Omaha Forums

Dundeemaha wrote:

guest2017 wrote:

Dundeemaha wrote:

guest2017 wrote:

Busguy2010 wrote: Hopefully a good chunk of their employees will use transit.

Don't get your hopes up because this won't happen.

I wonder what impact this has on MAPA's planning. All of their looking range options with more transit investment include a Center - Saddlecreek - Maple BRT line.

Dodge Street BRT, which has been in development for years now isn't scheduled to come on service until 2018 - if it ever does - even though TIGER funding was approved by the U.S. Department of Transportation in 2014. Don't get your hopes up for a BRT line that isn't on Dodge for the next decade.

So.. you're saying 2027

Not sure how they possibly think this will be done by 2018 if it construction doesn't start this year. Anyone know when construction was supposed to start?

choke wrote:

Dundeemaha wrote:

guest2017 wrote:

Dundeemaha wrote:

guest2017 wrote:

Busguy2010 wrote: Hopefully a good chunk of their employees will use transit.

Don't get your hopes up because this won't happen.

I wonder what impact this has on MAPA's planning. All of their looking range options with more transit investment include a Center - Saddlecreek - Maple BRT line.

Dodge Street BRT, which has been in development for years now isn't scheduled to come on service until 2018 - if it ever does - even though TIGER funding was approved by the U.S. Department of Transportation in 2014. Don't get your hopes up for a BRT line that isn't on Dodge for the next decade.

So.. you're saying 2027

Not sure how they possibly think this will be done by 2018 if it construction doesn't start this year. Anyone know when construction was supposed to start?

It is actually scheduled to be complete in fall of 2018, and there are going to be very minimal infrastructure improvements. All they have to do is build the stations, lay down a couple jump lanes, re-stripe Dodge Street, and put in some light extending electronics.

I think it's going to be pretty underwhelming as a transit improvement, but it will look clean and maybe encourage new people to ride.

Busguy2010 wrote:

choke wrote:

Dundeemaha wrote:

guest2017 wrote:

Dundeemaha wrote:

guest2017 wrote:

Busguy2010 wrote: Hopefully a good chunk of their employees will use transit.

Don't get your hopes up because this won't happen.

I wonder what impact this has on MAPA's planning. All of their looking range options with more transit investment include a Center - Saddlecreek - Maple BRT line.

Dodge Street BRT, which has been in development for years now isn't scheduled to come on service until 2018 - if it ever does - even though TIGER funding was approved by the U.S. Department of Transportation in 2014. Don't get your hopes up for a BRT line that isn't on Dodge for the next decade.

So.. you're saying 2027

Not sure how they possibly think this will be done by 2018 if it construction doesn't start this year. Anyone know when construction was supposed to start?

It is actually scheduled to be complete in fall of 2018, and there are going to be very minimal infrastructure improvements. All they have to do is build the stations, lay down a couple jump lanes, re-stripe Dodge Street, and put in some light extending electronics.

I think it's going to be pretty underwhelming as a transit improvement, but it will look clean and maybe encourage new people to ride.

So, basically like the city's "bike lanes"? Some new bus shelters and some awkward re-striping of Dodge Street?

choke wrote:

Busguy2010 wrote:

choke wrote:

Dundeemaha wrote:

guest2017 wrote:

Dundeemaha wrote:

guest2017 wrote:

Busguy2010 wrote: Hopefully a good chunk of their employees will use transit.

Don't get your hopes up because this won't happen.

I wonder what impact this has on MAPA's planning. All of their looking range options with more transit investment include a Center - Saddlecreek - Maple BRT line.

Dodge Street BRT, which has been in development for years now isn't scheduled to come on service until 2018 - if it ever does - even though TIGER funding was approved by the U.S. Department of Transportation in 2014. Don't get your hopes up for a BRT line that isn't on Dodge for the next decade.

So.. you're saying 2027

Not sure how they possibly think this will be done by 2018 if it construction doesn't start this year. Anyone know when construction was supposed to start?

It is actually scheduled to be complete in fall of 2018, and there are going to be very minimal infrastructure improvements. All they have to do is build the stations, lay down a couple jump lanes, re-stripe Dodge Street, and put in some light extending electronics.

I think it's going to be pretty underwhelming as a transit improvement, but it will look clean and maybe encourage new people to ride.

So, basically like the city's "bike lanes"? Some new bus shelters and some awkward re-striping of Dodge Street?

...you know, if you don't include that Omaha is acquiring new buses for it. The main concern with BRT is not building it, it's getting funding approval, designing a route and teaching people how to properly use the system. However, in places that have effective BRT systems, the lane is normally specially designated for BRT or HOV. In Omaha, if they don't utilize queue jumping (most likely newly constructed lanes or taking away from general traffic), I don't see how BRT makes the commute faster than driving oneself.

Keeping the comment on subject - I'm curious if HDR's move will remove the BRT stop at 84th? HDR is the designer behind Omaha's BRT and they had a stop set at their HQ on dodge.

You've still got a lot of office buildings there as well as the large employers in Methodist and Children's.

TIF before the planning board.

I heard a rumor that the Ground Breaking Ceremony will be on Friday.

Coyote wrote:I heard a rumor that the Ground Breaking Ceremony will be on Friday.

Going to be a really tight year in A/V with this u/c and UNO having two big projects going. I think it will all work out once it is finished up, but there is a LOT of activity in the area right now.

Does anybody have an idea of who the names of the contractors that got awarded the bids? 2018 will be here before we know it that doesn't leave much time to build a world class headquarters.

Glasshole wrote:Does anybody have an idea of who the names of the contractors that got awarded the bids? 2018 will be here before we know it that doesn't leave much time to build a world class headquarters.

Pretty sure Kiewit has been the builder from day one.

I guess I should have been more specific. Like the drywall company, steel erection, exterior glazing, plumbing and mechanical companies. I was just curious if they were local or out of town

Glasshole wrote:I guess I should have been more specific. Like the drywall company, steel erection, exterior glazing, plumbing and mechanical companies. I was just curious if they were local or out of town

I don't think anyone has ever posted things like that here.

Glasshole wrote:I guess I should have been more specific. Like the drywall company, steel erection, exterior glazing, plumbing and mechanical companies. I was just curious if they were local or out of town

This is a negotiated job for Kiewit, so there has not been a competitive bid. Kiewit will likely take subcontractor bids when the design is done in at least a year. They typically use mostly local subs for these trades.

Going before the Planning Board next Wednesday.

Coyote wrote:I heard a rumor that the Ground Breaking Ceremony will be on Friday.

Maybe it will be next Friday then....I didn't see anything there today.

They must be getting ready to do something. The block was mostly mowed late this week. Also some worker bees were over there mid-week with a pole and GPS unit on the top wandering all over the place taking some kind of measurements. Not surveyors. My husband thought they might be mapping/confirming all the little oddities of the site like the drainage area on the S end between the parking lot and the undeveloped area, the electrical boxes, etc.

This mornings WH about the TIF request for this project: http://www.omaha.com/news/metro/hdr-mig ... 1b91a.html

hatwate wrote:This mornings WH about the TIF request for this project: http://www.omaha.com/news/metro/hdr-mig ... 1b91a.html

Be curious to see how that is received.

MadMartin8 wrote:

hatwate wrote:This mornings WH about the TIF request for this project: http://www.omaha.com/news/metro/hdr-mig ... 1b91a.html

Be curious to see how that is received.

I'm sure not well.

Linkin5 wrote:

MadMartin8 wrote:

hatwate wrote:This mornings WH about the TIF request for this project: http://www.omaha.com/news/metro/hdr-mig ... 1b91a.html

Be curious to see how that is received.

I'm sure not well.

It's like more salt being poured into an un-healed, ever festering wound...

Ciao..LiO...Peace

It isn't like they were going to bypass TIF out of the goodness of their heart.

Longtime lurker, first time poster here. I've followed this HDR story elsewhere and can't help but conclude someone, somewhere else dropped the ball with regards to the issue of locating downtown. After ConAgra decided to pack up and move to Chicago, there was great anger & consternation, not only over the loss of jobs, but over the fact that past political/business leaders agreed to the wholesale evisceration of Jobber's Canyon just so ConAgra could build their sparkling campus. Whoever was ultimately responsible for letting the Specht Building and those one or two others get placed on the chopping block, was rather short sighted in my opinion (in not recognizing that anger) and deserves the blame for HDR's decision to relocate.

That aside, I'm not quite sure what to say about the traffic - seems to be a 'lesser of two evils' situation. As one who occasionally bikes to work though, I would definitely not discount the proximity of the Keystone Trail to Aksarben Village. As opposed to the Big Papio Trail that doesn't have a major east-west connector (at least not that I've ever found?), the Keystone does - hooking in with the Elmwood Park connecter at about 70th & Pacific and meandering north and east for some distance. I know that probably not many workers are bike commuters or would otherwise appreciate this, just thought it is a nice silver lining though.

Crockett1985 wrote:Whoever was ultimately responsible for letting the Specht Building and those one or two others get placed on the chopping block, was rather short sighted in my opinion (in not recognizing that anger) and deserves the blame for HDR's decision to relocate.

First, welcome. It was OPA that put these buildings on the chopping block.

Those two or three little buildings caused a 14 story downtown addition to be built in a CBD-syphon-district at 10 floors. F' those worthless buildings.

One Company - Many Solutions (HDR) and OPAS were too stubborn to make it happen.

http://www.restorationexchange.org/2016 ... buildings/

It wasn't an addition. HDR had a whole city block to craft their solution. (addition to downtown, yes)

iamjacobm wrote:It isn't like they were going to bypass TIF out of the goodness of their heart.

Yep. If everyone else is getting it, why not this project too?

MTO wrote:Those two or three little buildings caused a 14 story downtown addition to be built in a CBD-syphon-district at 10 floors. F' those worthless buildings.

Better than giving in to corporate extortion, demoing whole blocks for a company and then having said company up and leave (with most of its jobs) after not even 25 years. *(incidentally, I think you can thank them for bringing about TIF too)


The Capital District should do well to make up for this though.

GetUrban wrote:One Company - Many Solutions (HDR) and OPAS were too stubborn to make it happen.

http://www.restorationexchange.org/2016 ... buildings/

It wasn't an addition. HDR had a whole city block to craft their solution. (addition to downtown, yes)

...this basically says that OPAS wanted something specific - requiring demoing the buildings - and HDR, being the designer trying to please their client, designed a solution that their client wanted. If OPAS wanted to keep the building, or gave that as an option for HDR to design, they would have done it.

guest2017 wrote:

GetUrban wrote:One Company - Many Solutions (HDR) and OPAS were too stubborn to make it happen.

http://www.restorationexchange.org/2016 ... buildings/

It wasn't an addition. HDR had a whole city block to craft their solution. (addition to downtown, yes)

...this basically says that OPAS wanted something specific - requiring demoing the buildings - and HDR, being the designer trying to please their client, designed a solution that their client wanted. If OPAS wanted to keep the building, or gave that as an option for HDR to design, they would have done it.

The REO story also says:

Stott said it was “surprisingly easy” to create schemes to meet the Holland’s space requirements. He noted HDR was responding to a client’s needs and requirements. “They had done a lot of legwork; they traveled and toured similar facilities. In my personal opinion, the restrictions given to HDR forced the solution in a specific direction.
“As independent peers, the Gang challenged those requirements,” Stott said. “By challenging them, we met both the spirit and the letter of those requirements.”

The "Gang of 5" found solutions that would have met OPAS program needs. That was the main point...that it was possible to keep the historic buildings and meet their program needs. They don't say exactly what the "restrictions given to HDR" were, but one would assume clearing the historic site first was an OPAS requirement.

Also keep in mind that HDR had a whole block across the street, a clean slate, which could have been configured to add additional functional space for OPAS, such as parking, to make up for any shortcomings OPAS had on their constrained property. They couldn't work it out.

GetUrban wrote:

guest2017 wrote:

GetUrban wrote:One Company - Many Solutions (HDR) and OPAS were too stubborn to make it happen.

http://www.restorationexchange.org/2016 ... buildings/

It wasn't an addition. HDR had a whole city block to craft their solution. (addition to downtown, yes)

...this basically says that OPAS wanted something specific - requiring demoing the buildings - and HDR, being the designer trying to please their client, designed a solution that their client wanted. If OPAS wanted to keep the building, or gave that as an option for HDR to design, they would have done it.

The REO story also says:

Stott said it was “surprisingly easy” to create schemes to meet the Holland’s space requirements. He noted HDR was responding to a client’s needs and requirements. “They had done a lot of legwork; they traveled and toured similar facilities. In my personal opinion, the restrictions given to HDR forced the solution in a specific direction.
“As independent peers, the Gang challenged those requirements,” Stott said. “By challenging them, we met both the spirit and the letter of those requirements.”

The "Gang of 5" found solutions that would have met OPAS program needs. That was the main point...that it was possible to keep the historic buildings and meet their program needs. They don't say exactly what the "restrictions given to HDR" were, but one would assume clearing the historic site first was an OPAS requirement.

Also keep in mind that HDR had a whole block across the street, a clean slate, which could have been configured to add additional functional space for OPAS, such as parking, to make up for any shortcomings OPAS had on their constrained property. They couldn't work it out.

I am absolutely blown away by this article. In a mere three hours time, 5 individuals were able to develop innovative solutions to the quagmire in which the city, OPAS, and HDR found themselves. Has there ever been a clearer example of a "win-win" situation or a "have your cake and eat it, too" scenario? Take your pick of proverbial expressions. I hope that the recommendation made towards the end of the article actually comes to fruition in some way, shape, or form. No longer can those who seek to develop in Omaha--OPAS, Mutual of Omaha, and Conagra, to name but a few notable examples--make the genuine claim that their plans can only be achieved with a blank slate. This is a "win-win" for Omaha.

GetUrban, thank you for sharing.

The planning department passed an amendment to the Aksarben Village Mixed Use Development Agreement to make this lot a 160 Ft height limit. I would assume this finial height will be pretty much what they requested. ~160 feet should have a notable presence.

Any idea how tall BCBS is?

skinzfan23 wrote:Any idea how tall BCBS is?

I'm checking...

164 feet

Will HDR's clients be able to see it driving in from the airport? Sorry, I couldn't resist. Lol

TIF documents confirm. 160 ft building.

TIF for this project is on the City Council agenda for tomorrow, 9/27. TIF info: http://cityclerk.cityofomaha.org/images ... c/1353.pdf

Just this once, deny the TIF.

MTO wrote:Just this once, deny the TIF.

Why?

RNcyanide wrote:

MTO wrote:Just this once, deny the TIF.

Why?

Pretty simple enmity, 100% malignity, spite, revenge.