Arena Situation

[Jimmy Lemke]

Link: Journal stands to gain (http://pantheru.com/2014/09/journal-stands-to-gain/)

[Jimmy Lemke]

Link: JSOnline: Mone, UWM want to stay (http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/school-leaders-not-happy-with-talk-of-tearing-down-uw-milwaukee-panther-arena-b99368971z1-278961801.html)

Don Walker is the best friend UWM has in the MJS. I was very happy to see him get the UWM perspective on this.

[lutzow10]

Can i suggest a change in the color or boldness or underlining links? They are the exact same as the regular font and it would be impossible to tell otherwise without the "LINK:" in front of them. This is for the pantherU theme of course.

[illwauk]

MSG has a 5,000-seat theater attached to its complex. Perhaps a compromise can be reached where a smaller arena (5,000-6,000 seats) that could double as a theater could be built as part of the new arena complex. The smaller arena could also replace the Milwaukee Theater and serve as a home to the Admirals and Wave as well.

[Jimmy Lemke]

Can i suggest a change in the color or boldness or underlining links? They are the exact same as the regular font and it would be impossible to tell otherwise without the "LINK:" in front of them. This is for the pantherU theme of course.

No doubt. I'm always tweaking.

[MU/Panther]

If Panther Arena comes down, the Panthers will have to go back to the KC. They need to make a push to play half of their home games at the new Arena.

How does one get a building torn down. If the WCD says we are not selling, there is nothing the Bucks can do. Is that correct or is there more to it?

[Jimmy Lemke]

I don't buy that the Arena is going to get torn down. That's a load of hogwash. If any state taxpayer money is used to take down the Arena, then there MUST be money out of that set aside to build Milwaukee an on-campus arena. The Klotsche Center is NOT an option for any long-term scenario.

[BBF]

Jimmy, when it comes to the question of how tearing down the Arena would affect the University, the main players in this thing probably have a spectrum of opinion ranging from ignorance to apathy to hostility. The billionaires from NY probably never heard of us. What has the JS ever done for us that makes you think they'd have a moment's qualm about the effect on UWM if they have an opportunity to make money on the deal? Marquette detests the idea that their old home has our name on it -- something the new Bucks arena would never have for them.

That's why it's important that the University and its constituents put the political pressure on any government actors in this deal.

It's a shame we can't count on the JS to be an honest broker in this discussion, because when it comes time to squeeze the public for hundreds of millions in direct support or infrastructure improvement -- and I guarantee you that time will come -- an honest broker would be putting an aerial view of downtown Milwaukee on the front page and asking why it's being suggested that the public should underwrite much higher costs by tearing down working facilities like the Arena when there is open space for a new mega-arena immediately adjacent to the BC to the north. For that matter, if the pitch is that a new basketball arena will spur development, then building it in the middle of what is already a highly developed area is moronic. On the other hand, if you build it into the Park East corridor, it would open up the possibility of redevelopment in the light industrial area west of Schlitz Park, an area that shares some of the characteristics of the third ward as far as retail/commercial/residential potential.

[Jimmy Lemke]

Not to mention opens the area south of the Park East currently taken by the BC for development. Which, I may add, will fetch higher taxes than the P.E. Corridor will (Oh, and BTW, will actually get developed and not just sit vacant for years).

Another thing that would prevent the Arena from being used:

The only way they can make it happen is if the Bradley Center can be used in the meantime. For that to happen, both State and Kilbourn will need to be closed down, since the Arena space from north to south isn't big enough for the Bradley Center to sit, let alone big enough for a building 150% the size of the BC. They will also need to build over the surface lot between the Arena and the Convention Center, which eliminates any possibility of the convention center being expanded to the north ever. We know the Convention Center is good, but it needs to be about 50% larger than it is right now to make it an elite convention center, the kind that brings in all kinds of conventions that the current space cannot draw because of its lack of size. The size of the convention center is very important, because while the Bucks have 41 dates, the Admirals have 25 and the Golden Eagles have 18, the fact of the matter is the wide majority of time - especially from May through September - there's nothing going on in the Bradley Center. There are musical acts, to be sure, but in the warm summer months many of those acts opt for outdoor venues around Milwaukee, which leaves the Bradley Center unused and downtown lacking a huge tourist attraction. A bigger convention center will draw the kind of summer conventions our downtown craves, which brings in all kinds of tourism revenue for the city and state, and allows lots of business to get paid - a lot. If they built the Bradley Center attached to the Convention Center, that's possible, but the Convention Center doesn't need huge arena space - they already have arena floor space to offer with the Arena. They need more conventional convention (heh) space, something that cannot be provided in the arena.

[BBF]

Glad to see someone else is looking at the map. You are exactly right that there is insufficient space north to south between State and Kilbourn to build a modern NBA sized arena. The only way to enlarge that footprint (without tearing the BC down first, which is absurd unless the Bucks plan to play at the Klotsche themselves for two years) is to build over Kilbourn. So if you're doing that, what happens to all that happy horsesh!t about Kilbourn being the "grand vista" or however it was referred to in the plan that first proposed demolishing the Arena? It makes no sense. On the other hand, the already vacant land north of the BC between 4th and 6th and Highland and McKinley is big enough for anything this side of Jerry's World.

By the way, someone at the Athletic Department or the Wisconsin Center District is on the ball. If you zoom in on the Google map of that part of downtown, the Arena is already correctly labeled the "UW-Milwaukee Panther Arena." Cool!

[Jimmy Lemke]

The repeated line to me in recent weeks has been "We will be at the table."

[Tyrunner0097]

http://www.biztimes.com/article/20141030/BREAKINGNEWS/141039961

If true, the Journal Square will be the site for the new arena.

[MU/Panther]

I'm guessing putting lower bowl seating underground, saves on space.

[Mike-waukee]

Lemke is on twitter and spitting fire.

[Jimmy Lemke]

The way it sounds, they may be able to build it down into the ground, which would lead to a significantly smaller footprint. I would hope that if that happens, the new Bucks arena and the Wisconsin Center District should get folded in together to maximize the usable convention space.

Sounds like Major Goolsby's will move into Turner Hall.

[MU/Panther]

The way it sounds, they may be able to build it down into the ground, which would lead to a significantly smaller footprint. I would hope that if that happens, the new Bucks arena and the Wisconsin Center District should get folded in together to maximize the usable convention space.

Sounds like Major Goolsby's will move into Turner Hall.

So, everyone would be a winner!

[Mike-waukee]

Absolutely!

[Jimmy Lemke]

This is what I know: if the Bucks are planning to build east to the River and create a riverfront arena, where they don't touch the UWM Arena, it's going to be the "everybody wins" scenario. If they try to take over the Arena, they've got a real big fight on their hands. Fall of 2017 wouldn't happen.

[MU/Panther]

Listen, I would guess the Bucks owner don't want to piss off the Wave and UWM. I'm not saying the basketball part of it, I'm saying the school as a whole. The Bucks want to be friends with everyone. That's makes them richer!!

[Mike-waukee]

We need to be all over this. Any move to encroach upon our space is going to result in a fight. While I'm not a fan of Gimbel and the Center District annoys me a lot, the two groups need to get in lockstep and block 4th street.

[Jimmy Lemke]

Listen, I would guess the Bucks owner don't want to piss off the Wave and UWM. I'm not saying the basketball part of it, I'm saying the school as a whole. The Bucks want to be friends with everyone. That's makes them richer!!

If they can't make everyone happy, they'd screw us.

[BBF]

I posted this on the KK site and will repeat it here, with some additional comments:

Call me cynical but I smell a rat. My office window directly overlooks the JS site, the Panther Arena and the Bradley Center. I'm looking at all three right now. There is no way an arena with the footprint of the BC can fit on the JS site alone. That site is substantially smaller than the BC site. If you reconfigured an arena vertically and built it edge to edge from street to street -- 3rd to 4th, State to Kilbourn, and buried half of it, so that the upper tiers of the auditorium well above street level might actually have to extend over those surrounding streets, I suppose you might shoehorn a reduced footprint into this site. But I truly doubt there would be any place for a plaza or grand entrance, and I can't imagine a new arena being built without that in this age.

My concern is that this could be the camel's nose in the tent. They cut a deal with the JS, then drip by drip -- with the JS leading the charge, of course, to protect its economic interest in the deal -- the narrative begins to form that the engineering and design is proving too complicated and expensive because of the site limitations and it would all be so much easier if the arena site could span 4th street. Bye bye Milwaukee Panther Arena. If you want precedent go back to the earliest days of the talk about replacing County Stadium. Bud Selig, in his most brilliant move ever, announces that the Brewers will build a new stadium on their own dime. By doing so, he takes full command of the planning, destroying any chance for a downtown stadium like has been built in every other major league city. And by the time we're actually building a new baseball stadium in the valley, where there is no hope of leveraged development, the whole cost is on the taxpayers anyway.

Fool me once...


Here's my additional comment. I spoke with Frank yesterday and as he put it to me: "I don't get pushed easily." I have known Frank for years and that's not hyperbole. If the Bucks or the JS or MU or the politicals decide to push to encroach on (i.e., destroy) the UW-Milwaukee Panther Arena, they had better have deep lobbying and litigation budgets, and as Jimmy says, they had better be able to convince the NBA to suspend their ultimatum, because there's no way it's going to be resolved by 2017.

[BBF]

Jimmy, you are missing something very critical to this analysis. The new Arena CAN'T extend to the river from the JS site. The block east of 4th street is occupied entirely by the Milwaukee County Historical Society building -- a designated landmark, I believe --and Pere Marquette Park. You'd have as much a chance of building on that property as you would of tearing down the Public Library, City Hall or St. Josaphat's Basilica to do so. Not happening.

[BBF]

Meanwhile, there are two vacant city blocks IMMEDIATELY adjacent to the BC. The mind reels.

[Jimmy Lemke]

The new facility wouldn't need to be the size of the Bradley Center, since a great deal of it would go underground.

It's entirely possible that Lasry and Edens are going to be developing the Journal land to go with a new facility on the Bradley Center space. Who knows.

[BBF]

The new facility wouldn't need to be the size of the Bradley Center, since a great deal of it would go underground.

It's entirely possible that Lasry and Edens are going to be developing the Journal land to go with a new facility on the Bradley Center space. Who knows.

So where do the Bucks play while the BC is torn down and a new arena is built on the same footprint? That's at least a two season situation. Could be three. If they are buying the JS property for ancillary development it could only mean they expect to build on the Panther Arena/Milwaukee Theater site. Since they can hardly announce that with no buy-in from the WCD, it would be hard to believe they are looking at the JS site for anything other than a site -- or at least a partial site -- for the new arena itself. OnMilwaukee.com sure as hell didn't prepare that rendering of a new arena on the JS site. It came from someone with an interest.

[Mike-waukee]

Looking at Google Maps, it looks like they could make it work if they take out 3rd street.

They better not take the Arena.

[TheSultan]

We need to be all over this. Any move to encroach upon our space is going to result in a fight. While I'm not a fan of Gimbel and the Center District annoys me a lot, the two groups need to get in lockstep and block 4th street.


I'm sure that will go over well in the community.

[Jimmy Lemke]

I'm sure that will go over well in the community.

Pretty sure he meant symbolically.

[Tyrunner0097]

So where do the Bucks play while the BC is torn down and a new arena is built on the same footprint? That's at least a two season situation. Could be three.

The only possible solution if that were to happen would be they would have to play at the Kohl Center. That's the only arena in the state that could host NBA basketball, at least in my opinion.

[Mike-waukee]

How would it work with season ticket holders? Isnt it big enough in the space between the BMOHBC and the Park East corridor to build a new arena?

[Tyrunner0097]

http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/bucks-eye-journal-building-milwaukee-theatre-block-for-new-arena-b99382471z1-281198081.html

If this is true, then I hope that the university makes a stand here. They have to make a stand and flatly say, "If you force us out of our arena so you can build yours, then you have to do one of two things: Either help pay (At least 20% or 30%) for our new arena, either a brand new one or a major overhaul of Klotsche, OR you're going to let us play in the new arena, not Marquette."

[BBF]

Well it sure didn't take long to expose the fiction that the JS site alone is big enough for the Billionaire Boys Club, did it?

A few random thoughts:

It always amazes me when people choose to risk years of litigation when there are far more reasonable alternatives available.

The JS's cheerleader role in this is reprehensible. Lucius Niemann would roll over in his grave to see what has happened to that organization. Its only interest is shareholder value.

Any thought that either the billionaires or the politicians are going to pony up for a separate arena for Milwaukee is extremely wishful thinking. The parties involved in this simply won't care unless they are made to care.

The Theater space isn't needed for this project. This is all about destroying the Arena.

Marquette would change its tune on all of this very quickly if political pressure was applied to demand that the new arena authority give first -- or at least equal -- preference to the city's public University in return for the hundreds of millions in public dollars that will be spent to enrich the billionaires. My guess is that the Bucks have no interest in accommodating three basketball teams.

There are two vacant city blocks IMMEDIATELY adjacent to the BC to the north. The political, litigation, demolition and construction costs of building there are immensely lower than the JS/Arena site. It's about an additional 90 second walk from Wisconsin Avenue. If you are walking slowly. As if anyone's walking from there anyway. Moreover, building on that site (which is not even underused -- it's UNused) would both create the opportunity for infill development to the south once the BC is demolished AND open up the neighborhood north of McKinley to redevelopment similar to the Third Ward. Brewer's Hill to the northeast is already established. This would be a tremendous opportunity for the City. Somebody needs to tell the billionaires that if they want public money running to the hundreds of millions (they do, oh my they do) that's where they're going to build -- and they're going to like it.

[lutzow10]

The bucks ownership have no place in this city and should have no part in deciding any of this. They obviously have no clue about milwaukee and dont care either. They can go **** themselves with the shovel they are using to dig this hole for themselves.

[TheSultan]

Marquette would change its tune on all of this very quickly if political pressure was applied to demand that the new arena authority give first -- or at least equal -- preference to the city's public University in return for the hundreds of millions in public dollars that will be spent to enrich the billionaires. My guess is that the Bucks have no interest in accommodating three basketball teams.



http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/bucks-eye-journal-building-milwaukee-theatre-block-for-new-arena-b99382471z1-281198081.html
If this is true, then I hope that the university makes a stand here. They have to make a stand and flatly say, "If you force us out of our arena so you can build yours, then you have to do one of two things: Either help pay (At least 20% or 30%) for our new arena, either a brand new one or a major overhaul of Klotsche, OR you're going to let us play in the new arena, not Marquette."


Why should UWM get priority times for a program that gets a quarter of the attendance that Marquette does? It's better for the new arena to give priority to those who draw the biggest crowds.

[Tyrunner0097]

I'm just saying that the university needs to make their voice heard if they are going to have any say about this. If nothing else, "shout long enough and eventually somebody is going to see what all the fuss is about."

I just don't want to see UWM just roll over again.

[TheSultan]

I'm just saying that the university needs to make their voice heard if they are going to have any say about this. If nothing else, "shout long enough and eventually somebody is going to see what all the fuss is about."

I just don't want to see UWM just roll over again.


Well I can't blame you (or UWM) for that. Clearly they deserve a reasonable alternative should the Arena be sacrificed as part of this process. But it shouldn't be at the expense of Marquette, which is by every measure a bigger and more popular basketball program. I'm sure President Lovell would agree since he is interested in building partnerships between the two schools.

[Tyrunner0097]

I'm sure President Lovell would agree since he is interested in building partnerships between the two schools.

I would like to think that will mean he will help going to bat for us.

Still, I'm not going to make any conclusions until the owners make it clear what they want to do. They're sending out a bunch of mixed signals, with nothing certain on what's going on.

[Jimmy Lemke]

Just because the Milwaukee Panthers don't average 15,000 doesn't mean we don't get a say. I don't think we're the ones with the last word, either. But this whole idea that UWM is irrelevant and the Bucks picked their space so we just have to live with it is ludicrous. There are many people, Bucks and Marquette fans included, who don't want to see their historical home

The line that David Uihlein gave about how the new Bucks stadium should go where the Arena is because that's their historical home is a joke. The sentiment is a wash when you're bulldozing that historical home to put up your new home.

I think a far more valid argument for the Bucks is that it puts them next door to Old World 3rd Street and the bar district - people want entertainment before and after events. But the fact of the matter is that this new stadium is EXACTLY how we fix the problem of the empty Park East corridor. That space is too big to be developed on its own without a stadium.

With a stadium, development around it would happen on its own. To make sure the best possible development happens, though, we need to blank out the tax code in the area for 5-10 years, including construction costs, for development surrounding the stadium. That allows the area around the stadium to be built up concurrently with the stadium, thus turning the Park East corridor into an immediate bustling environment - and much closer to the Schlitz Park business area than their proposed space.

Meanwhile, this post from September 27th looks all the more prophetic - Link: Journal Stands to Gain (http://pantheru.com/2014/09/journal-stands-to-gain/)

[TheSultan]

This was a discussion on MUScoop a few weeks ago. There is a big reason why Park East is a poor site for something this big. It will increase costs tremendously due to bad soil.

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=44755.msg653578#msg653578

[BBF]

Right -- we should worry about "soil conditions" on the Park East site when the JS site is probably a toxic cleanup waiting to happen.

Let's just say muscoop is not a very reliable or unbiased source for geological advice.

And as Jimmy said, the current attendance at games is irrelevant. The more interesting political question: should $300-400 million in PUBLIC money be devoted to benefit a private enterprise and a private religious institution at the direct expense of the city's public university? I eagerly await how the politicos will answer that question in a four county region that has something like 100,000 living alumni of UWM.

[TheSultan]

Jimmy didn't say that "current attendance is irrelevant." At all. He said "Just because the Milwaukee Panthers don't average 15,000 doesn't mean we don't get a say." Which is absolutely true. I agree that UWM should not be left cold without a suitable place to play. If that means that the Arena stays...or UWM plays in the Bradley Center...or they leverage a workable on-campus arena, that's great.

Of course current attendance is relevant. Say what you want about the use of taxpayer money, but the arena is going to be built for the citizens of Milwaukee and the surrounding area for their entertainment. And Marquette basketball has been judged to be more worthy of the investment of entertainment dollars than UWM. That is simply an objective fact no matter what your own hopes and desires might be. I mean, if the 100k alumni of UWM cared so much about their basketball team, shouldn't they be able to draw more people to their games?

And if you have a problem with Marquette as a private enterprise benefiting from the use of public dollars, so will the Bucks and the Admirals. And last I checked, they weren't public entities either. Same with all the private concerts, shows, etc. that will use it. And Marquette pays rent to play in the BC. It isn't free, and the new arena won't either.

[Jimmy Lemke]

Posted this on the MU board. Part 1 of 2:

I'm going to paint the picture from our point of view, so you guys at the very least understand where we're coming from.

A few years ago, Mike Lovell - then a total novice at running a university from an athletics standpoint - looked to commissioner Jon LeCrone from the Horizon League to help replace Rick Costello, driven out in disgrace for not firing a soccer coach who made Bobby Knight look tame and well-tempered. LeCrone set up UWM with his friend and former colleague, Andy Geiger, retired and most recently the AD at Ohio State.

On the surface it was a big get. This guy was the AD who brought Ohio State back to prominence, the guy who hired Jim Tressel and Thad Matta. It showed that he was a name that drew attention - when George Koonce was introduced, you had a couple local TV guys. When Costello was hired, very few local media personalities showed up. When Geiger showed up, they had to change venues because the local sports media came out to see it. Below the surface, plenty of fans questioned whether or not he was well-equipped to run a mid-major in the present.

Geiger's only move of any consequence was to move the Panthers to the on-campus Klotsche Center for the 2012-13 season. This was a huge decision to make for someone who was an interim AD. To get the Klotsche Center ready, they spent $1 million "beautifying" the building. You know, fresh coat of paint, new temporary chairbacks on the west bleachers, makeover for a concession stand, etc. The big additions were two video boards that could be moved up into the rafters when they were not used. At the end of the day, though, the Klotsche Center seats under 3,000 people. Season ticket holders were...I guess the best word is "livid."

Geiger had made the move without consulting the basketball coaches, donors or season ticket holders. His response to any criticism was that "college basketball belongs on college campuses." That's such a non-answer and a stupid one at that. Marquette plays off-campus and there's no problem there. Plenty of schools play off campus, and some of them are the best programs outside power conferences. It was indicative of a guy who had no idea of the differences between mid-majors and the highest of high-majors.

I had been told by people who work for the program that Geiger had made the decision to move to the Klotsche Center without so much as walking upstairs to look at the arena inside the KC. What you need to realize is that the Klotsche Center is not like a smaller version of the Al. The Klotsche Center was built in the 70's as a student-use recreational facility. It wasn't built for a Division I basketball team - hell, it wasn't even built for an NAIA team. At the time, the Panthers were D-I independents and played whatever times they could get at the Arena downtown, so even in the 70's they didn't see the Klotsche Center as a viable home for an intercollegiate basketball team. At times we were forced back to campus in poor economic times - after we dropped from D-I to NAIA D-II in 1980 to the early 90's when we went back to the Arena, and also from 99-03 when we played at the KC.

On the day that the ticket office hosted an open house for fans to come and pick out their seats, I roved around and listened to their reactions. Their voices were almost universally negative. Many people voiced disappointment, some were just dejected, a few were downright angry. One had been a top 10 donor the last time I had access to the university's Millennium donor database (Summer 2010), and he straight up yelled at ticket manager Brian Morgan that he had given too much money to the university over the years to watch the program "disintegrate in a shithole." He was far from the only angry one, but definitely the one that stuck out in my mind because of his stature in the Milwaukee business landscape and how loud and red he got. Our season-ticket holder base plummeted.

I sure wasn't happy about it - I've clamored for years to return to campus, but the Klotsche Center is inadequate. What I've wanted is a real arena, preferably by North Avenue, to maximize all the possibilities for entertainment there. One of our architecture alumni actually used that for his thesis, which we wrote a story on HERE. I could live with the Klotsche Center for the meantime if the endgame was to either purchase the Arena downtown or to build a new arena on campus. Perhaps gutting the Klotsche Center and creating a small arena out of its shell would be possible, like Loyola did to the Gentile Center. Obviously we would want something larger than Loyola's building - the Valpo game this past season got something like 7,000 fans - but anything between 6,000 and 8,000 could be doable if we dropped the floor of the arena down to the first level or even dug further. However, the university's study for building an on-campus arena found that it wouldn't be possible because we couldn't pay for it or raise enough funds to do it.

So, we're stuck with two options today - play in the Arena downtown, or play in the Klotsche Center. Fans largely don't like the Klotsche Center, student attendance fluctuates based on the game's importance and not because of where it's played. There are no amenities nearby. In the cold, you have to get into a car to drive the five blocks to the closest bars, with fans splitting between North Avenue and Harry's bar or Oakcrest Tavern on Oakland. Recruits HATE the Klotsche Center for games. Now compare that to the Arena - fans almost universally love it, there's easy access for fans who come from places other than the East Side, there are plenty of bars and restaurants to go for pre-game or post-game. Recruits love it - they love the idea of playing where Kareem and Oscar played. The only long-term advantage for the university is saving money in the long run - money that wouldn't come close to piling up for arena costs for decades.

You can see why the university and its constituents would want to fight for the Arena's existence. That's why you hear crazy ideas like the Panthers as primary tenants in a new Bucks arena. From our standpoint, we see the Journal floating what the Bucks are looking for - closer to downtown among them - and we see the Bucks willing to make us homeless so they can be one block closer to downtown. It's hard for us to stomach when they already own land large enough for an enormous arena immediately to the north of the Bradley Center.

People are scared that our only viable home could go up in smoke. It's why big donors, university officials and politician alumni are meeting to plan out strategies. They're all very scared of the possibility that we could be made homeless because our house is on preferable land. It's not necessary - there are 5 or 6 other spaces the Bucks could pursue - but preferable. It seems that the Bucks have declared that with their pursuit of the Journal Sentinel building.

My guess is, Marquette doesn't really care where it goes as long as they remain Tenant #2. I see that the Journal Sentinel is quick to point out that the Boston Store-Surface lot-Parking Structure space between 5th street and the Grand Avenue is too small. I also know that between 5th street and the Grand Avenue on the south side of Michigan Street is a vacant office building that used to be the home of Blue Cross Blue Shield. Shutting down Michigan and 4th Street in that area would be possible, and adding the vacant lot and 1/3rd of Zeidler Square would be big enough for their gargantuan basketball arena.

It would also extend Marquette's campus east to the Grand Avenue mall. Having the new arena there would bring new life to the Grand Avenue. It's also surrounded by all the amenities they'd want. ESPN 540 be a stone's throw from the arena. I wonder why the Journal Sentinel won't bring up the former Blue Cross building with that site, but then again I remember that they have skin in the game. The Journal has an economic need to shed its headquarters, and playing up the Arena space makes their building prime real estate for developers.

We also see that space north of the arena and wonder why it's not viable. I understand there's no development around there, but couldn't that development be spurred on by manipulating the tax code and getting rid of any taxes in the area around the arena construction for say, 5-10 years? Maybe it's just me, but it seems like the Park East corridor is always going to remain an empty plot of land unless some of its space or the adjacent space carries with it a huge development - like an arena. You guys probably don't want to hear about the Grand Ave or the area north, so I'll stop there about other options.

[Jimmy Lemke]

Part 2 of 2 of my post on the MU Board:

There is an alternative, and that is using the fundraising for this huge arena to also raise money for another building. Plowing the Bradley Center, UWM Arena, Theater and Journal building is a lot of demolition just to build one big arena and some retail/restaurant development. The Panthers, Wave and plenty of non-sports entities will be displaced. This shouldn't be met with "too bad" or "UWM is irrelevant so who cares" but rather an eye for how to fix problems created by your dream facility.

I think the alternative is helping the other teams build a new home. I've heard a suggestion to have a small arena next door to the big arena, but that's just ridiculous to me - each arena draws attention from the other one. UWM can't build a building on its own - they've done studies that have told them they'd only be able to raise about $8 million for a new arena - but if the powerful business leaders and teams are going to displace the Panthers, then helping them build their own home is a way to make everyone happy. And the city gets two arenas.

Which it needs. Believe it or not, the Arena and Theater play an important role in the city. If this new Bucks stadium is built, the next largest venue in the city is the Al McGuire Center. There are plenty of musical acts and others that are far too large for the Al but way too small for the 18-20,000 seats the new Bucks arena is going to be. In sports, the Panthers and Wave fit that mold. But the Arena and Theater also have housed plenty of other acts - Disney on Ice, Tripoli Shrine Circus, etc. - that we sports fans don't think about on a daily basis. Plenty of those acts wouldn't be able to be done in Milwaukee - Disney on Ice and the Shrine Circus each take up full blocks on the calendar that the new Bucks arena would not be able to accommodate because it's at the same time as the MU/Bucks/Admirals season. That's lost revenue downtown.

Building the Panthers a new arena doesn't break the bank, which is the good thing about bringing big money to a mid-major. We don't need $200 million for a new arena. To get a comparable experience for the Panthers on the east side, the construction of the building would probably run something like $40 to $60 million, money that we couldn't come up with but is a tip in the jar compared to the money used to build this new Bucks arena.

I imagine during construction, the Panthers would play the majority of their season in the Klotsche Center with select big ticket games being played at the Bradley Center - Wisconsin, Green Bay, Valpo, games for which we would turn people away at the door of the Klotsche Center. Fans who don't like the Klotsche Center will live with it if they know there's a brand new facility being constructed on North Avenue next to one of the city's best bar districts.

That's how you make it happen. Because making all parties happy is how it gets done. You know how it doesn't get done? Pissing off several entities - the Wave, the Panthers, city business leaders who think we're cutting off our nose to spite our face with this space. This is the kind of move in 2014 that will drive this to litigation, because that seems to be the way everything is solved lately. Litigation could drag years, long enough to make the new arena moot when the Bucks become the Seattle Starbucks. I'd prefer to avoid all that by working a solution that makes everyone happy. I think bringing this to courts would be shameful. But do you expect anything less out of a guy like Frank Gimbel?

If that future includes the UWM Arena's demolition, so be it. But let's avoid all the negative energy and come up with a solution that makes sense for everyone. We don't always need to be at each other's throats. We could be complementary to each other in finding a solution to this arena problem. We don't need to turn this into an ugly fight, with the Bucks/MU/Journal on one side and UWM/Wave/WCD on the other side. Let's work together and make it work for everyone. Except Frank Gimbel. I'm all about cutting out that guy's power, as long as it doesn't also screw me over.

[MayorCK]

Sultan seems like a rather reasonable fellow, but MU would look a lot better in this if they make a substantial contribution to the new arena now.

No one in this forum thinks you play in the BC for free, by the way. We are fully aware of your lease, as we've used it to compare to our lease.

I don't feel that UWM realistically has a place in the new arena, mainly due to the attendance figures you allude to. Heck, with that new conference of yours, you may not either soon. I think the argument is that public funds should benefit the public university, not the Jesuit one.

[TheSultan]

Look, in the end, the needs of Marquette and UWM should be recognized and addressed before this is all said ans done. That is all I am saying.

And my point about the whole public funds issue is that they are going to be used to benefit all sorts of private enterprises. The Bucks, the Admirals, Marquette, etc. If you are going to make *that* argument, you would lobby the State to simply provide $50M to construct an on campus arena.

[BBF]

Jimmy, I love ya, man, but the "two new arenas solution" after everybody sits around the campfire, sings Kumbaya and opens their collective wallets? In this state?

Yeah, that's not happening.

[MayorCK]

Lobbying the legislature to fund construction of a new UWM arena would be an option, were it not for the big red bully that rules over Madison. Said bully cares nothing about UWM or Marquette, and their built-in advantage is nearly insurmountable.

[BBF]

By the way, I have read suggestions in several places about Milwaukee playing at the BC after the BBC is built. Huhwhat? The moment they open the doors at the BBC the wrecking ball will be swinging on the BC.

[BBF]

Lobbying the legislature to fund construction of a new UWM arena would be an option, were it not for the big red bully that rules over Madison. Said bully cares nothing about UWM or Marquette, and their built-in advantage is nearly insurmountable.

Truth. The only way they'll justify spending hundreds of millions of taxpayer money on this boondoggle in the first place is through the old "I'll find a new girlfriend if you don't put out!" threat. And there is truth in this. The Bucks can leave if they want to. They will remind us of this again in about 20 years when they start complaining that they need another new arena.

Every legitimate economic study has shown that building these sports palaces for pro teams has no meaningful economic benefit for the public. It just shifts local entertainment dollars from one thing to another. But the public keeps falling for it.

[MayorCK]

Agreed. And beyond that, who would pay for the $100 million in renovations the BC would still need in that scenario? Renovations our current home does not need, by the way...

[illwauk]

Jimmy, I love ya, man, but the "two new arenas solution" after everybody sits around the campfire, sings Kumbaya and opens their collective wallets? In this state?

Yeah, that's not happening.

The Panthers, Admirals and (FWIW) the Wave could all use a 5,000 seat arena. MSG has a theater of about that size built into its complex separate from the actual arena they're famous for. If all three interested parties got together and formed an alliance, I don't think the "two arenas" scenario would be all that unlikely.

[BBF]

The Panthers, Admirals and (FWIW) the Wave could all use a 5,000 seat arena. MSG has a theater of about that size built into its complex separate from the actual arena they're famous for. If all three interested parties got together and formed an alliance, I don't think the "two arenas" scenario would be all that unlikely.


The "little arena down the hallway?"

No. How in the world does that come close to replicating the Milwaukee Panther Arena? People are missing the point -- this is not entirely about basketball. It may not even be mostly about basketball.

[lutzow10]

So really it comes down to what would be a bigger issues, fighting with UWM, Wave, and the lawsuits and litigation that would follow, as well as the money owed for the Theatre, if they want to use the panther arena space.

OR ponying up a lot more money to pay to fix park east, but potentially solving the issue of development by adding an anchor that attracts foot traffic, instead of having to develop from scratch in an open space that doesnt have a reason to entice anyone to it. Plus with the new arena in park east and the panther arena and theatre to the south you have two anchors that would create a development spark in the former BC location as well.

Its not a tough decision when you are working on a clock. Legal battles cant be rushed but contruction and site clean up can be, and the Bucks clock is ticking.

[BBF]

I don't know where you are getting the idea that it would be more expensive to build on the open site north of the BC. There is no way that is true. The demolition and site preparation costs of taking down the JS buildings and the Arena and building there have to be enormously higher than building on open ground.

[TheSultan]

I don't know where you are getting the idea that it would be more expensive to build on the open site north of the BC. There is no way that is true. The demolition and site preparation costs of taking down the JS buildings and the Arena and building there have to be enormously higher than building on open ground.


Well, as I said, people are saying the soil is bad. You chose to ignore what I said. But the fact that nothing has been done there might give you a hint that the site isn't as clean as a developer would prefer.

[BBF]

I didn't ignore what you said, I appropriately discounted it because I know why it's being said and by whom. By the way, the soil condition under the JS site is completely unclear at this time, except that by the JS's own admission the safest presumption is that there could be a substantial environmental cleanup issue.

[illwauk]

The "little arena down the hallway?"

No. How in the world does that come close to replicating the Milwaukee Panther Arena? People are missing the point -- this is not entirely about basketball. It may not even be mostly about basketball.

I'm as big a Milwaukee history buff as anyone, but it's not exactly fun playing in a venue that only fills up for Wisconsin, Marquette, and late-round tournament games. Sure, it might be the House That Kareem Built, but I'm just barely old enough to remember Kareem playing with the Showtime Lakers, and I'm a lot older than the kids we're trying to recruit. As much as we might love the old MECCA, a smaller, more-modern arena would probably have more appeal to them.

[BBF]

We could speculate all day about whether a new standalone 5-7,000 seat arena would be a better recruiting draw. Did I miss the story that said someone is building it?

But if it's "the little arena down the hall" inside a new complex, instead of our own building (or a building in which we have long term naming rights like the UWMPA) I can pretty much guarantee that's not going to be a recruiting draw.

The history of the Arena frankly doesn't interest me much, even though I attended MU games there when Al was the coach and Bucks games when "Lew Alcindor" was playing. The location, prominence and quality of the Arena are what I like. There is no better pure basketball arena of any size in the state.

[Jimmy Lemke]

Recruits are very, very aware of who played in that building.

I'd go so far as to say that more often than not, recruits will bring that up when I ask them why they committed. Not that it tipped the scales in any way, but they remember it as something they like about the Panthers.

[illwauk]

Well, even that makes the Panther Arena a more valuable asset than I'd considered.

I just wish there was a way to reduce the seating capacity so it didn't have to look so damn empty for most games. Just taking out the top seating levels for luxury suites would be a huge start.

[Tyrunner0097]

http://m.journaltimes.com/sports/basketball/bucks-beat-owners-closing-in-on-arena-site-funding/article_e3825515-e7b2-5581-ba13-8825c38bc713.html?mobile_touch=true

Well, this just keeps on getting better and better...Ugh

[MU/Panther]

Gery Woelfel is one of the few that get his facts correct in his story's.

[lutzow10]

He makes it seem like they are negotiating not only with JS but with everyone involved. Not knowing what that entails is killing me. Honestly though this just sucks. Why cant they just build somewhere else. I swear it is constant highs and lows with this program. Wvery victory is met with another defeat and its killing me.
Get Andy Geiger as AD....
moves us back to KC
Win against Davidson and almost against SC....
proceed to only win 8 games.
Get New AD and win HL championship....
APR Ban
Buy naming rights to MECCA....
arena potentially being torn down.

What is next?

[Jimmy Lemke]

What is next is the university and its community need to come together and fight for our future. That doesn't necessarily mean that the Arena has to stay. I loved going to the game last night - the video board really was a game changer, although they need to get the stats right (by the next game, please) - but that experience can be replicated on a smaller scale elsewhere. We can take that video board and put it in storage for a couple years while we build our own place.

It sounds like the Bucks have chosen their home. If they've got $300 million out of $440 million or so to build the new stadium, then the writing is on the wall. Now's the time where we circle the wagons and come together, and use this tremendous inconvenience to influence some New Yorkers to help pay for a new home for our Panthers. That's what's next.

Actually, something else is next, but more on that later...

[MU/Panther]

I think that is how the step up works on the videoboard. The view is different compared to where you sit.

[Jimmy Lemke]

What's clear is we're in a struggle for the future of our program, but more importantly a struggle for the future of our university.

[MU/Panther]

What's clear is we're in a struggle for the future of our program, but more importantly a struggle for the future of our university.This summer they were sitting pretty.

[Jimmy Lemke]

One step forward, two steps back.

[Tyrunner0097]

http://m.journaltimes.com/news/opinion/editorial/journal-times-editorial-development-should-benefit-all-milwaukee-not-just/article_50e8d0ea-23a1-5b16-8be7-da1e599b6da3.html?mobile_touch=true

Nice article that's true.

[MU/Panther]

Why do some say the Admirals will be homeless with the new arena. :confused:

[Tyrunner0097]

Why do some say the Admirals will be homeless with the new arena. :confused:

Because many are assuming the Bucks owners don't care/want any other teams to share the new arena with.

[Jimmy Lemke]

Fantastic editorial. I'm glad the RJT is on board.

[MU/Panther]

Because many are assuming the Bucks owners don't care/want any other teams to share the new arena with. Who is assuming this? The new owners wouldn't want to lose 30+ dates for the new arena that the Admirals fill. That doesn't add up.

[Dan Zielinski]

Yeah that really makes no sense. That is dates that they wouldn't have to worry about filling and trying to make on.

[MU/Panther]

Yeah that really makes no sense. That is dates that they wouldn't have to worry about filling and trying to make on.

You want to see filling up dates, take a look at the Barclay Center site. If the Nets are not playing, they are hosting something. That building has something 6 to 7 days a week.

[Tyrunner0097]

Based on the comments on-where else?- JSOnline.

[Dan Zielinski]

Oh ok so the JSOnline comments sections is a trustworthy source for information...

[Jimmy Lemke]

Oh ok so the JSOnline comments sections is a trustworthy source for information...

LOL he's got ya there. The JS Comments are the absolute bottom of the barrel of **** in this town.

[MU/Panther]

LOL he's got ya there. The JS Comments are the absolute bottom of the barrel of **** in this town. That would be saying it to nice of a way.

[Goose85]

I would think the Admirals would be a part of the new facility, but unlike the BC, I don't think it will be built specifically with hockey in mind.
More a basketball facility that can also host a hockey event.

[Jimmy Lemke]

I would think the Admirals would be a part of the new facility, but unlike the BC, I don't think it will be built specifically with hockey in mind.
More a basketball facility that can also host a hockey event.

Totally.

[Tyrunner0097]

Guess word's been really spreading now. Knocking on the door of 500 signatures for Jimmy's petition. Here's hoping we get that and more for the demonstration on Wednesday.

[Tyrunner0097]

http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2014/11/18/uwm-bucks-striving-to-keep-panthers-downtown-says.html?page=all

Well, at least it sounds like the Bucks are acknowledging and listening to us.

[BBF]

http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2014/11/18/uwm-bucks-striving-to-keep-panthers-downtown-says.html?page=all

Well, at least it sounds like the Bucks are acknowledging and listening to us.


My jaw is still on the floor after reading that article. I presume someone in athletics has Gary Karner's number handy.

[Tyrunner0097]

http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/bucks-co-owner-lays-out-vision-for-milwaukee-downtown-renaissance-b99395781z1-283601791.html

Very nice piece I thought by Don Walker.

[Mike-waukee]

Totally. Don Walker has always been a fair writer at JS!

[Tyrunner0097]

http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/marquette-university-uw-milwaukee-take-differing-stances-in-downtown-arena-debate-b99399932z1-284259221.html

[Mike-waukee]

I can't believe that logic is totally left off the board here.

[Tyrunner0097]

Good news for the Arena! Sounds like talks to buy the Journal Communications building are in a stalemate.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/bucks-talks-for-preferred-site-for-new-arena-hit-snag-b99403665z1-284986161.html

[Goose85]

Unfortunately, that may mean that the JS building has a lot of environmental cleanup needed. If that is the case, and the new Bucks owners (who have billions) don't want to invest in it, that building must be worthless as it may very well cost more to clean up than it is worth.

Sure, good for the UWM fans that want to keep the Arena, but if the new facility is built on Wisconsin ave or Michigan ave, what happens to that area? I'd guess places like Buck Bradley's, Goolsby, etc could go under with no Bucks / Admirals / MU / concert / etc that the BC currently hosts. It would probably depend on if someone would want to develop the current Bradley Center site, and based on the Park East area, I doubt that very much.

[MU/Panther]

From day one I want the new arena to be on 4th and Wisconsin. Those people still need to park and can eat at those places and take the seven minute walk.

[Jimmy Lemke]

Unfortunately, that may mean that the JS building has a lot of environmental cleanup needed. If that is the case, and the new Bucks owners (who have billions) don't want to invest in it, that building must be worthless as it may very well cost more to clean up than it is worth.

Sure, good for the UWM fans that want to keep the Arena, but if the new facility is built on Wisconsin ave or Michigan ave, what happens to that area? I'd guess places like Buck Bradley's, Goolsby, etc could go under with no Bucks / Admirals / MU / concert / etc that the BC currently hosts. It would probably depend on if someone would want to develop the current Bradley Center site, and based on the Park East area, I doubt that very much.

It's a bar district. They're going to be fine. Goolsby's may want to relocate to the Grand Avenue's first floor if the Bucks get the arena there.

If 4th and Wisconsin doesn't happen, isn't the obvious answer to build the arena north of the Bradley Center, then develop all the land around it? It's not ideal - of course, I don't think the Journal/Arena/Theater was ideal either, and not just from my standpoint - but real estate developers could take that land and mold it exactly how they want it. I don't think that's a terrible idea. The City can help spur the development around the arena, and save the Bucks some money, by influencing the tax code in the blocks around the BC for development.

The Bucks arena could be a catalyst for all the real estate development around it. They could then flatten the Bradley Center and create some kind of pedestrian arena mall, perhaps with some kind of enclosure that goes right through the middle of the Arena/Theater and all the way to the convention center.

Being a little further from Wisconsin Avenue is a negative, sure. It's not so much a negative considering they'd be leaving a place immediately south. But they have no impediment around them. That "poor soil" line on the MU side of the board about the Park East corridor was a load of **** - I spent several hours trying to find evidence of that, and the only mention of the soil was that it was 'poor fill.' In other words, it's soil that you can't take and use for farming, etc. That's most urban soil.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the land the Bucks own north of the Bradley Center is not ideal but it's far from the terrible site everyone is claiming it is. The benefit to the city is great as well; we get the land around the arena developed in conjunction with the arena, so we could end up with a downtown growth area.

I think the reason the Bradley Center didn't spur a bunch of new development is because most of the space around it was already developed for other purposes. The Arena to the south, Turner Hall to the east, MATC to the west. I envision parking garages with full street level retail and restaurant space. They can build it so the "money shot" is the pedestrian mall leading up to the front, glass facade - not unlike the Staples Center.

[kingsteve]

Jimmy

The other thing about the site North of Bradley is wouldn't this be a boon to the Zilber Brewery complex? That could connect and make a very cool area and as long as they are at it connect the streetcar to that as well. Perplexed by the comment by City of Milwaukee developer that the site there is off the table? Why? Not like it is being overwhelmed with development opportunities. Lying fallow....and of course why demolish two beautifully maintained beloved historic buildings for a glass palace which will once again be obsolete in 15 years...just disgusting... Steve

[Goose85]

The article in the Biz Journal says the site north of the BC is off the table.

Looking at Wisconsin Ave and the 2nd and Michigan site as alternates to the JS building.