from S. 35th east to Walkers Point and south to Greenfield Avenue. TIF money could improve nearby local, neighborhood and downtown roads as well as improve the 16th Street Viaduct, with better valley access.
Along with creative TIF structuring, selling off the existing Bradley Center property could yield a significant contribution to construction costs. Similarly, that area of Downtown is now cleared for construction when it comes to an expanded Convention Center. Re-opening parts of 4th street, 5th street and using transit as a connector, could mean a seamless "district" which goes from Boston Store on the South and the existing Wisconsin Center footprint, all the way north to the Pabst development and Park East Corridor. This allows for hotel, commercial and retail developments, and importantly housing. Expanded downtown housing is critical to improving the utilization of land west of the river and would help bridge Wisconsin Avenue up to McKinley where the new Interstate ramps effectively serve a future marketplace at Park East. This bodes well for King Drive development over the long haul.
It makes more sense to put the new arena, which is almost totally a one-stop destination, in and out for events, in a revitalization area, and push for bigger and better in the current Wisconsin Convention Center and Bradley Center territory: more convention space, more hotel space, more street level retail, and more housing options.
And, as noted, the 13th street site, is easily accessible to Interstate traffic, local roads, existing major attractions like Potawatomi, and Marquette University. But it's also a hop, skip and jump over to 6th street where the Convention center sits now. Grand Avenue Mall is nearby. And, with an expanded streetcar route, visitors and Milwaukee residents themselves could never once use their car to enjoy any of these locations: Downtown/central business district, Casino/Hotel, Harley Museum, Convention Center, Pabst and Park East developments, MATC campus, and other important government office locations as well as, of course, the new arena itself.
South side neighborhoods from the 5th Ward to Walkers Point, all the way west to Clarke Square and the Layton Boulevard West Neighborhood/Silver City Main street would benefit from the nearby economic development as well as any residential TIF, transit access, road improvements, etc.
Not one penny of this would come from a sales tax increase. No diversion using a Super TIF which would drain the general fund of sales and income taxes in already tight fiscal conditions. Potential financial investments could come from a seat at the table for Potawatomi, Marquette, the City of Milwaukee, Milwaukee County and of course state dollars could be positioned for modest investments via: WisDOT, DWD, DNR, Commerce and Tourism Departments. Clearly, a financial role for the current Bradley Center and Wisconsin Center is going to be critical.
As will be the generous contributions from team owners themselves and Herb Kohl. Nothing in life is perfect and neither is this plan. But I think it's worth discussing. With this caution, which may be echoed by many, many other elected officials: Do not expect my vote to raise taxes or harm public services in Milwaukee via a Super TIF.
Josh Zepnick represents the Ninth Assembly District which includes the majority of the Menomonee Valley. He currently sits on the Legislative Council study committee reviewing the use of TIF plans in Wisconsin.
Bad.
Name the team Warriors and you have a deal
Quote from: PTM on July 11, 2014, 01:22:43 PM
Bad.
What's bad? The location? Or are you in favor of no new arena and staying in the BC?
Quote from: Heisenberg on July 11, 2014, 01:27:59 PM
What's bad? The location? Or are you in favor of no new arena and staying in the BC?
The location.
So people won't come to drop money on parking and a ticket and then go shopping...but they'd drop money on parking and a ticket and then go to a casino? Really?
And comparing the valley site to Chinatown in DC is asinine.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on July 11, 2014, 01:55:49 PM
So people won't come to drop money on parking and a ticket and then go shopping...but they'd drop money on parking and a ticket and then go to a casino? Really?
Yeah that to me didn't make much sense.
"There is absolutely no serious economic argument that a new Bucks area would catalyze increased economic development Downtown."
But there are in the Valley? Hmmmm, I wonder how he comes to that conclusion?
"Instead, there are other options and one of them happens to be in my Legislative District, an area that is ripe for new neighbors."
Ahh....there we go.
I don't think this dude knows where this location is.
Directly north of the casino is Valley Fields.
There is a city lot but it's WAAAAAY to the west of the casino, and on the north side of Canal.
I think I've seen DPW trucks in a facility to the east of Valley Fields, but that's on the east side of the 16th Street viaduct as well.
In any case, I don't think you can build an NBA size arena in the land between Canal and the river.
Even worse, he didn't bother researching how the NCAA tournament works:
QuoteHeated and properly lighted sidewalks could connect Marquette University campus via 13th street with the new arena — no small point given that Marquette's basketball team would play at the arena including the games during NCAA playoffs.
Yeah, no, that can't happen by NCAA rule.
I'm glad people are proposing other solutions than next to the current BC. Other solutions could change the city dynamic.
In the go big or go home category...
I'd be good with this idea if they would open up the Menomonee River down in the valley so boats could go all the way up to the stadium, Potawatomi and Miller Park. That would be fun but not worth the $$$
Now, back to more realistic ideas and conversations...
Any proposal authored by someone whose name is preceded with the title "Rep." or "Sen." is complete schlock.
It may be a good idea, but I'd like to hear from someone who is more tuned into the community's interests than their own.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on July 11, 2014, 01:55:49 PM
So people won't come to drop money on parking and a ticket and then go shopping...but they'd drop money on parking and a ticket and then go to a casino? Really?
And comparing the valley site to Chinatown in DC is asinine.
What I thought he was saying there was that someone already in town staying at the casino is more likely to spend a few extra dollars and go to a game than a person who already paid to park+ticket is to spend more money while they are downtown. I could have read it wrong.
Quote from: Brewtown Andy on July 11, 2014, 02:04:13 PM
I don't think this dude knows where this location is.
Directly north of the casino is Valley Fields.
There is a city lot but it's WAAAAAY to the west of the casino, and on the north side of Canal.
I think I've seen DPW trucks in a facility to the east of Valley Fields, but that's on the east side of the 16th Street viaduct as well.
In any case, I don't think you can build an NBA size arena in the land between Canal and the river.
Even worse, he didn't bother researching how the NCAA tournament works:
Yeah, no, that can't happen by NCAA rule.
Yeah, I really don't know how someone representing a district can't even tell where things are in that district. As far as I can tell 13th doesn't intersect Canal. Agree on your other points. There's no way they would build a skywalk across a city block and the canal to reach an arena that may or may not even fit there.
Aside from those issues, what is there for me to do there? I live here and am not really interested in going to the Harley museum more than once. Same with most of the attractions down there. A bar, on the other hand, I can turn into a pre or post-game tradition. In fact, a lot of people have. Major Goolsby's, the Brat House, and several other downtown bars already have solid traditions in this vein.
He also fails to mention that the other space proposed, a block north of the current location, has most of the same benefits. Vacant lot that no one seems to want to develop, already owned by the city (I believe), you could still tear down the BC and put in businesses/housing, and you could open 4th street back up. All while maintaining similar walking distance to downtown bars and Marquette.
Reopen 4th st? There aren't any parts of 4th st are closed, are there? 5th st is pretty much closed through downtown and I don't see much purpose in reopening any of those sections with the convention center there.
Quote from: source? on July 11, 2014, 02:39:54 PM
What I thought he was saying there was that someone already in town staying at the casino is more likely to spend a few extra dollars and go to a game than a person who already paid to park+ticket is to spend more money while they are downtown. I could have read it wrong.
May have been what he meant...but he's wrong. I go to the BC, drop money on tickets and parking, and then spend
extra $$ shopping several times each season. Been doing it for years, in fact. Yet he thinks it's "unrealistic." Not only is it realistic, it actually happens. And when I do, I see plenty of other people clad in MU attire at local businesses, from downtown, to the Third Ward, to Walker's Point.
Quote from: bork on July 11, 2014, 03:12:32 PM
Reopen 4th st? There aren't any parts of 4th st are closed, are there? 5th st is pretty much closed through downtown and I don't see much purpose in reopening any of those sections with the convention center there.
Yeah, sorry. I mis-typed that. My bad.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on July 11, 2014, 03:15:59 PM
May have been what he meant...but he's wrong. I go to the BC, drop money on tickets and parking, and then spend
extra $$ shopping several times each season. Been doing it for years, in fact. Yet he thinks it's "unrealistic." Not only is it realistic, it actually happens. And when I do, I see plenty of other people clad in MU attire at local businesses, from downtown, to the Third Ward, to Walker's Point.
Agreed that he is wrong. That's just my take on what he was saying.
Quote from: source? on July 11, 2014, 03:20:43 PM
Yeah, sorry. I mis-typed that. My bad.
It wasn't just you, it was mentioned in the article as well.
The location of the BC is excellent now. It's ashame Miller Park wasn't sited downtown. We love staying at a downtown hotel and walking to games, concerts, plays and restaurants. We would go to more Brewer games if if it was walkable.
Quote from: Stretchdeltsig on July 11, 2014, 03:28:33 PM
The location of the BC is excellent now. It's ashame Miller Park wasn't sited downtown. We love staying at a downtown hotel and walking to games, concerts, plays and restaurants. We would go to more Brewer games if if it was walkable.
It would be nice in some ways, but I really like tailgating. That's a lot more difficult to do in a parking structure. Tailgating isn't a huge part of basketball culture, but it's a big deal in a lot of baseball/football towns.
It's an interesting theory (even if the logistics worked), but you're just gutting downtown and investing 500million in another part of town.
It's not really stimulating growth. It's just redistribution.
Plus all the infrastructure is already there with the current location, with freeway onramps, parking, etc. I imagine it would cost a lot more to build an arena in any other location that would require all that additional work.
Quote from: source? on July 11, 2014, 02:39:54 PM
What I thought he was saying there was that someone already in town staying at the casino is more likely to spend a few extra dollars and go to a game than a person who already paid to park+ticket is to spend more money while they are downtown. I could have read it wrong.
The way I read it he said it was unlikely that a person would spend extra money. He was debunking the premise that the team will bring additional spending into the area. I know when I go to MU games that I rarely spend money downtown. However, we almost always stop at Kopps in Whitefish Bay on the way home. There are always other people there wearing gold at Kopps after an MU game.
Quote from: Canned Goods n Ammo on July 11, 2014, 03:37:55 PM
It's an interesting theory (even if the logistics worked), but you're just gutting downtown and investing 500million in another part of town.
It's not really stimulating growth. It's just redistribution.
Yep, take a pass.
I heard that Potawatomi offered to build MU an exact replica of Valley Fields on the opposite side of the river, so they could use that space for their hotel. Don't know if it's true or not.
I'm with Chicos on this one- get the Potawatomi tribe to endorse the Warriors name, and we're in.
Quote from: LloydMooresLegs on July 11, 2014, 05:46:05 PM
I'm with Chicos on this one- get the Potawatomi tribe to endorse the Warriors name, and we're in.
I third that!
Quote from: GooooMarquette on July 11, 2014, 01:55:49 PM
So people won't come to drop money on parking and a ticket and then go shopping...but they'd drop money on parking and a ticket and then go to a casino? Really?
Actually makes perfect sense. They'll go to a casino because in their minds, they're going to win back what they just spent on parking and a ticket and come out ahead. That won't happen with shopping.
Might not reflect good judgement--but that's the logic behind the comment.
It may work.
But it also means relocation of neighborhoods and further gentrification.