ReConnection an urban waterfront community

Jill Naumes Fall 2009

1 Much thanks and appreciation to all who influenced this project and ultimately, this book.

Linda Krause, for guidance and clarity throughout the semester.

Pre-thesis classmates, for the Monday night dinners, conversation and peace of mind.

Thesis committee, for faith enough to sign on to a project which was still rough around the edges.

Chris Kraco, for knowledge and insight into the city, as well as a genuine interest and excitement about my projects that inspires me.

Ryan Ptak, for constant support and encouragement. an urban waterfront community ReConnection

Jill Naumes MArch/MUP

Pre-Thesis Book Fall 2009

Committee: Larry Witzling, Chair Jim Wasley Chris Kraco 4 contents Contents 7 background 13 claim 15 proposalimplications 17

19 Study Area 21 Site History 22 siteCurrent Images 31 Recreation Network 34 Transportation Network 35 Zoning 38 Land Use 39 Climate 40 Demographics 42 Bay View Today 45

47 Sluseholmen / Copenhagen, Denmark 48 Harbor Baths / Copenhagen, Denmark 50 Kopprecedent van Zuid / Rotterdam, Netherlands 51 London Docklands Regeneration 52 Baltimore, Maryland 53 Southworks Lakeside Chicago Development 54 Prairie Crossing 55 Portland, Oregon 56

59 TOD & TND Principles 60 Form-Based Code Principles 64 Siteprogram Assembly 66

71 connection 72 conclusionsproject goals 73

77 references

contents 5 proposal Industrial Milwaukee

upload.wikimedia.org 8 proposal proposal 9 Modern Milwaukee

www.johnweeks.com 10 proposal www.december.com/images

www.milwaukeestreets.blogspot.com proposal 11 12 proposal Milwaukee is named for a Native American Potawatomi word meaning “gathering the Hoan Bridge requires resurfacing and structural repairs in 2011 costing $240 placebackground by the waters.” The city was settled at the convergence of three rivers--the million, followed by a complete replacement in 2050 estimated at $3 billion, in Milwaukee, Menomonee and Kinnickinnic--with Lake Michigan. Water was a crucial 2008 dollars (Journal Sentinel). This has sparked a debate among city leaders and element of the beginning of the city’s history first as a trade center and port, then community members, over whether there is a more cost-effective alternative to the beer producer, then tanning and manufacturing center. Yet over time, the city has aging Hoan. lost a connection to its rich history. The identity and cultures of the people who settled along the shores of Lake Michigan and the rivers have been all but lost; While the city is redeveloping its downtown and lakefront and expanding the absorbed into today’s bustling life. riverwalk on the Milwaukee River, this scale of revitalization has not stretched south to Bay View and the Port of Milwaukee. Recently, the city declared the port The Daniel Webster Hoan Memorial Bridge (Hoan) spans the water entrance to as blighted and is working on a redevelopment plan. As the city plans for the port, Milwaukee and frames the view which welcomes pleasure boaters and merchant the larger region prepares for a future commuter rail link in the Kenosha-Racine- vessels to the lakes, rivers and port. While the lakefront has seen modern Milwaukee (KRM) extension. One of the planned stops for the south side is in Bay museums which have re-defined the city’s image and waterfront, the Hoan remains View, just west of the Hoan interchange land. a symbol of Milwaukee’s former industrial might. On land, the bridge and its concrete supports act as large physical barriers to the lakefront and cuts off the city This thesis project explores the notion of the bridge and commuter rail and asks, from its shores. Expansive ramps and interchanges are built in such a fashion that what would happen to the land that is not currently being utilized to its fullest they make for a confusing trip and take up valuable land in the downtown and south economic potential? What sort of impact will the commuter rail impart on Bay side. View?

Moreover, the Hoan bridge connects Milwaukee’s downtown business district to the south side communities of Bay View, St. Francis and the General Mitchell International Airport. The Wisconsin Department of Transportation announced

proposal 13 14 proposal claimThis project is intended to design a vibrant, urban, waterfront mixed-use community which is both environmentally and ecologically responsible and reconnects the city to its past and lakefront.

proposal 15 16 proposal Reconfiguring the expansive ramps and interchanges to the south end of the Hoan bridgeimplications offers up land for development--land that was originally used for economic gains. Enhancing existing and future transit connections will improve the flow around the city and allows for a more efficient use of land and space. Furthermore, while many cities across the world have re-discovered the recreational opportunities afforded by their access to water, in Milwaukee, this notion has not yet been fully realized.

This project presents the opportunity to create vibrant neighborhood expansions and simultaneously re-connect the city to its past and waterfront. Adding residential units and supporting commercial or retail opportunities brings economic value to this land and tax revenue to the city, in a much needed time. The addition of new parks and recreation opportunities will further enhance the community and expand living to the outdoors on a year-round basis. As this new development is planned, it is important to practice measures of sustainability, green design and act responsibly for the landscape and environment.

proposal 17 site 20 site I-794 MILWAUKEE RIVER MENOMONEE THIRD RIVER WARD SUMMERFEST GROUNDS

FIFTH WARD

Hoan Bridge MMSD Metropolitan Milwaukee Sewerage District WALKERS POINT

I-794 Milwaukee represents the largest metropolitan city and region in the state of PORT OF Study Area I-43 Wisconsin. It lies on the shores of Lake Michigan, approximately 90 miles east from MILWAUKEE the state capitol of Madison. Chicago, Illinois is also approximately 90 miles south on the shores of Lake Michigan.

The project study area represents the Milwaukee neighborhood of Bay View and the KINNICKINNIC Port of Milwaukee on Jones Island. It is bounded by Greenfield Avenue to the north, RIVER 2nd Street to the west, Russel Avenue to the south/southeast and extends east to the shores of Lake Michigan. As this thesis progresses, these boundaries will be more tightly defined.

BAY VIEW

LAKE FREEWAY BAY VIEW Historic District

site 21 SiteIn the beginning,History on what is currently known as Jones Island, there was a swampy marsh in the middle of the Milwaukee River basin. Covered in thick forest groves, the island was plentiful in wild game and the summer home for the native Potawatomi (Kriehn 1). The island was separated from a narrow peninsula, one mile in length north-south as seen in the 1853 map to the right. As storms on Lake Michigan pounded the coast, the island was constantly reshaped, with new sand deposits eventually merging the island with the narrow peninsula.

When the City of Milwaukee was founded in 1846, the island was transitioning from a fur trading post to commercial port. When, in 1854, Captain James Monroe Jones started a shipbuilding operation at the northern part of the island, he provided the name known today, “Jones Island” (Kriehn 3). Jones was a prominent ship builder until he left the city in 1861.

The push for harbor developments began early, with settlers petitioning congress in 1834 for funds. The U.S. Army Corps of Topographical Engineers surveyed the harbor and promoted a straight cut to the north of Jones Island (seen in 1853 map). Work progressed at the southern, natural outlet of the river, where two piers and a lighthouse had been built. Then, in 1848 the state allowed Milwaukee to levy a tax to raise money to complete the northern straight cut (Kriehn 6).

Finally in 1857 the harbor was complete, making the Jones Island peninsula a true island. However, with two harbors at each end of the island, the lake and river currents eroded the beaches and the land beneath buildings washed away. After the south harbor became filled with sand, the island and peninsula were joined again.

The first fishermen lived on the mainland and many families began to move to the island in the late 1860s. These early fisherman told their families in Europe

22 site 1853 1855 of the good fishing and free land in the area and a migration began. Kashubes came from the narrow Peninsula of Hel off the Baltic Sea in Prussia (present day Poland) and Germans from the Stettin area of Pomerania (northeast of Berlin in present day Poland). Kashubes (kah-shoobs) were the only remaining people of Slavic tribes of ten centuries past (Kriehn 12). These people had no upper class, making their living off the poor farm land and fishing, making little contact outside their villages.

In 1872, after the unification of Germany, the Kashubes were subject to Germanization--no Polish language and no Catholicism. The German immigrants to Jones Island suffered from political wars and worker exploitation. This, combined with mandatory military duty, drove the Kashubes and Germans from Europe (Kriehn 25).

As new families arrived to Jones Island, they were helped out by other islanders to make a home, buying or borrowing money for land to build upon. The houses were small dwellings, built on poles to support them from the lowland flooding. Men worked hard to infill the land beneath their homes. Several families had a fenced yard where they kept small animals and farmed.

Jones Island appears as if it is laid out in some fashion to the adjoining Milwaukee street grid on the old maps. However, the fishing village was laid out in a nonsensical meandering of paths, some barely wide enough for a carriage to pass through.

Historically, the Kashubes and Germans clashed but made the Island their home. When troubles arose on the lake or among families, the islanders came to each other’s rescue. Many women who had been widowed by Lake Michigan’s violent storms peddled smoked fish to support their families. Children helped out their mothers and fixed fishing nets for a few cents.

Images from AGS Library Digital Collection 1877 1900 site 23 1915 image showing Milwaukee harbor straight cut and fishing village of Kashubian and German immigrants

24 site Children on the island had to travel to a school on Condemnation proceedings for harbor and sewerage the mainland for several years. Storms and icy rivers improvements were begun by the city in 1915. often made it impossible to get across the river by boat and the children would have to walk all the way down The picture below shows the dense fishing village in the peninsula and around to get to school. A school 1915. Soon after, many families would begin to leave was finally built on the island in 1896 but even then, the area. The Illinois Steel Company in Bay View laid teachers had difficulty crossing the waters in winter. claims that the islanders were squatters on their land and demanded rent. Lengthy court hearings Nostalgic tales of the cultural ceremonies on the island took place for years, some won and some lost by the recall a happy community. For the Kashubes, wedding Islanders. After the city finally intervened, a decision celebrations lasted three days. All the families on the was made to pay a sum to the Islanders who received island brought what they could to the festivities. The two-thirds and the Illinois Steel Company received one- immigrants remained true to their heritage on the third. This decision left 51 acres of the southern part island. Although, many parents only spoke English of Jones Island to the steel mill. When the mill shut its with their children at home so they could learn. doors and left, the city negotiated for ten years before buying the company’s holdings (Kriehn 106). The existing waste plant was located on the island and broke down frequently with increased garbage. In By 1920, twenty five families remained on the island, 1912, the City was preparing plans for a new sewerage and only eight in 1922. The first Kashube to be born plant on Jones Island. Three years later, the residents on the island closed down the Harbor Saloon in 1944. of the north end of the island were forced to move. As families moved away they were absorbed into Milwaukee’s other neighborhoods.

site 25 The first settler in the Bay View area was Horace Chase in 1834. But the early village really owes its existence to Captain Eber Brock Ward, who made his fortune in the Great Lakes shipping trade. When rail started competing with ships, Ward bought the railroads. His third steel mill, The Milwaukee Iron Company, was located in Bay View north of Conway Street (Gurda 12), first re-rolling iron rails and then producing new steel rails. The mill complex covered over twenty- seven acres and quickly became the largest employer in the area. Ward chose the site for its cheap land, existing Milwaukee & Chicago Rail lines and Bay View’s location at the junction of ore and coal supply routes (Gurda 13). The location of the rolling mill can be seen in the following two images.

The steel mill employed 2,000 men during peak periods (Gurda 13), many from Great Britain. At the time, few Americans knew of iron and steel production so Ward had to import his skilled workers from England, Scotland and Wales. The Mill built houses for its employees and sold many lots at 50x150-foot. A typical Milwaukee lot is only 30-feet wide, which contributes to the feeling of lesser density closer to the lake. Of the small wood-frame cottages built for workers, many of them remain today.

By 1886, over ten thousand men had joined the labor unions in Milwaukee. The “Bay View Massacre” or “Bay View riot” erupted when employees went on strike for an 8-hour workday without a pay cut. The governor ordered the militia to contain the situation. The Wisconsin National Guard opened fire on a crowd of 1,500 men marching to the Bay View mill and seven were killed. This became the bloodiest labor dispute in the state’s history. Today, a marker denotes the location of the riot at Russell Avenue and Superior Street.

When the Lake Shore Railroad (Green Bay, Milwaukee & Chicago Rail Company) connected Milwaukee and Chicago in 1855, Milwaukee’s first rail depot was located in Bay View on South Bay Street. The far southern limit of Milwaukee was Lincoln Avenue after 1857. Rapid growth prompted the village to vote to 1951 Sanborn Maps showing Illinois Steel and Bay View neighborhood.

26 site be annexed by the City of Milwaukee in 1887, adding 4,000 citizens as the city’s The rolling mills not only owe to Milwaukee’s existence but its development over Seventeenth Ward. time. The site of the original Bay View settlement was east of the railroad tracks stretching to Lake Michigan. Closest to the mill at the north end, were worker’s When Captain Eber Brock Ward died in 1875, his companies began to waiver and cottages and mill housing. Farther south, the managers and foremen built their the Milwaukee Iron company was bankrupt the next year. Ward’s company was houses. The original steel workers were British, Protestant, refined and did not reorganized under the “North Chicago Rolling Mills” and purchased the mills in consume alcohol. 1878. The rolling mills were bought by the Illinois Steel Co. in 1889 and expanded but, eventually closed in 1929. The second neighborhood was settled on the west side of the tracks, south of Lincoln Avenue, east of Howell and north of Russell. These settlers were the second generation of mill workers and were largely German and Irish. Not all families on the west side worked at the mill, many were employed at factories north of Lincoln.

After the turn of the century, Bay View became the new home for remaining Jones Islanders after the island was condemned. Italian immigrants also moved to the area just south of the rolling mill. Groppi’s Market on Russell is one of the remains of the area’s Italian influences.

LEFT: The original Bay View settlement is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. This shows the approximate locations of both the mill and consecutive settlement areas. BELOW: Photo showing Illinois Steel at time of close, Bay View and Jones Island.

ORIGINAL ROLLING BAY VIEW MILL ca. 1928 SETTLEMENT

SECOND BAY VIEW SETTLEMENT photo from Milwaukee Public Library image collection

site 27 In 1977 the Daniel Webster Hoan Memorial Bridge opened to traffic. (Named for But this celebration would be short-lived. On a cold December morning in 2000, Milwaukee’s longest-term and second socialist mayor). Yet it would still be twenty- the bridge suffered a critical failure of two of three support beams. The northbound one years before the bridge connected to the Lake Freeway, completely serving the bridge deck was sagging nearly four feet. Two weeks later, the buckled portion of south side and airport, thus earning it the rightful name of “Bridge to Nowhere” for the bridge was demolished and a repair plan was enacted. The southbound lanes some time. were re-opened the following February to one lane of traffic in each direction to alleviate congestion while repairs were made. Repairs completed in October 2001 Construction on the bridge began in 1970 through 1972, as part of Interstate 794. on the northbound lanes, with all six traffic lanes opened in November. During Backlash at the county freeway system interrupted the completion of the structure. construction, traffic to downtown was re-routed down Bay Street to Kinnickinnic/ When a resolution was eventually made, the bridge was connected to the north and First Street. These routes were severely impacted by the increased traffic, creating south ends and traffic began flowing in 1977, five years after completion. However, more congestion and traffic jams that tore up the road surface. the highway and bridge ended at Carferry Drive on Jones Island at this time. Extension of the state-designated Lake Parkway from the south was debated for It is evident that the bridge serves as an important link to the near south side of some time. Finally, in 1998, State Highway 794--Lake Parkway was extended from Milwaukee. However, the aging bridge could very well be subject to future failures. the southern end of the bridge south to Layton Avenue. Traffic counts from 2008 show an average of 38,600 vehicles travel over the bridge per day. This compares to well over 110,000 vehicles daily on each Kinnickinnic Now, the bridge finally went somewhere after it started construction twenty-eight Avenue and I-43. years earlier. When the bridge connected the near south side to downtown, many homeowners saw their property value increase. Not that Interstate 43 didn’t This thesis project will not eliminate this important connection between the north connect the neighborhoods already, but the Hoan offered an alternative route which and south sides of the city. It will enhance the connection and organize the ramps is very popular. and interchanges to the south in Bay View. The most important aspect for this thesis will be providing a connection the lakefront, past the strong barrier of the bridge and highway.

28 site BELOW: Current view of the bridge from the Third Ward. The large parking lots beneath and along the bridge take up valuable real estate.

site 29 view north of interchange, towards Car ferry Drive and downtown

view of Access Road with Lincoln Avenue overpass in background

view of Lake Parkway overpass, towards southeast 30 site Current Images

view of railroad tracks (CNW/KRM) north toward Lincoln Ave overpass

Port of Milwaukee building underneath Highway 794 site 31 The figure-ground image represents the space created between and around buildings that occupy the landscape. This shows the dense residential neighborhood and shifting street grids. Closer to the rivers, larger buildings do not follow such an ordered pattern. These are the commercial warehouses, boat sheds and manufacturing facilities. It is also easy to see the large land that is taken for the I-794 interchange on the site of the former Illinois Steel mill.

The circles represent typical walking distances of five (small circle) and ten minutes (large circle). They are centered around the future KRM transit station and the Lincoln / Kinnickinnic Avenues intersection. The walking circles for the transit stop enclose plenty of area but this is mostly vacant land or land utilized for the highway. Closing the empty half of these circles in with appropriate new development will support the future transit stop and provide a link to the lakefront.

32 site 0’ 250’ 500’ 1,000’

1 inch = 500 feet

site 33 The lakefront parks are clearly bisected by the Port Recreationof Milwaukee and industrialNetwork uses. Green parks and open space are discontinuous along the Lake Michigan shore. Pocket parks dot the landscape but are more abundant on the south side. There is one tiny park on the west bank of Jones Island, Kaszubes Park. Descendents of the Kashube fishing village come to the park once a year and celebrate their culture and heritage.

On and off-street trails connect across the neighborhoods and between city limits, including The Oak Leaf Trail, Hank Aaron State Trail and South Side Trail. The routes are popular for biking, walking, running and even snow-shoeing or cross-country skiing in winter.

This image clearly shows the lack of recreation space or green park space available around the port facilities. The potential for future green links and connections to the waterfront are given a rationale with this image.

34 site Expansive multi modal transportation networks span Transportationthe city. The orange and thickestNetwork lines represent highways, yellow are surface roads and red, dashed lines are rail.

Before the Hoan Bridge was complete, there was no direct access to the south side communities. The Hoan is still the preferred method of travel between downtown and the south side. This image clearly KRM shows it is the only direct north-south connection.

site 35 GREENFIELD AVENUE FIRST STREET

The street network in Bay View is laid out on a series of shifting grids. Many streets do not connect, such as those perpendicular to Bay Street. This creates several different block arrangements with alleys serving the BECHER STREET residences. BAY STREET

The original Bay View settlement east of the railroad tracks and current Lake Parkway was laid out parallel to the shores of Lake Michigan. When the area west of the railroad was settled, it was laid out according to a LINCOLN AVENUE KINNICKINNIC AVENUE standard grid (Gurda 22). The odd intersections result from where the street grids met.

Now, the Lake Parkway (794) bisects the HOWELL AVENUE neighborhoods and separates them from east to west. Although the railroad always bisected the two halves RUSSELL AVENUE of Bay View, the highway is an elevated barrier. Many streets do not connect through. On Jones Island, the bridge and highway is a heavy barrier to Lake RUSSELL AVENUE Michigan, lying directly along the edge of the port.

Future connections will need to be integrated with this system. Whether that is a simple extension of the grid is yet to be determined. ESTES STREET

36 site Continuation County Line To MATC North Campus of Route 143

MI detail below MILWAUKEE COUNTY LINE L Kohl Park 49U W 143 AUKEE COUNTY LINE North Lake 12 N Park N. 85 .

P 1 P 0 i l 7 g To t

t Kohl’s r h h i Downtown Glencoe Main m BAYSIDE 79 W. Brown Deer 49 W. Brown Deer Route Key 76 P 49U 68 8800

P N. Port Schlitz 45 Audubon N Heather Servite Regular Routes . Center

9 Milwaukee River N. 87t 1 F a BROWN DEER N. Lak s W Doctor’s t Operates most weekdays Dretzka Park u lk a Park shington N. Range Line h September to June ner 76 RIVER HILLS 67 e W Park-Ride Lot . A Tower pp W. Bradley W. Bradley N N 49U 8000 let Freeway Flyer . Parkland .

1 o 8 N. 76th N N N. T n 1 6 1 . . t

8 t 1 Lake Park h Limited Service h

Port 1 1 eutoni

3 To UWM N. 60 s FOX POINT t t Be sure to check schedules h P 68 for days and times this route

23 t a Calumet a r h k Pl N 23 Brown or route segment operates. .

Deer Park a 1 MENOMONEE ALLF S c N. Green Bay e 0 MCTS Administration Building 7 W t W. Good Hope h W. Good Hope W. Good Hope 1942 N. 17th Street 79 12 7200 Noyes Park Milwaukee, WI 53205

P N. 43rd Waukesha County Green Tree Rt 79 Zone Fare 35¢ Connects with Waukesha Metro W W . 143 Cardinal bus service To Fond du Lac N. 91s Kletzsch Stritch Downtown Park University All trips on all routes are 45 t wheelchair accessible W. Mill W. Mill N. Santa Monica Bender AH1-AH5 Alexander Hamilton* Main St. W y 6400 w B S . BV1-BV5 Bay View* Appleton k ake u P Havenwoods s 23 JM1-JM7 James Madison* s er 27 r e N. 64 iv 23 N State x R Florist . RS1-RS4 Riverside* Forest R 7 76 Florist 6 d ee n t

. PK1-PK2 Pulaski* t

o h h H Quad m GLENDALE wy o RK1 Rufus King* n Bayshore Graphics e

1 Sussex M W. Silver Spring P 8 QuadGraphics Sussex / Pewaukee 6 Silver Spring Silv W. Silver Spring 4 er N. M 8 Spr 63 63 5600 N. 35t ing N. 91s 10 Humboldt-Wisconsin 49 ar 8 lb 11 Holton-Green”eld / Howell

N. L P 8 30 o t

h WHITEFISH BAY La N. 107 39 ro 12 Teutonia-Hampton

Lisbon o W. Villard

n ug N. 84t ver 80 80 e Timmerman h 14 Forest Home / Howard N. N. 60t s t Field 19 h 10

Quad P 118t h Lincoln 15 Oakland-Kinnickinnic 8 or Graphics Park 15 t

28 h N. 32 17 Canal Street W

Pewaukee h W. Hampton W. Hampton E. Hampton 12 a N. N 27 4800 85 shi 18 National-Green”eld N. 92n . n S H N. n N. Oakland d h o

g 19 MLK - S. 13th & S. 20th e e p N G to rm N. 100 kin . r N. Wilson vill d T e n e en n 21 North Avenue W. Congress a s u plai 23 W n t u 45 . o B 22 Center Street Fon n D t a h ia y d Midtown d 68 Hope SHOREWOOD 23 Fond du Lac Avenue u 57 Center L 143 a 27 27th Street W. Capitol c E. Capitol 62 62 62 4000 28 108th St. W N. 67t . Atki 80 15 30 Sherman-Wisconsin Wirth James N. nso 67 39 n 10 Edgewood 31 State-Highland Currie M h UWM N. Maryland

W. Keefe N. Humboldt Downer ay N. Holto

Park N. 76 35 W. Keefe Newport 30 Hop (University of 35 35th Street f N. 124 Hartford ai Library Wisconsin-Milwaukee) ki 12 Oakland r 39 Timmerman Flyer UWM t n Campus h See detail below s Kenwood Union t 40 Holt-College Flyer (Northeast Lot) n h 8 Prospect Farwel 76 23 80 Stowel 3100 l W. Burleigh W. Burleigh l Locust 40U Holt-College UBUS (Southwest Lot) 60 B 60 S 60 r N. 92n herm

eme Lake Mount Locust 43 Whitnall Flyer Mary Chambers Park 27 19 n College a Locust 44 Fair Park-National Flyer n d

30 Do Oa W. Center W. Center M 44U Fair Park-Whitnall UBUS

85 w 57 22 22 ar kl N. 35t ne N. 60t N. 124 N. 8t N. 7th yl W an 45 Watertown Plank Flyer

30 an . Lisb r Mayfair d

E. Meinecke d 46 Loomis-Southridge Flyer h h t

WAUWATOSA h o h W. North n W. North 2300 47 S. 27th St. Flyer W

21 N. 21 28 e N. 27 a

To K 48 South Shore Flyer u 11 Downtown i n wat t g 10 c N. Lak

t 49 Brown Deer-Northshore Flyer

h e Lu o di s E. Brady a Washington l 49U Brown Deer UBUS

N. l rosp n N. W. Walnut 85 gto Milwa Park e P

57 47t

31

40 w ukee N. 17t r N. 50 Morgan Avenue n

W t N. 6t h Milwaukee Regional h

.

N. Fa 51 Oklahoma Avenue

H

Medical Center h

i g Ogden 31 h 1200 W. Watertown Plank W h 53 Lincoln Avenue

. Stat l a W. Highland l Vliet el 31 rw t c e n Ogden e Fa sp w o

N. 68t 54 Mitchell-Burnham 31 Pr Martin Luther P d McKinley King Park Knapp Knapp

N. 1 Juneau Juneau

B Milwa Ja Cas Marshall Astor W V

r an e Old

ater Research Highland oa c s kson riv B

12th St 10th St 55 Layton Avenue

9th dway 6th W 45 nvie uke u 4th S 4th

r

Milwaukee t o

MSOE en

c DOWNTOWN rld 3rd St St Area St ELM GROVE e Bradley State e orial D p . . . Technical . Center m t s

BROOKFIELD . e College State o 8 r 1 Red P Arrow h Marcus

DOWN. TOWN oln Me Center Park MSOE Milwaukee US Cellular Kilbourn nc Milwaukee Co. W. Wisconsin i

5 Theatre Civic Arena l L County Cathedra Juneau Gl Kilbourn Center City e 57 Walnut-N. 92nd quar Veterans 16th St 17th St S Park Court Plaza Hall Local and Flyer Routes W. Wisconsin Park House Theater Wells t Milwaukee District Public State Midwest Reuss n Milwaukee . . Maso Museum O˜ces Airlines Federal Northwestern Art Museum h Research Park Wells Center Plaza Mutual 10 Local andLibrary Flyer Routes see detail below Betty Brinn see detail below Wisconsin Wisconsin Childrens’ Museum O’Donnell 60 Burleigh Street ank Park Badger US B Shops at Center Ex W. Bluemound nd Bus

u Grand Avenue o H Depot igan m Mich e Marquette University 8 Michigan 8th . Blu Plankinto W Downtown 2nd St 4th 10 5th Transit Pier

Center Wisconsin 10 a St bourn

ly C S 85 St Clybourn St . . e . .

n 76 w

. 92n 62 Capitol Drive cu

St. Paul l Brook“eld Waukesha County e 35 r t Milwaukee y e 100 iv W Rt 10 Zone Fare 25¢ 67 W. Canal b 63 Silver Spring Drive Square d To e County To Downtown 80 Zoo To UWM Miller 17 794 64 S. 60th Street Emm Downtown Park 27 S Brook”eld Sq. 44U Mitchell Park/ . 2 67 N. 76th-S. 84th n

W. Adler 143 d 28 Wood Domes 68 Port Washington P Veterans nal W. Natio 76 N. 60th-S. 70th S

Center 41 S. 1st State 18 . 16

W. Washington Fair C 19 79 Menomonee Falls Flyer 44 t h Park AT To UWM 40U 80 6th Street M W. Green”eld W. Green”eld 11 1400 N. 124 N. 116 18 44U 18 8 85 Whitman-West S

M . 108

i 87 Nathan Hale l The Milwaukee Country Transit System currently serves 67 l e W. Mitchell t t h h 17

r t S

h

W. Burnham 88 Cudahy . 11 the city with bus transit. The site area is seen on this l WEST na 54 P 54 Maple

a

io S S t 89 St. Francis S t r S S

ALLIS h route map to the right. Bus 15 serves First Street and k . 35 . 27

Green“eld . 76 . 60 . 68 . Na D W Park W 14 137 House of Correction t t Kinnickinnic Avenue (orange). Route 11 travels south

t a t t h h h h h Portion of yer routes shown is where riders will nd bus stops approximately every y W. Lincoln W. Lincoln E. Lincoln 143 Ozaukee County Express three blocks. Routing into and from Downtown is subject to change without notice. 87 53 53 2300 along the same route but then travels down Howell 219 Oak Creek Shuttle S S e Avenue, shown in purple. These two routes are the . 84 . 92n k 54

a S 44 18 . 6t t d L only routes which primarily run north-south. Route h n d

h * For maps of these routes please W. Cleveland 39 Jackson . Wi 53, shown in red, travels east and west down Lincoln W refer to the specic route guide

Park S Russell S . AM ROUTE PM ROUTE Starts at Transit Center S (schedule). Avenue and ends at Bay Street where the commuter H 15 . 13 . 20

87 ow To rail stop will be located. These three bus routes are t 80 t h e

h Downtown

l Subject to change without notice. W. Oklahoma To l the only ones which get closest to the site area. 51 51 51 3100 Copyright Milwaukee County 2009 S W S Downtown . Clemen o . 108 E. Oklahoma llme S . 96 Alverno 67 67 76 76 64 14 35 19 19 S. L t College 11 As the map shows, the Lincoln Avenue bus is the only

h t r i t a lo h 40 ke Be W. Morgan W. Morgan 40U D

e t r route which pushes the farthest east. This leaves a 50 50 S. Ki .

S E. St. Francis Wisconsin P S Cass Hom . 43 Wisconsin t . Chas s 15 S n majority of Bay View underserved by only public transit e . I To nickin o

Downtown r

d UWM Michigan Transit . For w currently in the City of Milwaukee. For this reason, the

W e 48 Center 45 W. Howard a W. Howard E. Howard n Van Beck need for walkable communities with local amenities 14 ic 3900 s 28 894 S Wilson

794 . 76 cannot be over emphasized. A person who lives on 794 mi 27 Waterford S o Park . 60 t S Shore Drive would have to walk 5 to 6 blocks to the To h Lo ST. FRANCIS . . 27

UWM 44U 14 t E. Lunham h W E. Bolivar nearest bus stop on Kinnickinnic Avenue.

t S. P S 89 h

To . Howel W Cold Spring To Downtown S hitnall To Downtown 46 To . Pi Allerton n Downtown Downtown S e 44 45 79 46 . Brus 894 W. Layton l E. Layton E. Plankinton AM ROUTE PM ROUTE Starts at Transit Center 55 4700 55 S t S . 6 S. 68th

43 . 13

t 88

64 h

t n S 15 P h GREENFIELD Mitchell . Pen o site 37 S S 11th St 10th St 35 S . L W. Edgerton W. Edgerton International ols . Packar . 108 h a P To n

Airport k

43 sylvani Downtown e t CUDAHY h S. Nic d

Wisconsin Cass Wisconsin Southridge Warnimont Downtown W. Grange 19 a E. Grange Park Michigan Michigan Transit S 47 Center 40 5500 . 51s To E. Dale

HALES t UWM 794 Northway 13th St 794 CORNERS 80 estway

W. Ramsey S Ramsey W y . GREENDALE a S. S Ho

w 27 . 35 I outh lli w S th 40U

no Kelly t e

h 15 S

l Senior l i t s . Center W. College P W. College Lasata 40 43 46 47 48 Bridge W 88 6300 Nursing a P s E. College h 19 AM ROUTE PM ROUTE Home in g 27 t Grobschmidt o Zellman 15 n FRANKLIN Park S MATC

t 48 N. C . 13 W South h Linc Wal-Mart au o Grant State ln Campus W. Wood t h w h Park i cag ato 9th St.

s Cedar Springs o a UPS Health& 219 Wells Rehabilitation E. Rawson 17 E. Rawson 10 Center SO. MILWAUKEE 7100 Wisconsin t 6t

Cass t Wisconsin 10 h h 10th St. h 8th St. Downtown t h Milwaukee Madison Transit 176 Center Falk 143 Park Ozaukee 15 5t

Drexel h County Express 80 Drexel Columbai 7900 S . S. C 49 Port Ho h P Washington w W i c

AM ROUTE PM ROUTE e a oodcree l l g o Highland Saukville

Grafton 68 P Wal-Mart OAK CREEK t k State P h St rn o Puetz u Countr 10th St. o rt 11th St. Kilb To Oak 8700

t W . Downtown S

c unnyvi Creek e a e p w shi s Parkway o

Wells r y ngto P Milwaukee P Cedarbugr Wisconsin Park-Ride County House n of Correction 40 6th St. 2nd St. St. Mary s Hospital 137 Oak Creek Parkway 143 To Downtown P Ryan 794 Ryan 9500

794 137 S . Ho Hwy. 100 48 Bender w Park To Downtown e l l Zoning in Bay view is geared for residential use, theZoning yellow to orange colors in this image. Zoning controls limit the use and intensity to which a property can be built. Bay Street divides the industrial and transportation uses, for the most part, except for a mix with residential at the intersection with Kinnickinnic Avenue.

Kinnickinnic is the area’s defined commercial district but, as evidenced by this map, is very spotty. Commercial on one side of the street faces residential on the other side in many stretches of the street.

map generated from Map Milwaukee application 38 site This land use map of the study area delineates how theLand land isUse used within its zoning allowances. The zoning code determines the highest intensity of use possible on a site, but the actual way the land is being used could be less than the maximum. This map gives a more unified view of Bay View’s uses. Kinnickinnic is strongly called out as a small mix of neighborhood shopping and local businesses in pink. The rest of the area is primarily single and two-family residential focused. The few multi-family units stick out in the darkest shade of blue.

Again, the port and industrial uses along the river are continuous in grey. The most diverse intersection is where South Shore Park along the lake meets industrial uses. This image clearly shows the separation of park space from the lakefront.

map generated from Map Milwaukee application site 39 ClimateMilwaukee lies exactly at 43 North Latitude and -87.9 East Longitude. The latitude and longitude are important to know in relation to the earth’s orbit around the sun. The sun rises higher in the summer and lower in the winter. The angle of the sun creates shadows over buildings, thus the need for shading devices. The sun’s angles are important to know in order to determine the size of shading devices on buildings over windows to control the amount of heat gain into a structure. The aerial image to the far right shows the path the sun takes on the summer and The map below is generated from the Wisconsin winter solstice, only lighting a portion of the earth. Department of Natural Resources and shows the designated wetland areas near the site, shown in Prevailing winds generally come out of the northwest yellow. in winter months and the southwest in fall. Summer winds come from the northeast mainly. Wind of course Map Created on Nov 16, 2009 is variable and breezes off the lake will change the temperature swings closer to the lake. Winds off the lake may keep temperatures mild in winter but cooler map generated from Wisconsin DNR mapping application than average in the summer.

Milwaukee has 7,087 heating degree days (HDD) and only 616 cooling degree days (CDD). The base Legend for each degree day is 65 degrees Fahrenheit. A degree day represents the difference between the outside temperature and the 65 degree baseline. For instance, if the temperature outside was 50 degrees in winter, that is equal to 15 heating degree days. And vice versa for cooling degree days. These numbers generally represent the cold winters and mild summers Milwaukee has. The site in Bay View will experience slightly different swings in temperature due to its proximity to Lake Michigan.

0 1300 2600 3900 ft. Scale: 1:13,966 Map created on Nov 16, 2009 Wisconsin Wetland Inventory (WWI) maps show graphic representations of the type, size and location of wetlands in Wisconsin. These maps have been prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery in conjunction with soil surveys, topographic maps, previous wetland inventories and field work. State statutes define a wetland as "an area where water is at, near or above the land surface long enough to be capable of supporting aquatic or hydrophytic vegetation and which has soils indicative of wet conditions." The principal focus of the WWI is to produce wetland maps that are graphic representations of the type, size and location of40 wetlands in Wisconsin.site Within this context, the objective of the WWI is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type, size of these habitats such that they are accurate at the nominal scale of the 1:24,000 (1 inch = 2000 feet) base map. The DNR recognizes the limitations of using remotely sensed information as the primary data source. They are to be used as a guide for planning purposes. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to define the limits of jurisdiction of any Federal, State, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate Federal, State, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory programs and jurisdictions that may affect such activities. The most accurate method of determining the legal extent of a wetland for federal or state regulations is a field delineation of the wetland boundary by a professional trained in wetland delineation techniques. General Sun Path Diagram

www.scifun.wisc.edu

Passive Solar Heating Principles

SUMMER SUN

WINTER SUN

www.rredc.nrel.gov site 41 DemographicsFuture information which will be of use to determine Next, Census data from the larger Bay View transit ridership, retail and housing markets is gained neighborhood is analyzed to place these numbers from analyzing the area’s statistics. The figure on the in context. Some of this data is not available for the right summarizes some of the key information, solely walkable 1/2 mile distance. within an area 1/2 mile from the commuter rail. One half mile is representative of a comfortable walking Bay View has just under 17,000 housing units, with a distance and is meant to pull a larger number of vacancy rate of four percent. Today, this rate could be transit users. (All data is taken from the Census 2000 higher but is unknown. 66% of the housing units are and, although useful, is seen as nearly out of date). one-family, detached structures and 25% duplexes. Rental housing makes up 36% of the housing stock. 4,233 residents live within 1/2 mile of the intersection Further, the vast majority of the housing stock was of Bay Street and Lincoln Avenue in 2000. Just over built prior to 1939. Some homes even remain from 2,000 households are within this distance, with the time of the rolling mills worker housing. The an average size of 2.17 persons. The majority of median value of the housing stock was valued at residents, 80%, are Caucasian and 20% are minority. $91,900 in 2000. The majority of the population is also between the ages of 25 and 44 years, accounting for 36% within Currently, the housing market has slowed its pace 1/2 mile. This is a large spread, but also is nearly as the economy has slowed even farther. Seven ten years old--therefore, adding nine years yields a properties are currently in foreclosure as of majority population between 34 and 53 years. This December 1, 2009. Comparatively, there were over age group represents a portion of the population 30 properties in foreclosure in Sherman Park, a which will be nearing retirement. Different age groups Milwaukee neighborhood with similar assessed values. have different needs and should be designed for All of these numbers indicate a relatively stable accordingly. Households with children account for neighborhood in Bay View’s housing stock. While old, twenty percent of the population, but the age of these the majority is owner-occupied. children is not known exactly. The leading employment area in Bay View in 2000 was In 1999 (the year from which the 2000 income data is management, professional and related occupations. taken), the median household income was $30,250. This barely edges out sales and office occupations. This amount is just below the city’s median income The leading employment industry was educational, of the same time. Adjusting for inflation to today’s health and social services. These are important to dollars (2009), Bay View’s median income amounts note in order to prepare for the commercial component to $39,251 (data.bls.gov). [Of course, this is not of this thesis. Locating a good amount of office a direct comparison due to external factors which space could allow for jobs in the area at a walkable affect income, this is just done to get a handle on the distance. Of a large majority of workers aged 16 and numbers.] A slim majority of households in the radius over, 77% drive alone to their place of employment, in of the transit stop have access to one vehicle. a car, truck or van--most likely a personal automobile. Reducing these trips will have a positive impact on the environment and provide for a more sustainable community.

42 site 0-5 years 262

5-17 years 645

25-44 years 1,542 1 Vehicle per 460 Household

High School 567 2 Vehicles per 433 Graduate Household

Female 2,059 Median Hsld 30,250 Income

Male 2,174 Households 2,012

500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Population within 1/2 mile of Transit Stop Households within 1/2 mile of Transit Stop each symbol = 500 each symbol = 500 $ = 10,000

US Census 2000, SF 1 and SF 3 site 43 A new apartment development on Kinnickinnic Avenue Groppi’s Market, a Bay View staple

The Sugar Maple on Lincoln Avenue Puddlers Hall, where iron workers from the rolling mills would meet 44 site BayToday, ViewBay View Todayis a thriving neighborhood of Milwaukee. It enjoys its unique location which allows for a bit of separation from the rest of the city. Many of its residents have lived in their homes for several years and take great pride in the neighborhood. Although the same sense of animosity between the historic east and west settlements is largely gone, the two sides are visibly divided by rail and highway.

Many Milwaukee urbanists have dubbed Bay View as “The New Eastside” for its many pubs, restaurants and local businesses. Bay View does have a strong commercial strip along Kinnickinnic yet the discontinuation of business along the street does not create an uniform feel. Pockets of activity along the street do not contribute to a sense of identity. Storefronts along KK Ave are often smaller than modern storefronts. The local Business Improvement District is active in recruiting businesses but there remains a notable turnover rate at these storefronts.

Further, as Kinnickinnic is broken up, this leads to different nodes of concentration around the area. One node is at Lincoln Avenue and Kinnickinnic, even though just to the northeast, the Bay Street/KK intersection is the gateway into and out of Bay View. Then, Russell Avenue is also a node of commercial activity, where signature bars are located and Groppi’s Market still opens its doors. Russell Avenue provides the center of activity for the historic east settlement of Bay View.

For these reasons it is that Bay View lacks a clear center. On the Eastside, North Avenue is the clear node of activity and the Lower Eastside has Brady Street to focus on. The development surrounding the future KRM Rail depot which this thesis provides is intended to address this lack of center and create a new center for the community.

site 45 precedent Sluseholmen is a new neighborhood plan in a former Copenhagen,islands extend right up Denmark to the water’s edge,/ Arkitema allowing +The Sjoerd use of canals Soeters is a unique concept which could industrial area south of the medieval downtown center residents to get close to and interact with the water. easily be introduced into this thesis project in order to of Copenhagen, Denmark. In Denmark, there is an The buildings are spaced farther apart to account for bring people closer to Milwaukee’s natural features. urban population shift to the edge to be near water. the low sun angle at the high latitude. Due to the poor weather most of the year, its citizens Unfortunately, the project is not as successful in terms make the most of each day and relish the opportunity Each block contains a green courtyard for the of affordable housing--many units are not sold and only to enjoy outdoor living. residents, with vehicle parking underneath the a few are deemed “public housing.” The area has also courtyard. Of course, bicycles are favored in Denmark not taken off as planned due to the absence of the In many parts of Europe, large harbor terminals have but many people also get around by small canoe bridge to connect Sluseholmen to the area just north been moved out of the cities, toward the outskirts or kayak in this neighborhood development. Each and expand the commercial street. where there are deeper seas to accommodate the block is one large building, yet designed to appear as ships. This frees up the inner harbor area for new separate facades. development. CONNECTION: For this project, the use of high-quality The new Sluseholmen neighborhood offers diverse materials are favored, such as masonry buildings, living accommodations, shopping and a future transit granite or brick pavers and high quality streetscape connection over the harbor. Water is the essential like walkway lights, bridges, benches, trees and green design element in the creation of the canals, taking courtyards. cues from Amsterdam and Venice. The housing

www.static.panoramio.com 48 precedent www.sustainablecities.dk. precedent 49 HarborThe City of Copenhagen Baths / undertook Copenhagen, a massive clean-up Denmark effort of its harbors. The inner harbor connects out to the salty sea and contains two harbor swimming areas. The outer harbor areas along the coast have three baths or cafes. The harbor baths only allow swimming within the boundaries, but people can be seen jumping into the water all along the edge. One area, the Copenhagen Cablepark, is for more active beach goers with full equipment rental and activities such as wakeboarding and waterskiing along high wires above the water attached to six pylons. All of the waterfront recreation areas are located in former and current industrial areas.

CONNECTION: The notion of swimming in the Milwaukee River is a bit unsettling but could be done in the future with the proper remediation. The feasibility of this is very low, yet the lesson is not overlooked here. A more interactive sort of urban recreation could take place on Lake Michigan similar to the cable park. The location of the baths in industrial areas, turned summer recreation hot spots is also applied to Milwaukee for this thesis.

LEFT : Island Brygge bath BELOW LEFT: Halvandet bath wayfaring.info BELOW RIGHT: Docken Beach Cafe

halvandet.dk en.momondo.com 50 precedent KopRotterdam van was Zuid decimated / Rotterdam, after World War II Netherlandsand the city began to rebuild promptly. Before the war, Rotterdam typified a traditional Dutch city (Meyer 86). Plans to improve the city center were developed as far back as the mid 1800s, as new transportation modes moved into the city including shipping and rail. However, as Rotterdam became Europe’s largest port by the 1930s, its infrastructure could not support the central business district. As focus spread toward the river, the central business district became disconnected. In 1944, as the city prepared to rebuild, a radical plan was enacted.

First, after privately owned land was taken over by the Dutch government in 1940, a plan was developed to redistribute the land. Even more drastic was the re-zoning of the city and removal of the central business district from the historic city center northwest to a new boulevard and central city axis. Third in the rebuilding scheme was a large expanse of public open space. The city’s fabric was so dense that this scheme reduced the building coverage to approximately thirty percent (Meyer 92).

After twenty years of reconstruction, local planners and architects began to criticize the city’s efforts. The historic city center still remained vacant, the declining population left the streets desolate and too much open space further enhanced the bleak feeling of the center. Most significant in the critiques was the lack of Rotterdam’s connection to its history and connection between city center and river. Loss of the river connection was only emphasized by Rotterdam’s disappearance of shipping during the 1960s. City planners ceased building the post-war plan in the 1970s and, beginning in the 80s and continuing today, “urban planners shifted their emphasis to improving the quality of public space and to the quantity and variety of urban functions: new theaters, museums and other public buildings” (Meyer 96). Most importantly, Rotterdam began to focus its efforts toward the relationship between the city and river. Plans began to shape the obsolete harbor area and the Kop van Zuid (island in the center of the Maas river), into an extension of the city center. The central idea now is to make the river the center of the city, instead of its border.

CONNECTION: Rotterdam is a perfect example of the two critical elements of this thesis: re-establishing a connection to the water and to the city’s history. More than that, the city’s reconstruction has embraced modern architecture and planning which has resulted in buildings by renowned architects Norman Foster, Renzo Piano and others. The diverse architecture makes the area unique and provides a sense of identity. However, this massive leap in scales may not be the best fit for this thesis, as evidenced by the middle picture on the left. What is taken from this is the return to the historic dutch architecture and urban roots. model of central city and Kop van Zuid (island) from Rotterdam planning office SOURCE: Gastil precedent 51 LondonBy the 1930s, Docklands London’s nearly Regenerationeight square mile Today, the docklands are a major tourist, business docklands steers this thesis design in the right expanse of docks were flourishing, handling over and residential area, a truly mixed-use community. On direction. 35 million tons of cargo per year along 55 miles of the east end of the Thames is the London city airport. riverfront along the Thames. Yet, like most other port Connecting through the development is a light-rail facilities, activity declined after World War II. A 1962 transit system, enabling visitors and residents easy report recognized the need for redevelopment and access. even recommended relocating and condensing the port’s functions. One single entity was created to CONNECTION: London has been very successful in handle the development and implement the plans at redeveloping its harbor area and replacing it with an the docklands in 1981. At that time, 39,000 people even more profitable development. A clear mix of uses lived in the docklands area (Craig-Smith 61), 95% of bring people to the area at all times of day or night. whom resided in social housing. This is a great example for this thesis. The integration of transit is an important example of success, as well. Much of the development was focused on business and job creation for the docklands in the early years. Many notable architects have also turned the Tourism became an important focus in the mid-90s. docklands into a fashionable district and icon for Cultural events and arts activities in a residential area London. This thesis project has the potential to began to drive a new focus for development, including become an icon of new development for Milwaukee. www.dockland.co.uk heritage and historical links. Looking further to proven examples within the

Isle of Dogs and Canary Wharf Canary Wharf www.telegraph.co.uk www.travelpod.com 52 precedent InnerIn terms of Harbor American examples Redevelopment of highly successful / urban Baltimore, waterfront regenerations, Maryland Baltimore is continually cited as the leader for the U.S.. Founded in 1729, Baltimore lies along the upper reaches of the Chesapeake Bay north of the Patapsco River outlet. In its early days, the chief export was tobacco. After ironworks were added to the port’s list of functions, the city began to flourish and expand throughout the nineteenth century. Following a great fire in 1904, the city’s infrastructure was improved with wider streets, steel works expanded their operations and oil refining started at the port. Since World War II however, Baltimore has struggled with industrial decline (Craig-Smith 16), as containerization has moved two miles down stream toward the Atlantic.

Beginning in the mid 1950s, wealthy business owners began to take initiative for the city’s decline and formed Action Group for Baltimore in 1956. The group commissioned a master plan for the downtown the year after. The plans were broken into two groups and the first plan for the Inner Harbor area, over 250 acres, was prepared in 1964. After the federal government reduced money for central city improvements, the city shifted its focus to the inner harbor. Tourists began to arrive in the mid 80s to enjoy the new cultural destinations that Baltimore offered.

Although not initially began as a tourism center, the port has attracted enough tourism to sustain itself. Now, Baltimore’s harbor area houses both the professional Converted power plant in to commercial use baseball and football teams, the National Aquarium, and several other cultural museums and tourists attractions.

CONNECTION: Because Baltimore is hailed as the best example for American waterfronts, this example is given heavy consideration. For this thesis, the integration of uses is important, yet the tourism component may not be the best solution for this area of Bay View. Cultural uses are important and could lead to community destinations within the thesis which serve the local residents and celebrate the site’s local founding and history.

Camden Railroad Yards, now the home of Baltimore Orioles precedent 53 Southworks is a 575 Lakeside acre site, 10 miles Chicago south of DevelopmentAlso, the project / SOMwill extend + SasakiSouth Shore Assoc. Drive along downtown Chicago. This covers the former US Steel the lakefront and extend the street grid, which will South Works manufacturing site. The project area connect the South Chicago neighborhood to the joins the south side working class neighborhoods with lakefront again for the first time in over a century. A 1.5 miles of the city’s lakefront. The site will be built new harbor will be created adjacent to existing boat out over the next 30 years and centers around transit- slips. There are also plans for wind turbines on the oriented development. existing pier on Lake Michigan and a potential district cooling plant using lake water. At the Southworks The steel mill closed in 1992 and the buildings were parks, utilizing some materials from the steel mill will demolished. In 1998, the City of Chicago hired SOM recall the site’s heritage. to lay out a master plan for light industry on the site. After market studies pointed out the site wouldn’t CONNECTION: The Southworks project is very similar appeal to industry, a new developer changed direction to this project in Bay View. First, it is on the brownfield toward a mixed-use neighborhood and hired SOM and site of an old steel mill, which is the case in Bay View. Sasaki Associates. Reconnecting the street grid is a major focus for this thesis, in order to connect the neighborhood more The project is pursuing LEED ND certification and was efficiently. The mixed-use and mixed density are ways selected as a ND pilot project. Southwork’s site design to break up the scale of the development. includes an aggressive use of “green” material and design strategies, including permeable paving, green Moreover, Southworks serves as a good precedent for streets and an aggressive stormwater management large-scale sustainability. The permeable surfaces, www.sasaki.com plan. The project plan calls for 1,000 residential units, stormwater treatment and on-site power production a regional retail center, neighborhood retail, civic are all ideas that will be incorporated into this thesis space, large open space, extension of the lakefront to project. the southern most point and two new schools--all on a brownfield site.

www.bunhamplan100.uchicago.edu 54 precedent Prairie Crossings Crossing is an conservation / Grayslake, community Illinois and The / Prairie site is built Holdingswith 359 single-family Corporation homes Transit-Oriented Development located in a northwest in traditional midwestern vernacular and 36 suburb of Chicago and is approximately 60 miles condominiums near the local commuter rail station. A south of Milwaukee. The property was slated to be charter school on the eastern edge of the site serves developed in a typical suburban style with 1,600 the local students and surrounding neighborhoods, homes until, in 1987, the property was acquired by as well as a working organic farm. Over sixty percent a conservationist. Along with seven other neighbors, of the site is protected natural areas, fit with over ten Prairie Holdings Corporation was founded and acted miles of trails. Native plants filter stormwater runoff as developer. The development was planned based before it gets to Lake Aldo Leopold at the center of the on ten guiding principles of conservation and lifelong development. learning. Prairie Crossings actually exists more as two separate developments of the condos and small retail near the transit and large single family homes near the lake and prairie. The strong local sense of community doesn’t allow residents to feel as if they live in two separate communities, though.

CONNECTION: The lessons of Prairie Crossing stem more from the ecological perspective of the developers than the weak connection to a transit- oriented development. The design focus of the community toward the natural environment engaged the residents. It is today a very active, conscientious community. Features such as swales, native plants and crushed limestone trails allow stormwater to filter through the ground and regenerate the aquifers, rather than clog the municipal system. This thesis community in Bay View will focus on environmental design and sustainability measures. The one fault of Prairie Crossing is that it is not truly transit-oriented but makes up for that with its conservation efforts.

precedent 55 Portland,In terms of planning Oregon and, to a / larger Transit-Oriented extent, policy opened Development in 1998, estimates attribute over $3 billion in initiatives, Portland has been on the forefront of new development within walking distance of stations change for decades. Beginning in 1978 with the along the 38-mile line (TCRP 359). implementation of an Urban Growth Boundary, which limits development outside urban boundaries and Because Portland is light years ahead of Milwaukee preserves rural areas, the city has focused largely in terms of planning, transit and governance, the on transit. Growth boundaries also encourage following case studies are shown to portray the neighborhood infill. While transit began as an potential which could happen in Milwaukee. One large afterthought, as successful developments sprang difference to their success is the structure in which up again and again, Portland began to use transit Portland sees itself--in terms of an overall region-- investments to build communities (“TCRP Report 102” compared to Southeastern Wisconsin. 357). The term, Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) will be covered in the subsequent program section, but Portland has proven that, given multiple transit primarily refers to “compact, mixed-use development opportunities, development will thrive. Transit has not near transit facilities and high-quality walking only spawned new growth and demand but changed environments” (TCRP S-1). Between 1990 and 2000, the way people live their daily lives. ridership on the various transit systems in Portland increased faster than the population (TCRP 356). Moreover, since the region’s second light rail system

Center Commons, www.oregonmetro.gov

Portland’s riverfront development area, www.pdc.us 56 precedent This TOD is a mixed-use, infill development five miles When the Portland Streetcar was planned, it was Centereast of downtown Commons Portland. Center Commons lies Thestrategically Pearl Districtrouted through the Pearl District to spur adjacent to a highway, 1/4 mile from a light rail station large-scale redevelopment. In the area were obsolete (which is on the opposite side of the highway) and 1/3 warehouses, industry and brownfield sites left by the mile from three different bus routes. The community railroad. Today, the Pearl is home to a burgeoning consists of 314 housing units on 4.9 acres. The site artist community, galleries, boutiques and upscale is a former department of motor vehicles facility but loft housing which could rival Milwaukee’s Third Ward. surrounded by a stable residential neighborhood--with Average housing densities in the area are the highest industrial use on the opposite side of the highway. in Portland at 120 dwelling units per acre (TCRP 369). When complete, or by full build-out, the Pearl District The Commons were complete in 2001 and contain will house over 10,000 residents in 5,500 dwelling four separate buildings. Each building is a different units and provide 21,000 jobs including 1 million massing and scale and serves a different market. square feet of new retail space. The project consists of both affordable and low- income apartments, senior housing and market rate The Pearl comprises 90 city blocks north of the central townhouses for sale. After construction, a survey business district and is bounded by a highway to the of the apartment’s residents found their behavior west and Willamette River to the northeast. In the changed, with transit use increasing drastically for past, this area was a marsh along the river and filled work trips by 50% and 60% for non-work trips. to make way for railyards. By the turn of the twentieth century, the district was the transportation hub until CONNECTION: This project is a great example the 1950s. As in most other post-war cities, transport of implementing a change in behavior to the methods changed over to highway and air and the development’s residents, as well as the surrounding industrial district became vacant. The city began neighborhood. This thesis project attempts to increase planning efforts for the area but it was not until a 1997 the use of public transit in the local community, and development agreement when work began to take even the region and decrease the reliance on personal off. Since 1998, the assessed property values more automobile trips. The mixed style of buildings and than doubled, surpassing the city’s expectations. The users is also important for this thesis. Streetcar did not begin serving the area until 2001. Many residential buildings have ground-floor retail, as required by zoning, and are surpassing the past area www.explorethepearl.com norms of seven story residential height.

CONNECTION: Using public transit as a catalyst for development is the lesson from The Pearl District. The district exploded with growth soon after construction and streetcar lines came through. Yet the area remains in demand and continues to exceed expectations and early density requirements today. For Bay View, the large scale of development is not necessarily appropriate for the context of single- family residential neighborhoods. But density can be approached in different ways. Bay View’s new KRM station will act as a catalyst for new TOD development.

Center Commons, www.otak.com www.explorethepearl.com precedent 57 program TOD[ The following & TND info stemsPrinciples from an early book by architect Peter Calthorpe - “The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, community and the American dream.” ]

Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) or Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND), are interchangeable terms for a type of development which is really defined by walkability. These types of developments are a return to the historic patterns of urban growth. The concepts are based largely on three principles: that growth should be guided by transit expansion; that single-use or Euclidean zoning should be replaced with mixed use standards and; that architecture should be oriented toward the public domain and human scale.

In essence, TOD or TND neighborhoods resemble very much what Bay View looks like today and was built as before the automobile was even invented. TOD design is based on walkable neighborhoods which contain a mix of housing types, densities and costs, complemented by a mix of supporting public space, retail and service uses along transit corridors (p 41). The mix of uses planned out in walkable neighborhoods reduces the reliance on the automobile for frequent trips and allows trips to be combined.

An important aspect of the TOD design is that developments can and should be planned and built without transit. This provides a stronger focus on the pedestrian experience and creates healthier communities. Not just the physical fitness of the population is increased, but the dependence on the automobile is reduced by increasing opportunities for biking, walking and using transit, thus reducing our carbon consumption. The TOD principles work for this thesis master plan, despite the fact that the KRM Commuter Rail is still in the planning phase. Integrating this future, regional transit links are necessary for this neighborhood’s success.

The Next American Metropolis 60 program [

There are two types of TOD developments defined by Calthorpe, the Urban TOD and Neighborhood TOD. For this thesis, the Urban TOD model is shown here and will be followed closely.

An Urban TOD is located directly on the trunk line of the transit network--in this case, a future commuter rail system. Urban TODs require higher densities TOD Guiding Principles: of commercial, jobs and residential uses. The level of development surrounding the transit stop must be enough to support the need for transit and • mixed-use infrastructure expense as well as create the most transit-bound trips. • transit-oriented • walkable The walking distance is defined as 2,000 feet, or a • diverse comfortable ten minute walk. In some cases, 1,000 feet is used to represent a five minute walk. In the model to the right, diagramming the Urban TOD, the outer most circle represents the edge of the 2,000 foot walking distance from the very center of development- the transit stop. Both public space and Core Commercial uses directly surround the Transit Stop. Past the commercial core is Employment. Residential space lies farthest from the Core Commercial and is Urban TOD Model usually separated by public open space. [ The Core Commercial uses which should be developed include convenience retail and local office space, at a minimum. Larger commercial could include restaurants, entertainment functions, second floor residential use and higher intensity office and even light industrial uses. The commercial area will serve transit riders and local residents, reducing the amount of vehicle trips and increasing options for those without access to a personal vehicle (i.e., kids or lower income families) or with reduced mobility (i.e., senior citizens). The mixed-use nature of TOD’s provides for a 24-7 community, with different people using the center at all different times--24 hours per day, 7 days per week. This creates the most vibrant community.

The Secondary Areas noted on the Urban TOD model lie outside of the 2,000 foot walking distance, making them more appropriate for auto use and lower densities. Secondary Areas must lie no farther than

program 61 one mile from the center of development, yet still be Park space should dot the development and a one to well connected via the street network. Commercial four-acre park is recommended within two blocks of uses which will compete with the transit node at the any residence. Placed closed together, these parks center should not be placed in Secondary Areas. provide space for neighborhood children. Doing so could preclude the area from developing a clear and successful retail center. Suitable uses for Conversely, village greens or transit plazas are used for the Secondary Areas are community schools, lower- civic purpose and should be paced at the intersection density single family residential, large community of Core Commercial and residential use. “This A Mixed-Use, Mixed-Density parks and lower-density employment centers. essential piece of the commons once gave identity Neighborhood to the larger community and acted as the physical The figure above shows recommended density glue between residential neighborhoods, commercial arrangements for the residential space in an Urban centers and civic centers” (Calthorpe 92). TOD that achieve the average density. Housing needs should be met with a mix of housing types and To allow for a true diversity of uses, another important densities, to allow for a mix of home ownership types, point of Calthorpe is, the TOD should be a minimum not to mention a variation to the neighborhood’s of ten acres for sites which are infill or redeveloped, character. Calthorpe cites a minimum residential similar to this thesis project in Bay View. density of 10 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) to support bus transit, with even higher densities needed for rail. The average residential density of 18 du/ac shown above is intended to set a “baseline standard for all TODs, as well as encourage variety.”

The public spaces provide a focus for each neighborhood. Parks should be located adjacent to public streets and retail uses and should not be used as buffer areas between surrounding developments. The parks are used for neighborhood meeting places and recreation. Due to this nature, the best location is in proximity to residential areas. The Next American Metropolis 62 program “Defined by a comfortable walking distance, the TOD is made up of a core commercial area, with civic and transit uses integrated, and a flexible program of housing, jobs and public space surrounding it.

The densities and mix of these primary uses, though controlled by Zoning Code Integrating Mixed-Use certain minimums, is determined by the specifics of each site and economy.” The Next American Metropolis

Proper Street Network for TOD

The Next American Metropolis 2040: Getting There program 63 Form-Based Codes are a model for municipalities toForm-Based use as a planning Codeguide and Principles customize to the individual conditions of each place. Whereas traditional zoning is concerned with land use and separation of that use, form-based codes focus on the character and mass of the built environment. Like TOD and TND principles, form-based codes rely on a mix of uses. SmartCode, as shown on the lower right, was developed by the planning firm of Duany-Plater-Zyberk in 2003 and is the modern pioneer of form-based codes.

SmartCode promotes the following: “walkable and mixed-use neighborhoods, transportation options, conservation of open lands, local character, housing diversity, and vibrant downtowns.” The transect is separated into distinct zones which provide the basis for neighborhood structure. Each zone varies by its scale and intensity of the built environment. Within each zone are different requirements for street design, public and private street frontage and public or civic The Next American Metropolis space.

This method of planning realizes that each zone has its own proper forms and environment. Just as a sprawling ranch home fits in a more rural setting, a tall apartment building fits in the urban setting, but the two are not necessarily interchangeable.

This thesis will utilize principles of SmartCode to design for new streets and public spaces.

64 program The Suburban Sprawl Transect

This is non-transect of Conventional Suburban Districts that has been prepared (with malevolent intent) by Dan Zack. [email protected]

The Typical Urban to Rural Transect

program 65 TheSite following Assembly images represent different land assemblies for potential development. The boundaries and scale of development may change over the course of this thesis, as new data is collected and more in- depth analysis performed. The total land size shown here includes public infrastructure such as roads, sidewalks, highways and rail lines. Each site includes the southern edge of Jones Island so the port facilities can be considered for consolidation. Land identified here is primarily vacant and therefore, under utilized.

The smallest, at 291 acres, is primarily focused on the existing vacant land. Some of the buildings north of Bay Street will have to be demolished or can be reused in a new scheme.

The next largest, at 371 acres, extends the first area to the east and lakeshore. This encompasses infill land which is designated wetlands, as well as the US Coast Guard buildings. Nonetheless, those properties could be redeveloped with more compatible uses.

The final image, at the far right, at 517 acres, is the most ambitious of the schemes. This tackles land across the Kinnickinnic River at the former Milwaukee Solvay Coke and Gas site and industrial sites on the south bank of the KK River. This is also the only scheme which considers properties at the intersection of Bay Street and Kinnickinnic Avenue. This particular intersection forms the gateway into Bay View from traffic heading south on KK Avenue.

It is important to note that these images do not represent the limits of the effect new development will have and are only to be seen as limits for particular site interventions.

291 acres 371 acres 517 acres 12,680,000 sf 16,105,000 sf 22,555,000 sf

66 program 291 acres 371 acres 517 acres 12,680,000 sf 16,105,000 sf 22,555,000 sf

program 67 [

Preliminary Program:

• 20% public/civic • 40% commercial • 30% residential • 10% infrastructure [

68 program While specific densities of use are recommended to sustain Transit-Oriented Bay View already has a strong residential community surrounding the future KRM Development, these can be translated into percentages of total land use. Calthorpe depot. However, transit does require a certain ridership for success and, in this prescribes the following gross densities (p 63) for a successful Urban TOD. case, the inclusion for park and ride services to the larger Milwaukee community will most likely occur. Given the amount of for-sale signs and slow moving real • public or civic use 5-15% estate market, it is hard to recommend so much residential. But residential is • core/employment use 30-70% needed to serve commercial functions and this type of development would be • housing use 20-60% phased in over time, so as not to saturate the market. For these reasons, 30% residential use is considered sufficient and proposed for this program. This For this thesis, the above percentages are found to be on-par with the initial instinct translates to approximately 112 acres and a maximum of 2,016 dwelling units (at for program requirements. Therefore, using the previous recommendations as the recommended urban density of 18 du/ac). a rationale for this thesis, the following program is proposed. The medium-sized parcel assembly of 371 acres is chosen as the most realistic programming option. Finally, new streets will need to be built and existing street connections made. Ten percent is allotted for these functions but will most likely increase. The real need in Bay View is for some larger-serving retail and commercial functions. These uses will be a mix of local, regiona, or national retail surrounding the transit These percentages and densities allow for a truly mixed-use, Transit-Oriented stop and office space. Commercial functions account for 40% of the program, Development for Bay View. which is the largest of the proposed uses. This equals 148 acres of commercial.

Public and civic space will be scattered throughout the site area in different scales and functions. Open space, planned park space and town plazas will all be mixed, making 20% of the program. The public community spaces provide an identity for Bay View and central meeting places for both residents and visitors.

program 69 conclusions After careful analysis of the existing site conditions, related precedent studies andconnection different urban design principles, this thesis has a more defined focused than in September. As several different scenarios were teased out, this ultimate configuration of history, design, sustainability, conservation and recreation are found to be the most complementary elements of a new urban, waterfront community in Bay View, Milwaukee. When the larger project focus shifted towards a transit concentration around the KRM commuter rail extension in the final days, the final piece of the puzzle was connected. Accumulating development around a new transit center provides the physical center which Bay View is lacking, and a stronger neighborhood identity.

The project goals to the right summarize the lessons learned throughout this pre- thesis process and will guide the future design of this master’s thesis.

72 conclusions 1. Enhance transportation network 2.project Re-connect goals street grid 3. Connect to rivers, lake 4. Establish and enhance commercial districts 5. Connect to site history 6. Create stormwater management plan 7. Sustainable design 8. Expand park network 9. Provide multiple modes of transit connections 10. Design for walkable communities and the pedestrian realm

conclusions 73 74 conclusions 43

794 New Lake Interchange

Residential & Retail Inll Development

Extend Commercial Corridor Residential & Retail Inll

New Bridge!

NATIONAL AVENUE

Extend Street Grid to Water GREENFIELD AVENUE

This is an early master plan framework diagram for New the overall area. The thesis study area has since been MITCHELL Parks! STREET Extend condensed. This does not touch the level of detail Commercial 794 which will be required for future plans. This diagram Corridor only represents one possible scenario of development and is not the final plan for this thesis. The final plan will come in May of 2010.

BECHER Transit- STREET Oriented Development

New Interchange LINCOLN Conguration AVENUE

conclusions 75 references 78 references Calthorpe, Peter. The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, community, and the American dream. New York, Princeton Architectural Press, 1993. Print.

Craig-Smith, Stephen J., and Michael Fagence, eds. Recreation and Tourism as a Catalyst for Urban Waterfront Development: An international survey. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1995. Print.

Collis, Hugh. Transport, Engineering and Architecture. New York, Architectural Press, 2003. Print.

Congress for the New Urbanism. Codifying New Urbanism: How to reform municipal land development regulations. Chicago: American Planning Association, 2004. Print.

Dittmar, Hank, and Gloria Ohland. The New Transit Town: Best practices in transit-oriented development. Washington D.C.: Island Press, 2004. Print.

Gastil, Raymond W. Beyond the Edge New York’s New Waterfront. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press, 2002. Print.

Girling, Cynthia, and Ronald Kellett. Skinny Streets & Green Neighborhoods: Design for Environment and Community. Washington D.C.: Island Press, 2005. Print.

Girling, Cynthia, and Kenneth Helphand. Yard Street Park: The design of suburban open space. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1994. Print.

Gurda, John. “Bay View, Wis.: Milwaukee” Sponsored by the Milwaukee Humanities Program and the National Endowment for the Humanities [Milwaukee]: The Program, 1979. Print.

Kennedy, Rob. 2040 Getting There: Alternatives to sprawl in southeastern Wisconsin. Milwaukee, Citizens for a Better Environment, 1999. Print.

Korn, Bernhard. The Story of Bay View. Milwaukee: Milwaukee County Historical Society, 1980. Print.

Kriehn, Ruth. The Fisherfolk of Jones Island. Oconomowok, C.W. Brown Printing, 1988. Print.

Meyer, Han. “Rotterdam: The Promise of a New Modern Society in a New, Modern City 1940 to the Present.” Out of Ground Zero: Case studies in urban reinvention. Ed. Joan Ockman. Munich: Prestel Verlag, 2002. 84-97. Print.

Petersen, Laurie. “Lake Sure Drives: Two Chicago mega-projects are mega-fixes for old problems.” ChicagoArchitect July-August 2009: 36-40. Print.

Transit Cooperative Research Program. TCRP Report 102 Transit-Oriented Development in the United States: Experiences, Challenges and Prospects. Washington D.C.: Transportation Research Board, 2004. Print.

City of Milwaukee Southeast Side Area Plan, 2008

City of Milwaukee Third Ward Plan

US Census Data, www.census.gov

Hoan Bridge Information, www.wisconsinhighways.org

Form-Based Code, www.smartcodecentral.org, www.transect.org, www.formbasedcode.org

references 79