Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Trains, Planes, and Automobiles (and Streetcars!).

Moderators: Coyote, Omaha Cowboy, Brad, nebugeater

Turtle9160
Home Owners Association
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:25 pm
Location: Council Bluffs, IA

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby Turtle9160 » Sun Nov 23, 2014 10:52 am

they would have to redo 370 like West Dodge though Bellevue and Papillion to make a belt way work, but it could work. Wasnt building the new US 34 bridge south of Bellevue part of the plan for the "Southern Beltway" at one point?

User avatar
HR Paperstacks
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1730
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 7:39 pm
Location: West Central Omaha

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby HR Paperstacks » Sun Nov 23, 2014 11:28 am

Turtle9160 wrote:they would have to redo 370 like West Dodge though Bellevue and Papillion to make a belt way work, but it could work. Wasnt building the new US 34 bridge south of Bellevue part of the plan for the "Southern Beltway" at one point?

Yes, here's a map of the route they are considering:
Image

daveoma
Human Relations
Posts: 854
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 7:18 pm

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby daveoma » Sun Nov 23, 2014 12:52 pm

I think it may at first seem sensible to install a beltway, however in the end would it not cause more air pollution, increased traffic, suburban sprawl, and destruction of productive agricultural land? It seems to me that any money that would have been spent on a beltway should instead be used to install some kind of mass transit. I would rather see Omaha grow over time to resemble Vancouver or Miami in terms of density as opposed to Dallas or Houston.

Linkin5
County Board
Posts: 3843
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 7:59 pm

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby Linkin5 » Sun Nov 23, 2014 8:22 pm

daveoma wrote:I think it may at first seem sensible to install a beltway, however in the end would it not cause more air pollution, increased traffic, suburban sprawl, and destruction of productive agricultural land? It seems to me that any money that would have been spent on a beltway should instead be used to install some kind of mass transit.  I would rather see Omaha grow over time to resemble Vancouver or Miami in terms of density as opposed to Dallas or Houston.



That would definitely be preferable, I think the last thing Omaha needs to do is build a beltway to promote more sprawl. Would be amazing to see that money go towards light rail, the amount of development and extra housing around the line would be insane if done right.

User avatar
PotatoeEatsFish
Library Board
Posts: 416
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2015 11:59 pm

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby PotatoeEatsFish » Mon Aug 31, 2015 9:21 pm

For a city its size Omaha is very compact which is surprising. Unfortunately there is an urban sprawl that's growing every year so they do need a rapid transit system to keep it compact. The BRT is just a waste of money it will most likely be an expensive failure.
I got that Milf $

daveoma
Human Relations
Posts: 854
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 7:18 pm

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby daveoma » Mon Aug 31, 2015 9:47 pm

PotatoeEatsFish wrote:For a city its size Omaha is very compact which is surprising. Unfortunately there is an urban sprawl that's growing every year so they do need a rapid transit system to keep it compact. The BRT is just a waste of money it will most likely be an expensive failure.

I agree with you about the density. I think Omaha is a much more vibrant city when it is not sprawling.

Joe_Sovereign
Library Board
Posts: 395
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 3:57 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby Joe_Sovereign » Tue Sep 01, 2015 9:10 am

Omaha does not need an outer beltway. Take the money and build a couple commuter rail routes to take people from the outer suburbs to downtown.

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1896
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby GetUrban » Tue Sep 01, 2015 9:39 am

PotatoeEatsFish wrote:For a city its size Omaha is very compact which is surprising. Unfortunately there is an urban sprawl that's growing every year so they do need a rapid transit system to keep it compact. The BRT is just a waste of money it will most likely be an expensive failure.


Omaha is actually a fairly low-density city....more similar to Dallas, rather than an eastern city such as Philidelphia or Baltimore.

This is from 1990, but would still hold true...

http://www.demographia.com/db-us90city100kdens.htm

I agree we don't need a beltway. There is way too much property already in the city that should be redeveloped first.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

MTO
City Council
Posts: 7893
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:49 am
Location: Dundee

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby MTO » Tue Sep 01, 2015 11:54 am

15-17, 26, 32

User avatar
iamjacobm
City Council
Posts: 9031
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Midtown

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby iamjacobm » Tue Sep 01, 2015 12:09 pm

The only potion of a beltway I would be in favor of is making the Platteview Rd stretch limited access highway. Could divert long haul drivers out of the city and free up some capacity as well as feeding the booming Sarpy County.

If they wanted a full loop 204th shouldn't have been built the way it was. The north side of town really doesn't need one, if you wanted to do it they could put a highway spur out around Bennington Road and that would feed into 680.

User avatar
Taco
Home Owners Association
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2015 10:34 am

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby Taco » Tue Sep 01, 2015 12:13 pm

Houston population density: 3,502/sq mile
Omaha population density: 3,218/sq mile

We are actually already less dense than sprawling metropolises like Houston. In fact, among US cities with populations over 100,000, Omaha is between Irving, TX (suburb of Dallas) and Mesa, AZ (suburb of Phoenix) in terms of population density. With no real geographic constraints to our growth, we don't need any more incentives for uncontrollable sprawl. Instead of investing in a new beltway, we should make sure our existing infrastructure and public transportation programs are up to par.

MTO
City Council
Posts: 7893
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:49 am
Location: Dundee

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby MTO » Tue Sep 01, 2015 3:52 pm

Holy shįt! and Houston is my go-to for how not! to build a city. The chamber should launch a silent campaign called "keep it inside 680".
15-17, 26, 32

daveoma
Human Relations
Posts: 854
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 7:18 pm

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby daveoma » Wed Sep 02, 2015 1:22 am

Joe_Sovereign wrote:Omaha does not need an outer beltway. Take the money and build a couple commuter rail routes to take people from the outer suburbs to downtown.

AGREED! :clap:

Joe_Sovereign
Library Board
Posts: 395
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 3:57 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby Joe_Sovereign » Wed Sep 02, 2015 9:23 am

MTO wrote:Holy shįt! and Houston is my go-to for how not! to build a city. The chamber should launch a silent campaign called "keep it inside 680".


I would go as far as keep it east of 132nd. It is difficult to stop the spread of housing but certainly the City, County and Chamber can have a huge influence on business relocation and major retail developments. There is a ton of room for infill in the eastern half of the city.

MTO
City Council
Posts: 7893
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:49 am
Location: Dundee

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby MTO » Wed Sep 02, 2015 2:38 pm

daveoma wrote:
Joe_Sovereign wrote:Omaha does not need an outer beltway. Take the money and build a couple commuter rail routes to take people from the outer suburbs to downtown.

AGREED! :clap:


While we'd all love that a lot of the traffic on these outer bypasses is true interstate traffic bypassing the interior expediting their commutes. My point is we have to think of other people sometimes.
15-17, 26, 32

Joe_Sovereign
Library Board
Posts: 395
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 3:57 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby Joe_Sovereign » Wed Sep 02, 2015 4:37 pm

MTO wrote:
daveoma wrote:
Joe_Sovereign wrote:Omaha does not need an outer beltway. Take the money and build a couple commuter rail routes to take people from the outer suburbs to downtown.

AGREED! :clap:


While we'd all love that a lot of the traffic on these outer bypasses is true interstate traffic bypassing the interior expediting their commutes. My point is we have to think of other people sometimes.


There are examples all over the country of outer beltways driving tons of sprawl. If there was a method to bypass I-80 thru traffic that might not be a bad thing.

User avatar
Garrett
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1849
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 6:29 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby Garrett » Wed Sep 02, 2015 7:58 pm

Joe_Sovereign wrote:
MTO wrote:
daveoma wrote:
Joe_Sovereign wrote:Omaha does not need an outer beltway. Take the money and build a couple commuter rail routes to take people from the outer suburbs to downtown.

AGREED! :clap:


While we'd all love that a lot of the traffic on these outer bypasses is true interstate traffic bypassing the interior expediting their commutes. My point is we have to think of other people sometimes.


There are examples all over the country of outer beltways driving tons of sprawl. If there was a method to bypass I-80 thru traffic that might not be a bad thing.

Exactly this. Building a beltway only encourages further sprawl.
From Omaha to Chicago
From Axel to Garrett

Still the same guy

MTO
City Council
Posts: 7893
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:49 am
Location: Dundee

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby MTO » Wed Sep 02, 2015 11:54 pm

An Omaha beltway (a loop around the metro) is asinine just look at the map. Why every time a kid discovers cities do we have to rehash this tired old freeways cause sprawl trope. Nothing is that simple.
15-17, 26, 32

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1896
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby GetUrban » Thu Sep 03, 2015 12:23 pm

MTO wrote:An Omaha beltway (a loop around the metro) is asinine just look at the map. Why every time a kid discovers cities do we have to rehash this tired old freeways cause sprawl trope. Nothing is that simple.


"Beltways help enable sprawl." would be a more accurate statement.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

User avatar
RNcyanide
Planning Board
Posts: 2748
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Chalco

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby RNcyanide » Thu Sep 03, 2015 12:33 pm

I don't think we need to build a beltway. We need to not build sprawling neighborhoods served by streets with one lane in each direction for several miles. We need to keep the streets we have maintained better than we have. The investment in mass transit shouldn't need to be mentioned. A beltway is a terrible idea, but I think making a bypass around the south would be a little better of an idea.
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

MTO
City Council
Posts: 7893
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:49 am
Location: Dundee

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby MTO » Thu Sep 03, 2015 1:23 pm

What if a city built a beltway but denied any building permits for residential?
15-17, 26, 32

User avatar
jessep28
Planning Board
Posts: 2393
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:10 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby jessep28 » Thu Sep 03, 2015 1:38 pm

MTO wrote:What if a city built a beltway but denied any building permits for residential?


That would be the city council/county commissioner's job to block residential development.
Verbum Domini Manet in Aeternum

User avatar
RNcyanide
Planning Board
Posts: 2748
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Chalco

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby RNcyanide » Thu Sep 03, 2015 1:48 pm

I wouldn't say deny, maybe selectively permit. Or there's a rule where they need to abut against either a 4 lane road or another neighborhood. And still no beltway.
Last edited by RNcyanide on Thu Sep 03, 2015 1:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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

User avatar
iamjacobm
City Council
Posts: 9031
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Midtown

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby iamjacobm » Thu Sep 03, 2015 1:55 pm

Makes absolutely no sense to spend money on a beltway if you are not going to collect increased tax revenue by limiting development.

MTO
City Council
Posts: 7893
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:49 am
Location: Dundee

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby MTO » Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:12 pm

What if a city built a bypass but didn't install exits just interchanges with other freeways?
15-17, 26, 32

MTO
City Council
Posts: 7893
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:49 am
Location: Dundee

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby MTO » Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:16 pm

iamjacobm wrote:Makes absolutely no sense to spend money on a beltway if you are not going to collect increased tax revenue by limiting development.


Isn't controlled development something we advocate around here? So are you for the Texas style just let them build anywhere and everywhere?
15-17, 26, 32

User avatar
jessep28
Planning Board
Posts: 2393
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:10 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby jessep28 » Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:16 pm

RNcyanide wrote:I wouldn't say deny, maybe selectively permit. Or there's a rule where they need to abut against either a 4 lane road or another neighborhood. And still no beltway.


Then that would have to be written up in the zoning regulations enacted by the governing body for the area. There's no reason for the permit office to deny an application which meets all zoning and code requirements.
Verbum Domini Manet in Aeternum

User avatar
PotatoeEatsFish
Library Board
Posts: 416
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2015 11:59 pm

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby PotatoeEatsFish » Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:58 pm

So is this just a rumor still?
I got that Milf $

User avatar
RNcyanide
Planning Board
Posts: 2748
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Chalco

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby RNcyanide » Thu Sep 03, 2015 11:20 pm

PotatoeEatsFish wrote:So is this just a rumor still?


Just pitching ideas back and forth. We are not getting a beltway, probably ever.
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

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1896
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby GetUrban » Thu Sep 03, 2015 11:32 pm

Nothing is set...See page 95-97 Not an easy question to answer....lots of factors at work, including $.

http://www.mapacog.org/images/stories/lrtp2035/LRTP_2035_Amendment2.pdf
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

User avatar
iamjacobm
City Council
Posts: 9031
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Midtown

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby iamjacobm » Thu Sep 03, 2015 11:38 pm

MTO wrote:
iamjacobm wrote:Makes absolutely no sense to spend money on a beltway if you are not going to collect increased tax revenue by limiting development.


Isn't controlled development something we advocate around here? So are you for the Texas style just let them build anywhere and everywhere?


I am not sure I have ever supported institutional control of development in a way of denying building permits for residential. I personally think getting as much tax base on existing infrastructure is the best mode of growth going forward and I support smart growth, but I do not favor a draconian idea like not allowing building permits.

You proposed
What if a city built a beltway but denied any building permits for residential?


What possible benefit would exist in spending the money to build a beltway then prohibiting construction around the investment? I don't support a full beltway, I have said that. Yet if a beltway did end up happening I certainly would want as much possible development around the investment to make it worthwhile.

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1896
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby GetUrban » Fri Sep 04, 2015 9:06 am

Regarding the idea of "not granting building permits" as a method to control growth: Decisions governing smart growth need to happen long before it gets to the point of building permits being issued, such as when zoning is changed from AG to something more intense and during the time when property is being platted and proposed streets are being laid out.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

User avatar
RNcyanide
Planning Board
Posts: 2748
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Chalco

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby RNcyanide » Fri Sep 04, 2015 9:32 am

Developing Hwy370 as a limited access style highway between I80 and I29 would have been the easiest way to do it, but it's too late now. Additionally, they could have done the same for the portion of Hwy6 between Dodge and Gretna, possibly to I80, but again, it's too late for that.
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

User avatar
TitosBuritoBarn
Planning Board
Posts: 2118
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 7:08 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby TitosBuritoBarn » Fri Sep 04, 2015 9:35 am

Instead of a beltway, we could just reconfigure some of the middle lanes of I-80 into express lanes with no entry or exit between, say, I-480 and I-680. There's no reason why a city the size of Omaha needs a 10 lane expressway anywhere.
"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

cdub
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1214
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 1:38 pm
Location: Tempe. AZ

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby cdub » Fri Sep 04, 2015 9:41 am

So, build a beltway to get others through the city quickly but build nothing to prevent sprawl?
Sounds like the worst idea I could imagine. A massive investment that provides almost no benefit to locals other than possibly removing a little bit of through traffic. May as well just build an elevated fly over lane.

The beltway in Omaha's case is just a terrible idea. Sometimes there is no argument.

User avatar
RNcyanide
Planning Board
Posts: 2748
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Chalco

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby RNcyanide » Fri Sep 04, 2015 9:46 am

I agree.
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

daveoma
Human Relations
Posts: 854
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 7:18 pm

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby daveoma » Fri Sep 04, 2015 8:50 pm

Agreed

bigredmed
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1905
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:45 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby bigredmed » Fri Sep 04, 2015 10:49 pm

Want to discourage sprawl? Every developer has to pony up for a 4 lane road and maximum use utilities connected to 144th. Upfront, as part of the fees paid to the city. No building till its in the bank.

East of 144th, you have to pay for necessary upgrades. (Like old buildings that don't have adequate utilities for apartments.)

Want to slow urban sprawl in residential? Sorry OPS fans, but forced conversion of the TAC back into a Technical HS and weakening the Teachers union's hold over the school board elections, and emphasis on quality education is key. People do irrational things for their kids. We all know people who are dressing up in silly costumes or going WWE on some other parent who got the best place for videoing their little princess' dance recital. Buy a house in west O and get Elkhorn or Millard or buy a house in OPS? Which is more likely?

User avatar
Uffda
Planning Board
Posts: 3117
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby Uffda » Sat Sep 05, 2015 8:14 am

bigredmed wrote:Want to discourage sprawl? Every developer has to pony up for a 4 lane road and maximum use utilities connected to 144th. Upfront, as part of the fees paid to the city. No building till its in the bank.

East of 144th, you have to pay for necessary upgrades. (Like old buildings that don't have adequate utilities for apartments.)

Want to slow urban sprawl in residential? Sorry OPS fans, but forced conversion of the TAC back into a Technical HS and weakening the Teachers union's hold over the school board elections, and emphasis on quality education is key. People do irrational things for their kids. We all know people who are dressing up in silly costumes or going WWE on some other parent who got the best place for videoing their little princess' dance recital. Buy a house in west O and get Elkhorn or Millard or buy a house in OPS? Which is more likely?


Although I feel TAC is top heavy with admin and, I think it would cost to much to retrofit it back to a technical high school. I think in the bond issue or a future Issue there was talk about creating a new tech high school.

Teachers union controls school board? You did catch the part with the school board extended school year without anybody's input? I think the school board has other controllers is not the teachers union. :D

Based on your previous post, I feel you know that OPS deals with a lot more than Elkhorn or Millard school districts deal with. Different areas different problems.

bigredmed
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1905
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:45 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: Official: Omaha Beltway Discussion

Postby bigredmed » Sun Sep 06, 2015 10:40 pm

Uffda wrote:
bigredmed wrote:Want to discourage sprawl? Every developer has to pony up for a 4 lane road and maximum use utilities connected to 144th. Upfront, as part of the fees paid to the city. No building till its in the bank.

East of 144th, you have to pay for necessary upgrades. (Like old buildings that don't have adequate utilities for apartments.)

Want to slow urban sprawl in residential? Sorry OPS fans, but forced conversion of the TAC back into a Technical HS and weakening the Teachers union's hold over the school board elections, and emphasis on quality education is key. People do irrational things for their kids. We all know people who are dressing up in silly costumes or going WWE on some other parent who got the best place for videoing their little princess' dance recital. Buy a house in west O and get Elkhorn or Millard or buy a house in OPS? Which is more likely?


Although I feel TAC is top heavy with admin and, I think it would cost to much to retrofit it back to a technical high school. I think in the bond issue or a future Issue there was talk about creating a new tech high school.

Teachers union controls school board? You did catch the part with the school board extended school year without anybody's input? I think the school board has other controllers is not the teachers union. :D

Based on your previous post, I feel you know that OPS deals with a lot more than Elkhorn or Millard school districts deal with. Different areas different problems.


Till the last big school board election, pretty much every board member ran with union money. They helped bloat the admin staff and create school environment issues that were problematic. Millard has old Millard that has exceeded its allotment of scattered site housing and has a significant immigrant pop as does Ralston, Bellevue, and PapioLV. Somehow these districts manage.


Return to “Transportation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest