Old Union Pacific Headquarters Lot

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

Moderators: Coyote, nebugeater, Brad, Omaha Cowboy, BRoss

User avatar
RNcyanide
Planning Board
Posts: 2780
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Boston

Post by RNcyanide »

ad2330 wrote:Look I hope more than anything this actually happens, I just have my doubts.  

Is there really a demand for high end office space?  Especially for that kind of square footage?
I think it's going to be really difficult to find retailers capable of paying the rent necessary to make the numbers work.
I DO think there is a starving demand for some very nice condos w/ a concierge type service.
That would be one LARGE building to go 25 stories in the air on a lot that covers an entire square block.

I actually was thinking a very high end/boutique style hotel on that lot would be spectacular given its location and the fact that we have 0 high end hotels in downtown Omaha.
It would be really nice if they split the use of the block. Basically the exact opposite Gavilon and UP did with their buildings. Leave some space for either public use or for another structure.
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
ad2330
Home Owners Association
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Post by ad2330 »

RNcyanide wrote:
ad2330 wrote:Look I hope more than anything this actually happens, I just have my doubts.  

Is there really a demand for high end office space?  Especially for that kind of square footage?
I think it's going to be really difficult to find retailers capable of paying the rent necessary to make the numbers work.
I DO think there is a starving demand for some very nice condos w/ a concierge type service.
That would be one LARGE building to go 25 stories in the air on a lot that covers an entire square block.

I actually was thinking a very high end/boutique style hotel on that lot would be spectacular given its location and the fact that we have 0 high end hotels in downtown Omaha.
It would be really nice if they split the use of the block. Basically the exact opposite Gavilon and UP did with their buildings. Leave some space for either public use or for another structure.
I agree.  More economical and would allow for taller buildings to expand our skyline.

Gavilon for instance is beautiful, but it's really too bad you won't even notice its presence in our skyline.  Obviously, Gavilon isn't concerned with that and I wouldn't expect them to be, but it's frustrating from a resident's perspective.

Don't get me started on TD building out west...:)
User avatar
RNcyanide
Planning Board
Posts: 2780
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Boston

Post by RNcyanide »

Oh god, if we could have got TD downtown, it could have potentially been absolutely stunning. Even if they kept the divisive seafoam color (which I don't really mind), it would have been fantastic.

I love the design of Gavilon, but I think it would have done more justice with the space and the building if they had constructed it in the Old Mill area. Imagine it perched atop the hill where Old Mill Toyota is vacating.
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
BRoss
IT Director
Posts: 10002780
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 7:39 pm
Location: West Central Omaha

Post by BRoss »

RNcyanide wrote:Oh god, if we could have got TD downtown, it could have potentially been absolutely stunning. Even if they kept the divisive seafoam color (which I don't really mind), it would have been fantastic.
And just think how tall it would have been. The one in Old Mill is 11 stories, but there is also three additional buildings on our campus here. If all those were combined into something downtown, it would have been another 5 or 6 stories!
User avatar
Linkin5
County Board
Posts: 4542
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 7:59 pm

Post by Linkin5 »

lmdramos wrote:Hotel Deco? It's a 4 star hotel and is working to become a 5 star hotel.
Yeah, isn't Magnolia Hotel pretty high end as well?
User avatar
Brad
City Council
Posts: 1033408
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2004 6:03 pm
Location: Omaha, NE
Contact:

Post by Brad »

Nebraska only has 2, AAA - 4 Diamond Hotels.  The Hilton and Hotel Deco.

http://ww1.aaa.com/AAA/AAADiamonds/Awar ... 012012.pdf
User avatar
iamjacobm
City Council
Posts: 10389
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Chicago

Post by iamjacobm »

RNcyanide wrote:
ad2330 wrote:Look I hope more than anything this actually happens, I just have my doubts.  

Is there really a demand for high end office space?  Especially for that kind of square footage?
I think it's going to be really difficult to find retailers capable of paying the rent necessary to make the numbers work.
I DO think there is a starving demand for some very nice condos w/ a concierge type service.
That would be one LARGE building to go 25 stories in the air on a lot that covers an entire square block.

I actually was thinking a very high end/boutique style hotel on that lot would be spectacular given its location and the fact that we have 0 high end hotels in downtown Omaha.
It would be really nice if they split the use of the block. Basically the exact opposite Gavilon and UP did with their buildings. Leave some space for either public use or for another structure.
Just a guess, but considering the Lanoha connection I would expect a well landscaped plaza on this lot along with the building.
User avatar
skinzfan23
City Council
Posts: 9228
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 11:26 am
Location: Omaha/Bellevue

Post by skinzfan23 »

Brad wrote:Nebraska only has 2, AAA - 4 Diamond Hotels.  The Hilton and Hotel Deco.

http://ww1.aaa.com/AAA/AAADiamonds/Awar ... 012012.pdf
Just thought I would point out, the only other 4 Diamond metro hotel is Ameristar in Council Bluffs.
User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4441
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Post by S33 »

I don't think this would have anything to do with PacLife, the timeframe wouldn't make sense.

Who knows, cool (potential) project, though.
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill
User avatar
iamjacobm
City Council
Posts: 10389
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Chicago

Post by iamjacobm »

skinzfan23 wrote:
Brad wrote:Nebraska only has 2, AAA - 4 Diamond Hotels.  The Hilton and Hotel Deco.

http://ww1.aaa.com/AAA/AAADiamonds/Awar ... 012012.pdf
Just thought I would point out, the only other 4 Diamond metro hotel is Ameristar in Council Bluffs.
I had no idea that was a 4 Diamond, wow.
User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4441
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Post by S33 »

Also of note: it would appear as though the city did give away the former UP site without recourse, should the project fail, as Lanoha would have to purchase that plot of land from the Townsend backers.

Unless...

Townsend foot the bill for the demolition of the old UP building, and, in that case, I would have to assume the demo costs far outweighed the land?

The city either really f'ed up, or made a very smart move. (I don't know enough to speculate)
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill
icejammer
County Board
Posts: 3571
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Council Bluffs

Post by icejammer »

Townsend footed the bill on the demo in exchange for the sale price of $1.
"Destiny is not a matter of chance, it is a matter of choice; it is not a thing to be waited for, it is a thing to be achieved."

--William Jennings Bryan
User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4441
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Post by S33 »

icejammer wrote:Townsend footed the bill on the demo in exchange for the sale price of $1.
Would anyone care to guestimate the cost of demo and disposal, and then an estimate of that plot of land?
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill
User avatar
iamjacobm
City Council
Posts: 10389
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Chicago

Post by iamjacobm »

S33 wrote:
icejammer wrote:Townsend footed the bill on the demo in exchange for the sale price of $1.
Would anyone care to guestimate the cost of demo and disposal, and then an estimate of that plot of land?
Don't quote me, but $4 million sounds awfully familiar.
User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4441
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Post by S33 »

iamjacobm wrote:
S33 wrote:
icejammer wrote:Townsend footed the bill on the demo in exchange for the sale price of $1.
Would anyone care to guestimate the cost of demo and disposal, and then an estimate of that plot of land?
Don't quote me, but $4 million sounds awfully familiar.
Land or demo?
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill
User avatar
iamjacobm
City Council
Posts: 10389
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Chicago

Post by iamjacobm »

S33 wrote:
iamjacobm wrote:
S33 wrote:
icejammer wrote:Townsend footed the bill on the demo in exchange for the sale price of $1.
Would anyone care to guestimate the cost of demo and disposal, and then an estimate of that plot of land?
Don't quote me, but $4 million sounds awfully familiar.
Land or demo?
Sorry for demo costs.
User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4441
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Post by S33 »

iamjacobm wrote:
S33 wrote:
iamjacobm wrote:
S33 wrote:
icejammer wrote:Townsend footed the bill on the demo in exchange for the sale price of $1.
Would anyone care to guestimate the cost of demo and disposal, and then an estimate of that plot of land?
Don't quote me, but $4 million sounds awfully familiar.
Land or demo?
Sorry for demo costs.
Minus the lot being empty for the better part of 5 years, the city probably did alright.
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill
User avatar
byrdrules
Home Owners Association
Posts: 168
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Midtown

Post by byrdrules »

ad2330 wrote:I actually was thinking a very high end/boutique style hotel on that lot would be spectacular given its location and the fact that we have 0 high end hotels in downtown Omaha.
There's actually a very nice hotel right across the street...
psl25201
Home Owners Association
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 11:50 pm

Post by psl25201 »

Did you all know that the reason UP didn't build a taller building was because of 9/11?  They originally planned for a taller building, but after 9/11, decided that it proposed a significant enough safety risk to alter their plans.

Maybe y'all knew this, but I had no idea.
User avatar
RNcyanide
Planning Board
Posts: 2780
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Boston

Post by RNcyanide »

psl25201 wrote:Did you all know that the reason UP didn't build a taller building was because of 9/11?  They originally planned for a taller building, but after 9/11, decided that it proposed a significant enough safety risk to alter their plans.

Maybe y'all knew this, but I had no idea.
It's funny and sad at the same time. Besides, 19 stories is enough stories for a plane to hit.
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
Planning Board
Posts: 2635
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Post by GetUrban »

psl25201 wrote:Did you all know that the reason UP didn't build a taller building was because of 9/11?  They originally planned for a taller building, but after 9/11, decided that it proposed a significant enough safety risk to alter their plans.

Maybe y'all knew this, but I had no idea.
I have heard they simply wanted more square footage per floor to serve the needs of larger departments, which was more important than building higher. The Atrium eats up some significant square footage though. But the building still has more than 1,000,000 square feet. I know a guy who works there...I'll see if he knows why they didn't build higher. How reliable  is your source?
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.
User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4441
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Post by S33 »

psl25201 wrote:Did you all know that the reason UP didn't build a taller building was because of 9/11?  They originally planned for a taller building, but after 9/11, decided that it proposed a significant enough safety risk to alter their plans.

Maybe y'all knew this, but I had no idea.
IF that is true, it's one of the dumber things I've heard in a long time.
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill
Joe_Sovereign
Library Board
Posts: 433
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 3:57 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Post by Joe_Sovereign »

S33 wrote:
psl25201 wrote:Did you all know that the reason UP didn't build a taller building was because of 9/11?  They originally planned for a taller building, but after 9/11, decided that it proposed a significant enough safety risk to alter their plans.

Maybe y'all knew this, but I had no idea.
IF that is true, it's one of the dumber things I've heard in a long time.
Both are true.  They did want as much square footage as possible per floor but also I think any ideas of trying to make some kind of skyline impact was negated by concerns after 9/11.  Interestingly both FNB and UP have publicly stated the wish they had built bigger because the have since needed more space.
User avatar
iamjacobm
City Council
Posts: 10389
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Chicago

Post by iamjacobm »

Joe_Sovereign wrote:
S33 wrote:
psl25201 wrote:Did you all know that the reason UP didn't build a taller building was because of 9/11?  They originally planned for a taller building, but after 9/11, decided that it proposed a significant enough safety risk to alter their plans.

Maybe y'all knew this, but I had no idea.
IF that is true, it's one of the dumber things I've heard in a long time.
Both are true.  They did want as much square footage as possible per floor but also I think any ideas of trying to make some kind of skyline impact was negated by concerns after 9/11.  Interestingly both FNB and UP have publicly stated the wish they had built bigger because the have since needed more space.
This is why I actually think a real possibility for the office portion of this building is FNB.  There have been mentions that they are adding jobs to downtown and that their current two buildings are practically full.  This location would be close to their current complex and could help quell some of their parking needs if this building does indeed have a 5 floor parking deck in the structure.  It would also allow FNB to put a physical sign on a building in the skyline, something they don't have right now.
User avatar
RNcyanide
Planning Board
Posts: 2780
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Boston

Post by RNcyanide »

Joe_Sovereign wrote:
S33 wrote:
psl25201 wrote:Did you all know that the reason UP didn't build a taller building was because of 9/11?  They originally planned for a taller building, but after 9/11, decided that it proposed a significant enough safety risk to alter their plans.

Maybe y'all knew this, but I had no idea.
IF that is true, it's one of the dumber things I've heard in a long time.
Both are true.  They did want as much square footage as possible per floor but also I think any ideas of trying to make some kind of skyline impact was negated by concerns after 9/11.  Interestingly both FNB and UP have publicly stated the wish they had built bigger because the have since needed more space.
Well, here's to hoping for a 'Two First National Center' and 'Two Union Pacific Center.'
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
Ben
Human Relations
Posts: 936
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 12:57 pm
Location: Westside

Post by Ben »

I highly doubt First National would take any space in this building, as they have the flexibility of not renewing tenants that they currently have both in the tower, as well as the old bank building across the street.  They could grow rather significantly without expanding their footprint, just by not renewing leases that other companies have in their buildings.

UP, on the other hand, would be a very likely partial tenant in this Lanoha building.  They've recently started leasing space once again in Central Park Plaza due to lack of additional office space in their building.  Plus, these CPP based employes aren't happy as they don't have easy access to UP amenties (like the fitness center and subsidized cafeteria).  This could easily be accomplished at Lanoha via either an underground tunnel or elevated walkway between the buildings, as they're across the street from each other.
User avatar
GetUrban
Planning Board
Posts: 2635
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Post by GetUrban »

My friend at UP just said he had heard nothing of either reason for not building higher. He did say they were concerned about building too flashy of a building and wanted to keep a lower profile to appease stockholders who would rather they spend more on their rail infrastructure, engines, IT, etc. He also said they are short of space in the new building and are renting office space nearby. They have departments which take up several floors already, even with the large floor plates.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.
User avatar
Brad
City Council
Posts: 1033408
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2004 6:03 pm
Location: Omaha, NE
Contact:

Post by Brad »

GetUrban wrote:He did say they were concerned about building too flashy of a building and wanted to keep a lower profile to appease stockholders who would rather they spend more on their rail infrastructure, engines, IT, etc.
I can see that because they don't spend once cent washing their locomotives...
User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4441
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Post by S33 »

Joe_Sovereign wrote:
S33 wrote:
psl25201 wrote:Did you all know that the reason UP didn't build a taller building was because of 9/11?  They originally planned for a taller building, but after 9/11, decided that it proposed a significant enough safety risk to alter their plans.

Maybe y'all knew this, but I had no idea.
IF that is true, it's one of the dumber things I've heard in a long time.
Both are true.  They did want as much square footage as possible per floor but also I think any ideas of trying to make some kind of skyline impact was negated by concerns after 9/11.  Interestingly both FNB and UP have publicly stated the wish they had built bigger because the have since needed more space.
Boy, that 9/11 paranoia sure ran thick
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill
User avatar
thenewguy
County Board
Posts: 3747
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 9:50 pm
Location: Council Bluffs

Post by thenewguy »

If they could squuze out 25 or so stories and anchor it with UP and/or FNB (and use the rest for residential, etc), there would likely still be a need for additional downtown commercial space, yes?  it would be somethin special if the civic parcel was also developed into something tower related.
Go Cubs Go
User avatar
iamjacobm
City Council
Posts: 10389
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Chicago

Post by iamjacobm »

thenewguy wrote:If they could squuze out 25 or so stories and anchor it with UP and/or FNB (and use the rest for residential, etc), there would likely still be a need for additional downtown commercial space, yes?  it would be somethin special if the civic parcel was also developed into something tower related.
PacLife and FirstComp have been mention as possible downtown departures in the Rumors section.  If one or both leave that will be quite a big chunk of office space to hit the market in the Landmark and CPP.  No doubt that would change any spec office projects over the next few years.
User avatar
RNcyanide
Planning Board
Posts: 2780
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Boston

Post by RNcyanide »

Speaking of firstcomp, has anyone heard of where they plan on going?
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
matthewgoett
New to the Neighborhood
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 9:10 pm

Re: 1416 Dodge - Lanoha Highrise

Post by matthewgoett »

Has anyone heard anything else for this plot. Just wondering if Lanaha was serious or not. :shock:
User avatar
OmahaJaysCU
Planning Board
Posts: 2164
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 6:00 pm

Re: 1416 Dodge - Lanoha Highrise

Post by OmahaJaysCU »

matthewgoett wrote:Has anyone heard anything else for this plot. Just wondering if Lanaha was serious or not. :shock:
He's serious....once he finds some tenants, which could take several months/years.
User avatar
iamjacobm
City Council
Posts: 10389
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Chicago

Re: 1416 Dodge - Lanoha Highrise

Post by iamjacobm »

matthewgoett wrote:Has anyone heard anything else for this plot. Just wondering if Lanaha was serious or not. :shock:
There is a mention in next week's agenda. Says that they will dissolve the former TIF agreement for the WST and make a new one with Lanoha for a project between $50-100 million and up to $17 million in TIF funds. Project is for sure progressing.
Varsity
New to the Neighborhood
Posts: 37
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 5:45 pm
Location: Downtown Omaha

Re: 1416 Dodge - Lanoha Highrise

Post by Varsity »

iamjacobm wrote:
matthewgoett wrote:Has anyone heard anything else for this plot. Just wondering if Lanaha was serious or not. :shock:
There is a mention in next week's agenda.  Says that they will dissolve the former TIF agreement for the WST and make a new one with Lanoha for a project between $50-100 million and up to $17 million in TIF funds.  Project is for sure progressing.
Does anyone know how much TIF funds were granted for WST? Or what the WST cost was? I know the scale of the Lanoha project has had a lot of variability where it has been mentioned (Between 10 and 25 floors I think?). Maybe it could give us a better idea of how much interest they are getting and what scale they are currently looking at if we compare? Not really sure how all that works to be honest!
User avatar
iamjacobm
City Council
Posts: 10389
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Chicago

Re: 1416 Dodge - Lanoha Highrise

Post by iamjacobm »

Varsity wrote:
iamjacobm wrote:
matthewgoett wrote:Has anyone heard anything else for this plot. Just wondering if Lanaha was serious or not. :shock:
There is a mention in next week's agenda.  Says that they will dissolve the former TIF agreement for the WST and make a new one with Lanoha for a project between $50-100 million and up to $17 million in TIF funds.  Project is for sure progressing.
Does anyone know how much TIF funds were granted for WST? Or what the WST cost was? I know the scale of the Lanoha project has had a lot of variability where it has been mentioned (Between 10 and 25 floors I think?). Maybe it could give us a better idea of how much interest they are getting and what scale they are currently looking at if we compare? Not really sure how all that works to be honest!
That project got $15.6 million. This current proposal is starting off the request at $5.5 million but there is a possibility that they could raise it up to $17 million if the project needs to be bigger. Basically the move right now is so the developer can restart the 15 year development clock that exists on TIF agreements.

There is still a lot up in the air on this project. I would be really surprised if they get to break ground here before 2015 honestly.
Collin
Home Owners Association
Posts: 228
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 10:52 am

Re: 1416 Dodge - Lanoha Highrise

Post by Collin »

New high-rise planned for downtown Omaha
On Tuesday, the City Council will consider an updated tax increment finance plan to help Omaha’s Lanoha Development build the project.

Read more: http://www.ketv.com/news/local-news/new ... z2qKl6tpCa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
guitarguy
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1292
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:39 am

Re: 1416 Dodge - Lanoha Highrise

Post by guitarguy »

KETV is airing a special on this at 10 tonight.
User avatar
Coyote
City Council
Posts: 33216
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 11:18 am
Location: Aksarben Village
Contact:

Re: 1416 Dodge - Lanoha Highrise

Post by Coyote »

Just saw the 30 second article. They didn't say much that isn't already posted, but there are drawings out by TACK Architects.
Post Reply