Lot B Development

Downtown, Midtown, and all parts east of 72nd.

Moderators: Brad, nebugeater, Coyote, Omaha Cowboy

Joe_Sovereign
Library Board
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 3:57 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Joe_Sovereign » Tue Jan 03, 2017 11:28 am

Joe_Sovereign wrote:So are the CLink convention center expansion, parking Garage in Lot D and pedestrian bridge to the riverfront something that would happen simultaneously? Lot D parking structure has to happen before Lot B can be developed.

So what we may see is a master plan for CLink expansion, pedestrian bridge, and complete development plans for Lot B and Lot D. That is a master plan for about 17 blocks of downtown Omaha, Clink expansion and Bridge (1 block), Lot B (4 blocks), and Lot D (about 12 blocks). This is a hugely important plan they are making.


Quoting myself now.

The more I think about it Lot D for sure should be part of the Riverfront plan since it fronts the railroad tracks and connecting Fahey road to the river front is critical to either development. Basically what the City needs is a master plan for redevelopment of everything from Lot D to the riverfront, extending through Con Agra Campus, and Heartland of America Park. Including Parking in Lot D to open up Lot B development, connecting North Downtown to the River Front, covering the railroad tracks, extending Heartland of America park to the river, extending the riverfront boardwalk from Lewis Clark landing all the way to the power plant apartments, building a street grid in the Con Agra Campus and in Lot D, extending Old Market into the Con Agra Campus, Lot D development to include retail, residential, and office.

User avatar
TitosBuritoBarn
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1987
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 7:08 pm
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: Lot B Development

Postby TitosBuritoBarn » Fri Jan 06, 2017 4:16 pm

Dundeeomaha wrote:Let's use 500 spaces as an example: at 18k per space a garage costs 9mil. With 20% down 5% interest on a 15 year term that's just over $3 million in interest payments. Not to mention the maintenance costs for the unproductive grass (read weed filled) lots didn't go away just because there weren't parking spaces.

Cost to build 500 surface lot spaces: $2 million

So yes it can be more expensive.


NEDodger wrote:Gotta agree with Dundeemaha here. CenturyLink Omaha opened in 2003, but you've got to look at the design/plan phase of it so you're talking more like ~17 years ago. No need to put all the extra money up front for the "hope" that all of north downtown is rapidly developed and that we need a parking garage - keep in mind the enormous expanse of land we're talking about. CenturyLink was the first domino to fall. There was a lot of garbage land that had to be cleared out anyways, be it as surface lots or empty gravel lots. It would have made even less sense to have built a costly parking garage at the time while there was a square mile of destitute land surrounding the place


Greg S wrote:In addition to need, there was no more money years ago to build the garage, they were pretty tapped out on everything else.


Right, it makes sense that they wouldn't build a garage back when the Century Link Center was first built if they didn't have the money to do so (no Nickelback profits yet, as I mentioned). But they'll still be putting more money into parking facilities by building surface lots, tearing them down, building new ones, tearing those down and building a garage as opposed to just building a garage. If this area is going to take off, and I'm sure they planned for it to back in 2003, a garage is not an "if" but a "when." Yes, if you have a surface lot your vegetation maintenance costs are lower as there wouldn't be a field of weeds. However, your snow and ice removal costs are higher as you don't need to clear snow and ice from a garage except the top level.

My main point was that if they had the money to spring for the garage (which apparently they didn't), they should have. That's the essence of urban planning. You plan for 17 years from now when things are more swinging, not so much for the present day.
Last edited by TitosBuritoBarn on Fri Jan 06, 2017 7:05 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"Video game violence is not a new problem. Who could forget in the wake of SimCity how children everywhere took up urban planning." - Stephen Colbert

MTO
City Council
Posts: 7802
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:49 am
Location: Dundee

Re: Lot B Development

Postby MTO » Fri Jan 06, 2017 6:01 pm

..."You plan for 17 years from now"...

Where were you when Commissioner Daub opted for the Great Wall of Hilton over the 30 story Marriott! Jk
15-17, 26, 32

User avatar
choke
Human Relations
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 8:46 am
Location: North Omaha

Re: Lot B Development

Postby choke » Tue Jan 10, 2017 5:19 pm

Per KETV:

MECA 'Lot B' development report ready, mayor to review


http://www.ketv.com/article/meca-lot-b-development-report-ready-mayor-to-review/8583254

Leaders from First National Bank of Omaha, Creighton, the College World Series, the NCAA and others were on the committee that drafted the report.


"It'd be surprising if anyone had any major issues with how this whole thing has been put together," said Jay Noddle, a board member.


I think they oughta keep the name LOT B when developed.

User avatar
Coyote
City Council
Posts: 19994
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 11:18 am
Location: Three floors down
Contact:

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Coyote » Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:29 pm

choke wrote:I think they oughta keep the name LOT B when developed.

Too bad Lncoln already has the name rail yard. It would be nice to do homage with something like the Rail Shops...
Image

User avatar
choke
Human Relations
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 8:46 am
Location: North Omaha

Re: Lot B Development

Postby choke » Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:25 pm

Coyote wrote:
choke wrote:I think they oughta keep the name LOT B when developed.

Too bad Lncoln already has the name rail yard. It would be nice to do homage with something like the Rail Shops...


I'd be down with that. Omaha does headquarter UP (for now at least). Some kind of homage to the railroad, extend what they have coming in off of tenth street.

User avatar
Coyote
City Council
Posts: 19994
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 11:18 am
Location: Three floors down
Contact:

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Coyote » Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:30 pm

After looking for a while I gave up... Does anyone have a map showing where the Railyard Shops were?
Ye Olde Railyard Shoppes that is.
Image

Turtle9160
Home Owners Association
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:25 pm
Location: Council Bluffs, IA

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Turtle9160 » Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:47 pm

Coyote wrote:After looking for a while I gave up... Does anyone have a map showing where the Railyard Shops were?
Ye Olde Railyard Shoppes that is.


The old UP Yard shops were roughly 9th - 10th St around Cass - California. I have a copy of a map of downtown that shows everything block by block and what was on them at that time, map is from 1916

User avatar
Coyote
City Council
Posts: 19994
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 11:18 am
Location: Three floors down
Contact:

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Coyote » Tue Jan 10, 2017 10:09 pm

I had not seen this 1895 photo before :
"ladder leans against a brick building in the foreground of this photograph of the Union Pacific shops, 8th to 13th Streets, Davenport Street to Nicholas Street, Omaha, Nebraska."

image.jpeg
image.jpeg (86.95 KiB) Viewed 1109 times
Image

User avatar
Brad
City Council
Posts: 28073
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2004 6:03 pm
Location: Omaha, NE
Contact:

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Brad » Wed Jan 11, 2017 12:06 pm

Where's that from? Durham Collection?
Image
Omaha Skyline Photos, Omaha Aerial Photos, and More.
http://www.bradwilliamsphotography.com
http://www.facebook.com/bradwilliamsphotography
@bradwphoto on Twitter
Greater Omaha Chamber of Commerce Member

User avatar
Omaha Cowboy
The Don
Posts: 5851
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 5:31 am
Location: West Omaha

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Omaha Cowboy » Wed Jan 11, 2017 12:22 pm

Brad wrote:Where's that from? Durham Collection?


Man.. It sure looks like it could be..

That is a fantastic photo :thumb: ...

Ciao..LiO...Peace
Go Cowboys!

User avatar
OmahaJaysCU
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1958
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 6:00 pm

Re: Lot B Development

Postby OmahaJaysCU » Wed Jan 11, 2017 5:37 pm

Am I the only one that thinks the city should focus on The Civic, riverfront and Wall Street sites before they add another huge block to the mix? Seems to me like there is too much going on with too little attention being paid amongst them. It just seems to me like we love to put great ideas on paper but the effort always comes up way short. I'd rather see one or two big wins vs a bunch of half assed projects.

buildomaha
Home Owners Association
Posts: 109
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 7:06 pm

Re: Lot B Development

Postby buildomaha » Wed Jan 11, 2017 5:42 pm

OmahaJaysCU wrote:Am I the only one that thinks the city should focus on The Civic, riverfront and Wall Street sites before they add another huge block to the mix? Seems to me like there is too much going on with too little attention being paid amongst them. It just seems to me like we love to put great ideas on paper but the effort always comes up way short. I'd rather see one or two big wins vs a bunch of half assed projects.

I think it is fine as long as they don't try to rush and get everything done without the demand and end up with sub par, empty buildings throughout downtown.

User avatar
Coyote
City Council
Posts: 19994
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 11:18 am
Location: Three floors down
Contact:

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Coyote » Wed Jan 11, 2017 7:07 pm

Brad wrote:Where's that from? Durham Collection?


I finally found this at Nebraska Memories from the collection of the Omaha Public Library.
Image

User avatar
Omaha_Gabe
Human Relations
Posts: 723
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 1:22 pm
Location: Midtown Crossings

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Omaha_Gabe » Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:36 pm

FIRST IN THE WORLD-HERALD
Omaha civic leaders plan $125 million mixed-use development on lot across from CenturyLink Center

http://www.omaha.com/news/metro/omaha-c ... a471d.html

User avatar
iamjacobm
City Council
Posts: 8639
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Midtown

Re: Lot B Development

Postby iamjacobm » Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:39 pm

http://www.omaha.com/news/metro/omaha-civic-leaders-plan-million-mixed-use-development-on-lot/article_a9e6d336-d944-11e6-8fff-572c613a471d.html

Hurry up an wait on this. Always fun to see some images though.

But don’t expect to see a groundbreaking anytime soon. The report lays out next steps, which include further studies on traffic and the construction of new parking facilities, that would probably take at least three years. And the city hasn’t identified a developer to take on the project, said Mayor Jean Stothert.

The committee suggested that the city and MECA now form an agreement to sort out potential design restrictions for the site and guide any development.


The concept that the committee designated as the “preferred” design contains a diagonal street running from the entrance of the convention center to the ballpark. There would be a park surrounded by restaurants directly across from TD Ameritrade, and the civic institution would be along the diagonal street and visible from 10th Street.

The development has the potential to bring tax money, jobs and activities to Omaha. And it could help the city attract conventions at the CenturyLink Center, Dixon said, because convention attendees often ask for more places to go near the center.

jsheets
Human Relations
Posts: 586
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 12:06 pm
Location: Shadow Lake / Walnut Creek Lake

Re: Lot B Development

Postby jsheets » Thu Jan 12, 2017 11:10 pm

Coyote wrote:
choke wrote:I think they oughta keep the name LOT B when developed.

Too bad Lncoln already has the name rail yard. It would be nice to do homage with something like the Rail Shops...

Couldn't agree more. I still feel like Lincoln stole the name off this message board back in the day...

see: viewtopic.php?p=61209#p61209

User avatar
Brad
City Council
Posts: 28073
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2004 6:03 pm
Location: Omaha, NE
Contact:

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Brad » Fri Jan 13, 2017 8:01 am

iamjacobm wrote:Hurry up an wait on this. Always fun to see some images though.


I hear you there, that's a ways out. Nice looking proposal though.
Image
Omaha Skyline Photos, Omaha Aerial Photos, and More.
http://www.bradwilliamsphotography.com
http://www.facebook.com/bradwilliamsphotography
@bradwphoto on Twitter
Greater Omaha Chamber of Commerce Member

MadMartin8
Planning Board
Posts: 2008
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 12:48 pm
Location: Beyond Thunderdome

Re: Lot B Development

Postby MadMartin8 » Fri Jan 13, 2017 8:02 am

iamjacobm wrote:http://www.omaha.com/news/metro/omaha-civic-leaders-plan-million-mixed-use-development-on-lot/article_a9e6d336-d944-11e6-8fff-572c613a471d.html

Hurry up an wait on this. Always fun to see some images though.

But don’t expect to see a groundbreaking anytime soon. The report lays out next steps, which include further studies on traffic and the construction of new parking facilities, that would probably take at least three years. And the city hasn’t identified a developer to take on the project, said Mayor Jean Stothert.

The committee suggested that the city and MECA now form an agreement to sort out potential design restrictions for the site and guide any development.


The concept that the committee designated as the “preferred” design contains a diagonal street running from the entrance of the convention center to the ballpark. There would be a park surrounded by restaurants directly across from TD Ameritrade, and the civic institution would be along the diagonal street and visible from 10th Street.

The development has the potential to bring tax money, jobs and activities to Omaha. And it could help the city attract conventions at the CenturyLink Center, Dixon said, because convention attendees often ask for more places to go near the center.


Wow, that's going to be a long while. Would have thought there was more urgency.
No posts exist for this topic

Greg S
Planning Board
Posts: 3451
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2004 10:46 am

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Greg S » Fri Jan 13, 2017 8:44 am

Honestly though, these things never seem to go fast around here. Maybe we are finally getting a realistic time table, vs announcements then hearing about delays.

Greg

User avatar
skinzfan23
County Board
Posts: 4933
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 11:26 am
Location: Omaha/Bellevue

Re: Lot B Development

Postby skinzfan23 » Fri Jan 13, 2017 8:49 am

Granted, the end result probably won't end up looking like the proposals, but here are the two proposals mentioned in the article:

Preferred concept: 454 residential units, 130 room hotel and 99,745 sq ft of office space.

Image

Image


Alternate concept: 437 residential units, 130 room hotel and 100,000 sq ft of office space.

Image

Image


Image

Joe_Sovereign
Library Board
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 3:57 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Joe_Sovereign » Fri Jan 13, 2017 8:52 am

I like the diagonal street going south east to north west but the other street joining it with the weird Y intersection and then connecting out in a single exit seems a poor design. I imagine before and after an event the bumper to bumper traffic on these streets and people getting stuck for 20 minutes trying to drive 2 blocks will turn a lot of people off and distract from the enjoyment of the area.

Image

The story doesn't really make it clear since they never actually use the tern Lot D in the story, but it seems like the parking in Lot B is only for the development and the replacement parking spots are still in a Lot D parking garage. I didn't really understand what they were talking about with parking in the story until I saw this.

Image

Joe_Sovereign
Library Board
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 3:57 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Joe_Sovereign » Fri Jan 13, 2017 9:06 am

The Construction order is going to be interesting. Obviously the Lot D Parking Garage would have to come first but there will be less over all parking while this is under construction.

If Lot B is built out in phases as the article suggests I imagine the Parking Garage with the Residential surrounding it would have to be first right after or simultaneous with the roads and the public plazas and green spaces. The other strange shaped lots I guess will be green spaces or surface parking or vacant lots for a while. Making surface parking lots or nice usable green spaces take money to build and maintain but minimally maintained vacant lots are not going to look good on TV.

admiralArchArch
New to the Neighborhood
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 3:34 pm

Re: Lot B Development

Postby admiralArchArch » Fri Jan 13, 2017 9:26 am

How many of these "entertainment districts" can this city sustain?

jsheets
Human Relations
Posts: 586
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 12:06 pm
Location: Shadow Lake / Walnut Creek Lake

Re: Lot B Development

Postby jsheets » Fri Jan 13, 2017 9:32 am

Like shopping malls, probably a new one every 10 years

Dundeemaha
Library Board
Posts: 268
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 11:41 am
Location: Country Club

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Dundeemaha » Fri Jan 13, 2017 9:41 am

admiralArchArch wrote:How many of these "entertainment districts" can this city sustain?


If you cut through the tagline it's just an area with a few bars and restaurants where you can drink outside. So I'd say the city can sustain quite a few...

User avatar
choke
Human Relations
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 8:46 am
Location: North Omaha

Re: Lot B Development

Postby choke » Fri Jan 13, 2017 9:44 am

admiralArchArch wrote:How many of these "entertainment districts" can this city sustain?


How many "entertainment districts" does Omaha currently have?

User avatar
choke
Human Relations
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 8:46 am
Location: North Omaha

Re: Lot B Development

Postby choke » Fri Jan 13, 2017 9:46 am

admiralArchArch wrote:How many of these "entertainment districts" can this city sustain?


How many "entertainment districts" does Omaha currently have? This is needed. I work parking sometimes and people want to leave the Clink for lunch and come back. They get upset when they find out they have to pay 8 dollars to park again if they leave the lot. There needs to be more restaurants near the Clink.

yard salad
New to the Neighborhood
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2015 10:01 am
Location: midtown

Re: Lot B Development

Postby yard salad » Fri Jan 13, 2017 10:01 am

choke wrote:
admiralArchArch wrote:How many of these "entertainment districts" can this city sustain?


How many "entertainment districts" does Omaha currently have? This is needed. I work parking sometimes and people want to leave the Clink for lunch and come back. They get upset when they find out they have to pay 8 dollars to park again if they leave the lot. There needs to be more restaurants near the Clink.


The area around Clink and the park is a wasteland of parking lots. More development around this area will be a great thing. I don't think this would even qualify as a "new" entertainment district since it will help unify the existing North Downtown developments into this area.

Unfortunately the vacuum border of I-480 means that this part of the city is forever cut off from downtown and the new Captiol st. district and that any development in this area will have to be essentially self-sustaining.

Dundeemaha
Library Board
Posts: 268
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 11:41 am
Location: Country Club

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Dundeemaha » Fri Jan 13, 2017 10:10 am

yard salad wrote:
choke wrote:
admiralArchArch wrote:How many of these "entertainment districts" can this city sustain?


How many "entertainment districts" does Omaha currently have? This is needed. I work parking sometimes and people want to leave the Clink for lunch and come back. They get upset when they find out they have to pay 8 dollars to park again if they leave the lot. There needs to be more restaurants near the Clink.


The area around Clink and the park is a wasteland of parking lots. More development around this area will be a great thing. I don't think this would even qualify as a "new" entertainment district since it will help unify the existing North Downtown developments into this area.

Unfortunately the vacuum border of I-480 means that this part of the city is forever cut off from downtown and the new Captiol st. district and that any development in this area will have to be essentially self-sustaining.


Who's going to stand under 480 and exclaim "Ms. Stothert, tear down this highway!"

Joe_Sovereign
Library Board
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 3:57 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Joe_Sovereign » Fri Jan 13, 2017 10:11 am

admiralArchArch wrote:How many of these "entertainment districts" can this city sustain?


Without considering the events at the Clink or AmeriTrade, just between developments at The Yard, The Capital District, Alvine and Lot B you would have maybe 1000 residential units (maybe 2000 to 3000 residents), over 500 hotel rooms, and over 1000 office workers net new in a few blocks.

MTO
City Council
Posts: 7802
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:49 am
Location: Dundee

Re: Lot B Development

Postby MTO » Fri Jan 13, 2017 10:21 am

Side question; why build a parking garage directly in front of the baby bob?
15-17, 26, 32

Linkin5
County Board
Posts: 3782
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 7:59 pm

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Linkin5 » Fri Jan 13, 2017 10:47 am

MTO wrote:Side question; why build a parking garage directly in front of the baby bob?


With where they are building the garage, the Baby Bob landing would flow directly north of the garage.

Omaha_corn_burner
Library Board
Posts: 378
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Omaha_corn_burner » Fri Jan 13, 2017 11:11 am

Joe_Sovereign wrote:I like the diagonal street going south east to north west but the other street joining it with the weird Y intersection and then connecting out in a single exit seems a poor design. I imagine before and after an event the bumper to bumper traffic on these streets and people getting stuck for 20 minutes trying to drive 2 blocks will turn a lot of people off and distract from the enjoyment of the area.

From visiting similar designs in other cities, they usually close those roads off so they are pedestrian only during events.

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1810
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: Lot B Development

Postby GetUrban » Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:04 pm

Linkin5 wrote:
MTO wrote:Side question; why build a parking garage directly in front of the baby bob?


With where they are building the garage, the Baby Bob landing would flow directly north of the garage.


They should set-back the Lot D parking garage from Fahey St. furher to the north so that the south side of the garage aligns with the south side of TDA to the west. Then the entrance to the Baby Bob could align with the wider sidewalk on the north side of Fahey St., as it really should. No reason to have Baby Bob come in to the north between the garage and remaining part of Lot D, or whatever gets built there eventually.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

MTO
City Council
Posts: 7802
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:49 am
Location: Dundee

Re: Lot B Development

Postby MTO » Fri Jan 13, 2017 1:20 pm

GetUrban wrote:
Linkin5 wrote:
MTO wrote:Side question; why build a parking garage directly in front of the baby bob?


With where they are building the garage, the Baby Bob landing would flow directly north of the garage.


They should set-back the Lot D parking garage from Fahey St. furher to the north so that the south side of the garage aligns with the south side of TDA to the west. Then the entrance to the Baby Bob could align with the wider sidewalk on the north side of Fahey St., as it really should. No reason to have Baby Bob come in to the north between the garage and remaining part of Lot D, or whatever gets built there eventually.


I thought the baby Bob's plaza dumbed into MECA Dr/Mike FaHey St which would put the sight lines between the convention center and this garage. It just seams like the city wanted a bigger presence for the bridge which would make more sense to put the Lot D garage further north.
15-17, 26, 32

Joe_Sovereign
Library Board
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 3:57 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: Lot B Development

Postby Joe_Sovereign » Fri Jan 13, 2017 1:48 pm

MTO wrote:
GetUrban wrote:
Linkin5 wrote:
MTO wrote:Side question; why build a parking garage directly in front of the baby bob?


With where they are building the garage, the Baby Bob landing would flow directly north of the garage.


They should set-back the Lot D parking garage from Fahey St. furher to the north so that the south side of the garage aligns with the south side of TDA to the west. Then the entrance to the Baby Bob could align with the wider sidewalk on the north side of Fahey St., as it really should. No reason to have Baby Bob come in to the north between the garage and remaining part of Lot D, or whatever gets built there eventually.


I thought the baby Bob's plaza dumbed into MECA Dr/Mike FaHey St which would put the sight lines between the convention center and this garage. It just seams like the city wanted a bigger presence for the bridge which would make more sense to put the Lot D garage further north.


I would hope before they build the Parking Garage in Lot D they have a master plan for Lot D development as well. There is no reason Lot D can't be developed like Lot B even if it is required to include 2 or 3 massive parking garages.

Maybe the should build the CenturyLink and Ameritrade parking garages overtop of the Railroad Tracks.

MTO
City Council
Posts: 7802
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:49 am
Location: Dundee

Re: Lot B Development

Postby MTO » Fri Jan 13, 2017 2:17 pm

Joe_Sovereign wrote:
MTO wrote:
GetUrban wrote:
Linkin5 wrote:
MTO wrote:Side question; why build a parking garage directly in front of the baby bob?


With where they are building the garage, the Baby Bob landing would flow directly north of the garage.


They should set-back the Lot D parking garage from Fahey St. furher to the north so that the south side of the garage aligns with the south side of TDA to the west. Then the entrance to the Baby Bob could align with the wider sidewalk on the north side of Fahey St., as it really should. No reason to have Baby Bob come in to the north between the garage and remaining part of Lot D, or whatever gets built there eventually.


I thought the baby Bob's plaza dumbed into MECA Dr/Mike FaHey St which would put the sight lines between the convention center and this garage. It just seams like the city wanted a bigger presence for the bridge which would make more sense to put the Lot D garage further north.


I would hope before they build the Parking Garage in Lot D they have a master plan for Lot D development as well. There is no reason Lot D can't be developed like Lot B even if it is required to include 2 or 3 massive parking garages.

Maybe the should build the CenturyLink and Ameritrade parking garages overtop of the Railroad Tracks.


I'm not an engineer but i think building parking facilities over train tracks sounds pretty easy.
15-17, 26, 32

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1810
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: Lot B Development

Postby GetUrban » Fri Jan 13, 2017 2:52 pm

MTO wrote:
GetUrban wrote:
Linkin5 wrote:
MTO wrote:Side question; why build a parking garage directly in front of the baby bob?


With where they are building the garage, the Baby Bob landing would flow directly north of the garage.


They should set-back the Lot D parking garage from Fahey St. furher to the north so that the south side of the garage aligns with the south side of TDA to the west. Then the entrance to the Baby Bob could align with the wider sidewalk on the north side of Fahey St., as it really should. No reason to have Baby Bob come in to the north between the garage and remaining part of Lot D, or whatever gets built there eventually.


I thought the baby Bob's plaza dumbed into MECA Dr/Mike FaHey St which would put the sight lines between the convention center and this garage. It just seams like the city wanted a bigger presence for the bridge which would make more sense to put the Lot D garage further north.


I think we're almost on the same page on this one. There is a strong axis with a wide pedestrian walkway along the north side of Fahey which should continue on to the Baby Bob. The south side of the new Lot D parking garage should follow the same set-backs off Fayhey as the TDA. Vehicle traffic would still need access back around the northeast corner of the CLINK and be kept separate from Ped traffic. The view of the main Bob from Fahey should definitely be maintained and enhanced. I don't remember what all the options looked like for baby bobby....I'll have to go back and look.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

MadMartin8
Planning Board
Posts: 2008
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 12:48 pm
Location: Beyond Thunderdome

Re: Lot B Development

Postby MadMartin8 » Fri Jan 13, 2017 2:56 pm

Greg S wrote:Honestly though, these things never seem to go fast around here. Maybe we are finally getting a realistic time table, vs announcements then hearing about delays.

Greg


True that.
No posts exist for this topic


Return to “Urban Omaha Development”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest