HDR and preservationists
Moderators: Coyote, nebugeater, Brad, Omaha Cowboy, BRoss
-
- Human Relations
- Posts: 552
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 11:32 am
- Location: Lincoln, NE
HDR and preservationists
It's a shame that so many of you are still so butt-hurt over the fact that the preservationist movement backfired. Now we are grasping at anything we can think of to complain about HDR. Rest-assured that if HDR came out with a plan tomorrow to make capacity improvements to AV to handle more traffic that they would be further vilified for catering too much to the automobile. There is no winning with some around here.
It would be nice for once to get a positive comment about Omaha as it is instead of the constant bitching that Omaha isn't what some think it should be.
It would be nice for once to get a positive comment about Omaha as it is instead of the constant bitching that Omaha isn't what some think it should be.
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
You have completely misunderstood the complaints or don't grasp this entire situation if you think this is just "people bitching about Omaha".CapitalGuy wrote:It's a shame that so many of you are still so butt-hurt over the fact that the preservationist movement backfired. Now we are grasping at anything we can think of to complain about HDR. Rest-assured that if HDR came out with a plan tomorrow to make capacity improvements to AV to handle more traffic that they would be further vilified for catering too much to the automobile. There is no winning with some around here.
It would be nice for once to get a positive comment about Omaha as it is instead of the constant bitching that Omaha isn't what some think it should be.
-
- Human Relations
- Posts: 552
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 11:32 am
- Location: Lincoln, NE
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
If I am not understanding it Linkin, it is because a handful on here can't seem to find approval in anything that happens. The same folks that clamor for dense, urban development are now bemoaning a longer commute time. That is one of the most amusing things I have read on this board as those folks are the ones that are so quick to mock the suburban lifestyle. Now it comes across that they are just as beholden to that lifestyle as anyone else! LOL
Not sure what more HDR was supposed to do here. They can engineer a solution to traffic issues if that is what GetUrban wants, but it will undoubtedly entail more concrete. Any other option is not an engineering matter (like getting folks to take their bike or walk or ride a bus). They can only design to control human behavior to an extent. After that it is up for the humans to make the choices.
This development is a good thing. So was the last HDR proposal. Lets be grateful and not entitled for a change.
Not sure what more HDR was supposed to do here. They can engineer a solution to traffic issues if that is what GetUrban wants, but it will undoubtedly entail more concrete. Any other option is not an engineering matter (like getting folks to take their bike or walk or ride a bus). They can only design to control human behavior to an extent. After that it is up for the humans to make the choices.
This development is a good thing. So was the last HDR proposal. Lets be grateful and not entitled for a change.
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
If you look at my posts earlier in this thread. I was applauding some of the qualities of HDR's proposed design for AK Village, such as its street presence along 67th, Parking behind the main building(s), retail at street level, pedestrian oriented, etc. The only negative I mentioned was increased traffic congestion, which was already coming as AK Village development filled-in the remaining vacant lots....maybe not at the density HDR will bring. Since they bill themselves as being on the cutting edge in their industries of practice, how can it be wrong to have high expectations of them as problem solvers? They want us to have high expectations and can handle the criticism, believe me. It remains to be seen if traffic really becomes a nightmare. Also, I don't believe historic preservation efforts backfired when HDR didn't locate at 11th & Dodge. That was just one of several factors affecting their decision. I thought one of the purposes of this forum was to contribute detailed critical discussion of the pros and cons of developments in general....not to simply praise every crumb of development that comes along.CapitalGuy wrote:If I am not understanding it Linkin, it is because a handful on here can't seem to find approval in anything that happens. The same folks that clamor for dense, urban development are now bemoaning a longer commute time. That is one of the most amusing things I have read on this board as those folks are the ones that are so quick to mock the suburban lifestyle. Now it comes across that they are just as beholden to that lifestyle as anyone else! LOL
Not sure what more HDR was supposed to do here. They can engineer a solution to traffic issues if that is what GetUrban wants, but it will undoubtedly entail more concrete. Any other option is not an engineering matter (like getting folks to take their bike or walk or ride a bus). They can only design to control human behavior to an extent. After that it is up for the humans to make the choices.
This development is a good thing. So was the last HDR proposal. Lets be grateful and not entitled for a change.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.
...and then they were gone.
- Omaha Cowboy
- The Don
- Posts: 1013189
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 5:31 am
- Location: West Omaha
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
This.. And it is. Thank you!...GetUrban wrote:I thought one of the purposes of this forum was to contribute detailed critical discussion of the pros and cons of developments in general....not to simply praise every crumb of development that comes along.
Also, I believe every person who contributes to this forum is pleased as punch that HDR decided to stay and build their corporate HQ's in Omaha. No one can deny that. But having a discussion with differing opinions about Omaha and the area is what makes our forum interesting and (at least to me) a bit addictive ..
Carry on...
Ciao..LiO...Peace
Go Cowboys!
HDR and preservationists
First off, what is done now was partially privately funded and they had to do what those companies (OPA and FNBO) wanted to do. You think First National wanted a more attractive place for their employees to smoke and OPA wanted not to clog the streets. That's why the design in front of those two places is what it is. Structurally, there is only so much to be done with the sidewalks because they have underground storage under them. Some were filled in with concrete, others were left as is, but that limits what you do on top of them.TitosBuritoBarn wrote:I'm going to second this. It's not a bad design, but it's underwhelming. Sure there's now some parking to encourage activity, but the opportunity was there to make the street more multi-modal as it was intended to be (more or less) back in the day and they didn't really capitalize on it. Perhaps there were some budget constraints I'm not aware of, but some sort of bike infrastructure or attractive bus stops would have helped. Or, to be really innovative, they could have made the street into a woonerf. And it's almost completely without any fun little gimmicks (like the pagoda bus stop. why is the pagoda bus stop gone?!).loess hill lusting wrote:Sorry to have offended. Sure, 16th is a fine design, but I don't think fairly straightforward and formulaic sidewalk + planting/furnishing zone + parking w/ bulbouts rises to the level that would refute my "not good" claim. It's exceptionally clean and clear engineering/roadway design, but there isn't much to it in terms of urban design/program/image. I was mostly talking about contracts with broader scopes and/or at greater scales though.guest2017 wrote:16th Street Revitalization is one of the best designs in the city (and will be even more amazing when it's finished - you have no idea what you're talking about.loess hill lusting wrote:The paragraphs above are exactly why I wish Omaha would stop awarding urban design and master planning contracts to HDR; they aren't good at urban design.
For bus stops - why put in one-off bus stops was the problem with the area before? The bus stops were amazing - but they attracted homeless folks. The bus stops they got rid of were some of the neatest ones in Omaha. Also, they are getting rid of most of the bus traffic on 16th street because it's no longer going to be a transfer area.
The pagoda bus stops were removed because homeless people would buy (street name) "whoop |expletive|" at the Downtown Convenient Shop (which was also prevented by the city council from selling alcohol in large quantity single cans) because they were becoming a nuisance to residents of 16th street and Omaha Police. Since removing them (and forcing Downtown Convenient to stop selling single cans), crime and police calls have dropped significantly.
The street is designed for on-sidewalk cafe-style seating. It is the business owners that have to pay for that though, so while it's in the design, you won't see it unless the businesses put the money down for it.
-
- Human Relations
- Posts: 552
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 11:32 am
- Location: Lincoln, NE
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
For the record, I have no problem with critical and thoughtful debate. However, I am troubled that some in this HDR discussion were so quick to literally tell those who were in favor of HDR's original downtown proposal that the supporters of that proposal were not intelligent enough to understand the nuances of passing on a $300 million dollar development that would have brought a 1,000 or more jobs to downtown in favor of saving a couple of older buildings. Regardless of what the Specht supporters think, there was considerable logic in supporting the HDR and OPAS proposal. While I am pleased with HDR's decision to relocate to AV (as they could have easily gone farther west), I will continue to be disappointed that a once in a couple decade opportunity to accelerate development in downtown Omaha was lost due to an emotional reaction that a year from now will be entirely forgotten. My biggest concern with this HDR decision is that it will further push new development in Omaha to the AV area and a way from downtown. I sincerely hope the preservationists have not overplayed their hand on this one to the long-term detriment of downtown Omaha.
- Omaha Cowboy
- The Don
- Posts: 1013189
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 5:31 am
- Location: West Omaha
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
A very thoughtful, critical and insightful post.. ..CapitalGuy wrote:For the record, I have no problem with critical and thoughtful debate. However, I am troubled that some in this HDR discussion were so quick to literally tell those who were in favor of HDR's original downtown proposal that the supporters of that proposal were not intelligent enough to understand the nuances of passing on a $300 million dollar development that would have brought a 1,000 or more jobs to downtown in favor of saving a couple of older buildings. Regardless of what the Specht supporters think, there was considerable logic in supporting the HDR and OPAS proposal. While I am pleased with HDR's decision to relocate to AV (as they could have easily gone farther west), I will continue to be disappointed that a once in a couple decade opportunity to accelerate development in downtown Omaha was lost due to an emotional reaction that a year from now will be entirely forgotten. My biggest concern with this HDR decision is that it will further push new development in Omaha to the AV area and a way from downtown. I sincerely hope the preservationists have not overplayed their hand on this one to the long-term detriment of downtown Omaha.
And as it relates to corporate development (and development in general) downtown, I share your concern on this matter...
Ciao..LiO...Peace
Go Cowboys!
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
Whenever someone rags on the preservationists, I think they forget that the main source of ire was that OPAS originally proposed a parking garage there. No ground level retail, no offices, no mixed use. Just another |expletive| parking garage. Sure they came back around with some vague mixed use idea to save face, which I don't think they had any intention of following through on, but they already played kickball with the hornet nest. I don't blame the preservationists one bit in this. OPAS sunk the deal without their help.
When fortune smiles on something as violent and ugly as revenge, it seems proof like no other that not only does God exist, you're doing his will.
The Bride
The Bride
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
Agree to everything in this.CapitalGuy wrote:For the record, I have no problem with critical and thoughtful debate. However, I am troubled that some in this HDR discussion were so quick to literally tell those who were in favor of HDR's original downtown proposal that the supporters of that proposal were not intelligent enough to understand the nuances of passing on a $300 million dollar development that would have brought a 1,000 or more jobs to downtown in favor of saving a couple of older buildings. Regardless of what the Specht supporters think, there was considerable logic in supporting the HDR and OPAS proposal. While I am pleased with HDR's decision to relocate to AV (as they could have easily gone farther west), I will continue to be disappointed that a once in a couple decade opportunity to accelerate development in downtown Omaha was lost due to an emotional reaction that a year from now will be entirely forgotten. My biggest concern with this HDR decision is that it will further push new development in Omaha to the AV area and a way from downtown. I sincerely hope the preservationists have not overplayed their hand on this one to the long-term detriment of downtown Omaha.
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
Thanks for the info Jacob. This definitely helps put things in perspective. :-)iamjacobm wrote:My general thoughts on some of the "urbanists" comments made.
New Urbanism doesn't mean getting rid of everyones vehicles and making everyone walk or bike to everything that they need. The goal is to first, give the people that want to limit their vehicle use that option and second to create places that require parking once and completing a number of tasks.
In A/V an HDR employee can leave work and walk to the gym and workout or get their nails done or grab something as Spirit World before they hit the road to head home, it is a shame that Wholner's didn't make it b/c it would be great for people to grab some food before they head home. I would like A/V to get some more services like a dry cleaners to help make the area even more useful.
What that does for traffic and land use in the city is that a number of errands can be accomplished while using the parking spot you use for work. In the suburban model you need that space at work from 8-5 then a space at the nail salon, then one at the gym, then one at the liquor store ect. Inefficient use of land, creating more gridlock and wasting your time as you drive miles out of your way to get to all the things you need.
-
- Planning Board
- Posts: 2076
- Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2015 10:03 pm
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
Omaha Cowboy wrote:This.. And it is. Thank you!...GetUrban wrote:I thought one of the purposes of this forum was to contribute detailed critical discussion of the pros and cons of developments in general....not to simply praise every crumb of development that comes along.
Also, I believe every person who contributes to this forum is pleased as punch that HDR decided to stay and build their corporate HQ's in Omaha. No one can deny that. But having a discussion with differing opinions about Omaha and the area is what makes our forum interesting and (at least to me) a bit addictive ..
Carry on...
Ciao..LiO...Peace
It's great to be in a city where we aren't 100% sure where the city will be in 10 years. To see some actual change and growth! I feel like we are in the Austin of the 90's and I hope through things like civic activists and this forum we can somehow avoid Austin's current problems with infrastructure (I35!!!!)
- Omaha Cowboy
- The Don
- Posts: 1013189
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 5:31 am
- Location: West Omaha
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
I couldn't agree with you more ...Athomsfere wrote:Omaha Cowboy wrote:This.. And it is. Thank you!...GetUrban wrote:I thought one of the purposes of this forum was to contribute detailed critical discussion of the pros and cons of developments in general....not to simply praise every crumb of development that comes along.
Also, I believe every person who contributes to this forum is pleased as punch that HDR decided to stay and build their corporate HQ's in Omaha. No one can deny that. But having a discussion with differing opinions about Omaha and the area is what makes our forum interesting and (at least to me) a bit addictive ..
Carry on...
Ciao..LiO...Peace
It's great to be in a city where we aren't 100% sure where the city will be in 10 years. To see some actual change and growth! I feel like we are in the Austin of the 90's and I hope through things like civic activists and this forum we can somehow avoid Austin's current problems with infrastructure (I35!!!!)
Ciao..LiO...Peace
Go Cowboys!
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
The spect building supporters are not to blame. The process was moving along despite the outrage. The problem happened with HDR feeling spurned by OPA going back on their original offer by raising the demamds.CapitalGuy wrote:For the record, I have no problem with critical and thoughtful debate. However, I am troubled that some in this HDR discussion were so quick to literally tell those who were in favor of HDR's original downtown proposal that the supporters of that proposal were not intelligent enough to understand the nuances of passing on a $300 million dollar development that would have brought a 1,000 or more jobs to downtown in favor of saving a couple of older buildings. Regardless of what the Specht supporters think, there was considerable logic in supporting the HDR and OPAS proposal. While I am pleased with HDR's decision to relocate to AV (as they could have easily gone farther west), I will continue to be disappointed that a once in a couple decade opportunity to accelerate development in downtown Omaha was lost due to an emotional reaction that a year from now will be entirely forgotten. My biggest concern with this HDR decision is that it will further push new development in Omaha to the AV area and a way from downtown. I sincerely hope the preservationists have not overplayed their hand on this one to the long-term detriment of downtown Omaha.
Let's not stoop to the historical revisionist level.
-
- Human Relations
- Posts: 552
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 11:32 am
- Location: Lincoln, NE
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
From the World-Herald article where HDR announced the scrapping of their DT plans:
It is certainly up for debate on whether a parking garage was a worthwhile project for the destruction of the historic buildings (as RN has). We can also certainly debate whether OPAS's parking demands were reasonable or whether they could have been met in some other manner. But, the quote above is indisputable evidence that the success of the preservationist effort to save the Specht site is what altered the HDR project to the extent that it became undesirable in the eyes of HDR to move forward.
Not revisionist at all.
Just to put this all together, the "previously planned parking facilities nearby" is clearly referring to the parking garage that was to be placed on the Specht site. Once that could not happen, HDR was forced to incur greater costs due to having to accommodate the parking demands of OPAS. Those demands were made of HDR because OPAS could not use the Specht site for parking.He said the primary reason for the decision was that the cost of the project had increased and the construction timetable had been delayed. In a statement, he tied the rising costs to the “loss of previously planned parking facilities nearby.” HDR wouldn’t elaborate.
It is certainly up for debate on whether a parking garage was a worthwhile project for the destruction of the historic buildings (as RN has). We can also certainly debate whether OPAS's parking demands were reasonable or whether they could have been met in some other manner. But, the quote above is indisputable evidence that the success of the preservationist effort to save the Specht site is what altered the HDR project to the extent that it became undesirable in the eyes of HDR to move forward.
Not revisionist at all.
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
OPAS could have built around the Specht. They didn't need that building. The fallout downtown is on OPAS more than anyone else. I don't like that HDR pulled out of downtown and I don't really care too much about the Specht, but the preservationists are not to blame here. The greed of OPAS is.CapitalGuy wrote:From the World-Herald article where HDR announced the scrapping of their DT plans:
Just to put this all together, the "previously planned parking facilities nearby" is clearly referring to the parking garage that was to be placed on the Specht site. Once that could not happen, HDR was forced to incur greater costs due to having to accommodate the parking demands of OPAS. Those demands were made of HDR because OPAS could not use the Specht site for parking.He said the primary reason for the decision was that the cost of the project had increased and the construction timetable had been delayed. In a statement, he tied the rising costs to the “loss of previously planned parking facilities nearby.” HDR wouldn’t elaborate.
It is certainly up for debate on whether a parking garage was a worthwhile project for the destruction of the historic buildings (as RN has). We can also certainly debate whether OPAS's parking demands were reasonable or whether they could have been met in some other manner. But, the quote above is indisputable evidence that the success of the preservationist effort to save the Specht site is what altered the HDR project to the extent that it became undesirable in the eyes of HDR to move forward.
Not revisionist at all.
Hdr reason
I am putting this here because I do not know how to respond in the other threads. Opas and HDR were both playing omaha for money to build their offices, parking garages and expansions. HDR was planning a suburban office in the middle of Daly work. They tried to grift from omaha and lost. Let them go to Aksarben where their average work is. It will be a great addition to Ak anyway.
-
- Human Relations
- Posts: 552
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 11:32 am
- Location: Lincoln, NE
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
I don't disagree at all with your sentiments, HR. I am sure that putting cost aside there were plenty of alternatives OPAS could have explored. That being said, they did not want to entertain those alternatives. And, to my recollection they had an agreement in principle to purchase the buildings (although I could be misremembering this fact). They only discontinued those plans after the preservationists raised the issue of destruction of the buildings publicly.
Again, it is what it is. Those opposed to the destruction of the buildings made the moves that they felt were appropriate and just. But it is undeniable that those moves set into motion the eventual HDR change of plans from DT to AV. Frankly, if the cause was important enough to the preservationists, they would own the outcome. The fact that there is so much deflection regarding the effect of their actions makes me think that there is some regret on their part which I don't believe they should have any regret if they believed they were taking just action.
Again, it is what it is. Those opposed to the destruction of the buildings made the moves that they felt were appropriate and just. But it is undeniable that those moves set into motion the eventual HDR change of plans from DT to AV. Frankly, if the cause was important enough to the preservationists, they would own the outcome. The fact that there is so much deflection regarding the effect of their actions makes me think that there is some regret on their part which I don't believe they should have any regret if they believed they were taking just action.
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
The city was going to purchase the buildings and give them to OPA. When the city brought the taxpayers into those historic buildings they opened themselves up to strong public input. If HDR or OPA had put their own cash up and bought the buildings for $11+ million they would have been demoed. Both sides out played their hand when they got the city on the hook for a public purchase to destroy historic stock. That is a bad look all around.CapitalGuy wrote:And, to my recollection they had an agreement in principle to purchase the buildings (although I could be misremembering this fact). They only discontinued those plans after the preservationists raised the issue of destruction of the buildings publicly.
-
- Human Relations
- Posts: 552
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 11:32 am
- Location: Lincoln, NE
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
No doubt the optics of the city-backed purchase also harmed the project. The players should have come up with some sort of alternative financing arrangement that would not have made it appear that the city was directly funding the destruction of the historic buildings.
-
- Library Board
- Posts: 367
- Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 8:28 pm
- Location: Omaha Metro Area
Re: HDR Aksarben Office
My only concern about this was that the taxpayer was going to be on the hook for buying the buildings, I don't like redistribution, especially when it goes to people with more money than me. That said, I think the public outcry over the buildings was greater than the outcry about the taxpayer funding. Even if the owners had sold to either HDR or OPAS of their own free will with no taxpayer money involved, the gnashing of teeth would still have likely derailed the project. heck, look at the Clarinda fiasco. Mutual ponied up their own money and owners were overjoyed to sell the building. I've made no secret of my dislike for the Clarinda and my joy at seeing it come down, but a lot of people were seriously angry about it, despite having no skin in the game other than having the bad taste to think it was worth preserving. In this case there were three much better looking buildings at stake. I have to think that regardless of whether taxpayer money was involved or not things would have ended up the same way. In the end it's better for HDR to go somewhere else in the city if the only way they would build downtown would require cash handouts, but the primary reason they aren't building downtown is because of the preservationists. Kang beat Kodos.CapitalGuy wrote:No doubt the optics of the city-backed purchase also harmed the project. The players should have come up with some sort of alternative financing arrangement that would not have made it appear that the city was directly funding the destruction of the historic buildings.
HDR and preservationists
The preservationists won because the buildings they wanted to save are still there. But in a sense, they also lost because HDR and OPAS weren't willing or didn't try hard enough to design around the buildings and create a solution that met their needs while keeping the historic structures intact. They wanted a clean slate for OPAS to work with, or nothing at all. (Clean slates cost less to work with, admittedly.) Historic buildings are most valuable when they survive and can be re-purposed into new uses over and over again. Each of those buildings has already been re-purposed several times.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.
...and then they were gone.
Re: HDR and preservationists
Let's not get it twisted: OPA, HDR and the building huggers are to blame. My main concern at this point is how the business community perceives downtown. I just don't understand how in "one" city everything big and new goes downtown but here it doesn't.
15-17, 26, 32
Re: HDR and preservationists
IMO, Part of the reason is that Omaha's downtown is at the edge of the city and not centrally located.MTO wrote: I just don't understand how in "one" city everything big and new goes downtown but here it doesn't.
Edit to add: Yes, Chicago's extremely successful downtown is at the edge of that city, but there are big differences such as having a giant lake next to downtown.
Re: HDR and preservationists
Well, at least you acknowledge OPA & HDR are to blame. Their assumption that they could base their only plausible design solution on acquiring historically-designated properties that were not their own, without creating strong opposition, was flawed. Every design solution faces constraints the owner/designer has to deal with, such as gravity, climate, property lines & easements, soil bearing capacity, covenants, land acquisition ability, etc.MTO wrote:Let's not get it twisted: OPA, HDR and the building huggers are to blame.
The primary reason their design wouldn't work is they couldn't acquire the additional property they wanted without constraints, and they were unwilling or unable to change their design to acknowledge that fact. (even though the city did everything they could to give them the property.)
That's like blaming your neighbors and their friends for making you move out to west Omaha because they wouldn't let you take their house and property to add on to yours.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.
...and then they were gone.
-
- Parks & Recreation
- Posts: 1897
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:45 pm
- Location: Omaha Metro Area
Re: HDR and preservationists
And in Downtown Chicago, the basic infrastructure of the city (banks, stores, human needs retailing (socks and underwear), and day to day cafes and other casual restaurants are open after business hours. Not really the case here in O town. Want to talk to a banker about a car loan after work? Better be in the middle of the city or points west, cause in the Big O, the downtown banks close real fast.Omaha1000 wrote:IMO, Part of the reason is that Omaha's downtown is at the edge of the city and not centrally located.MTO wrote: I just don't understand how in "one" city everything big and new goes downtown but here it doesn't.
Edit to add: Yes, Chicago's extremely successful downtown is at the edge of that city, but there are big differences such as having a giant lake next to downtown.
Re: HDR and preservationists
Yeah that makes sense and this city sucks at everything but incongruent development. I'm going to enjoy watching our peers eat our lunch.
15-17, 26, 32
Re: HDR and preservationists
Anyone crying that HDR was "lost" to AV needs to have their head examined. The deal was foul. Pure and simple. Let's recap:
1. Absolutely needless destruction of historic structure NOT RELEVANT TO THE BUILD SITE!
2. $40M in Public bond funding for this nonsense because one upset poor city "leader" simply refuses to compromise site planning on more than an acre of unused greenspace next to the Holland. Because...because...Gottschalk wanted it. And he was going to make the city pay for it.
3. The cost of 100 parking spots for a 30 year note do not torpedo a deal. No, something else was afoot. This was a filthy, backroom handshake deal built on the backs of Omaha taxpayers and at the cost of prime public space and the dismissal of historic structures. Like impudent children who don't get their way, OPAS and HDR took their "ball" and went home. If the so called preservationists won, than we should all jump out of our seats to give them a round of applause.
4. Free market people all over the city should be ecstatic. Grift, corruption, misuse of funds, all serving a multi-billion dollar company. That was the deal. Let them pay for their building like anyone else. Even if it's in AV.
1. Absolutely needless destruction of historic structure NOT RELEVANT TO THE BUILD SITE!
2. $40M in Public bond funding for this nonsense because one upset poor city "leader" simply refuses to compromise site planning on more than an acre of unused greenspace next to the Holland. Because...because...Gottschalk wanted it. And he was going to make the city pay for it.
3. The cost of 100 parking spots for a 30 year note do not torpedo a deal. No, something else was afoot. This was a filthy, backroom handshake deal built on the backs of Omaha taxpayers and at the cost of prime public space and the dismissal of historic structures. Like impudent children who don't get their way, OPAS and HDR took their "ball" and went home. If the so called preservationists won, than we should all jump out of our seats to give them a round of applause.
4. Free market people all over the city should be ecstatic. Grift, corruption, misuse of funds, all serving a multi-billion dollar company. That was the deal. Let them pay for their building like anyone else. Even if it's in AV.
Re: HDR and preservationists
Globochem wrote:Anyone crying that HDR was "lost" to AV needs to have their head examined. The deal was foul. Pure and simple. Let's recap:
1. Absolutely needless destruction of historic structure NOT RELEVANT TO THE BUILD SITE!
2. $40M in Public bond funding for this nonsense because one upset poor city "leader" simply refuses to compromise site planning on more than an acre of unused greenspace next to the Holland. Because...because...Gottschalk wanted it. And he was going to make the city pay for it.
3. The cost of 100 parking spots for a 30 year note do not torpedo a deal. No, something else was afoot. This was a filthy, backroom handshake deal built on the backs of Omaha taxpayers and at the cost of prime public space and the dismissal of historic structures. Like impudent children who don't get their way, OPAS and HDR took their "ball" and went home. If the so called preservationists won, than we should all jump out of our seats to give them a round of applause.
4. Free market people all over the city should be ecstatic. Grift, corruption, misuse of funds, all serving a multi-billion dollar company. That was the deal. Let them pay for their building like anyone else. Even if it's in AV.
When fortune smiles on something as violent and ugly as revenge, it seems proof like no other that not only does God exist, you're doing his will.
The Bride
The Bride
- Coyote
- City Council
- Posts: 33289
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 11:18 am
- Location: Aksarben Village
- Contact:
Re: HDR and preservationists
Little detail, Noddle Bradford Holdings will own the building and get TIF, HDR will rent.Globochem wrote:Let them pay for their building like anyone else.
Re: HDR and preservationists
True, HDR was never going to own the building, but the financial backers of the deal are already invested in Wiatt Plaza in AV. Its possible/likely the downtown project was simply a trial balloon to see how much they could bilk the city.Coyote wrote:Little detail, Noddle Bradford Holdings will own the building and get TIF, HDR will rent.Globochem wrote:Let them pay for their building like anyone else.
Re: HDR and preservationists
...because Dana Bradford (the 'Bradford' in Noddle Bradford Holdings) owns Waitt. Waitt Plaza was going to be Waitt's 15 employees and the rest of the building rented out - it was to be the same place that HDR is going (the entire block). Basically, Waitt said, "Redesign the building to your likings (because you designed it in the first place), let us own it, and we'll rent back to you." Wouldn't surprise me if Waitt placed their employees in a small portion of HDR's building(s).Globochem wrote:True, HDR was never going to own the building, but the financial backers of the deal are already invested in Wiatt Plaza in AV. Its possible/likely the downtown project was simply a trial balloon to see how much they could bilk the city.Coyote wrote:Little detail, Noddle Bradford Holdings will own the building and get TIF, HDR will rent.Globochem wrote:Let them pay for their building like anyone else.
It's not likely the downtown project was a "trial balloon to see how much they could bilk out of the city" - downtown provided HDR a lot more visibility and benefits, but when you factor in that the cost would be twice or three times what Aksarben Village is, you understand why they went another direction.