Suburb vs Urban Transportation

Humor and off topic conversation

Moderators: Coyote, Omaha Cowboy, Brad, nebugeater

choke
Human Relations
Posts: 690
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 8:46 am
Location: North Omaha

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby choke » Tue Jan 09, 2018 1:27 pm

GetUrban wrote:This will be a great project, assuming it happens. It's a good fit near the Old Market and will add more life to the area 24/7, even though it's sad to see yet more office space disappear from downtown.

Glad to see APMA is the Architect too.


That is too bad about the office space. The article notes that the investors really did not want to go this route. Or is it just the Landmark building? Keiwit is building new and what about the Rail and Commerce building? Of course, ConAgra isn't filling up too fast either. Hines is gonna have to reconsider their plans for office space on that campus.

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1902
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby GetUrban » Tue Jan 09, 2018 2:30 pm

choke wrote:
GetUrban wrote:This will be a great project, assuming it happens. It's a good fit near the Old Market and will add more life to the area 24/7, even though it's sad to see yet more office space disappear from downtown.

Glad to see APMA is the Architect too.


That is too bad about the office space. The article notes that the investors really did not want to go this route. Or is it just the Landmark building? Keiwit is building new and what about the Rail and Commerce building? Of course, ConAgra isn't filling up too fast either. Hines is gonna have to reconsider their plans for office space on that campus.


I'm sure the Mayor and Chamber of Commerce are already doing a lot to attract more companies and offices to locate downtown, but maybe they still need to step up the effort a few more notches. As long as they don't give away too much. Better mass transit to and from downtown would help too, of course. Maybe a light rail connection to West O and the airport too? If only the money was there, right?
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

buildomaha
Home Owners Association
Posts: 222
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 7:06 pm

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby buildomaha » Tue Jan 09, 2018 2:48 pm

GetUrban wrote:
choke wrote:
GetUrban wrote:This will be a great project, assuming it happens. It's a good fit near the Old Market and will add more life to the area 24/7, even though it's sad to see yet more office space disappear from downtown.

Glad to see APMA is the Architect too.


That is too bad about the office space. The article notes that the investors really did not want to go this route. Or is it just the Landmark building? Keiwit is building new and what about the Rail and Commerce building? Of course, ConAgra isn't filling up too fast either. Hines is gonna have to reconsider their plans for office space on that campus.


I'm sure the Mayor and Chamber of Commerce are already doing a lot to attract more companies and offices to locate downtown, but maybe they still need to step up the effort a few more notches. As long as they don't give away too much. Better mass transit to and from downtown would help too, of course. Maybe a light rail connection to West O and the airport too? If only the money was there, right?

The money issue would be solved if they would stop paving the way (literally with interstate widenings and such) for suburbanites to move further and further from the core. They are the ones who don’t want to pay for the streetcar or any public transportation so why would the rest of the city pay for the unsustainable suburban lifestyle?

Athomsfere
Home Owners Association
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2015 10:03 pm

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby Athomsfere » Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:42 pm

buildomaha wrote:I'm sure the Mayor and Chamber of Commerce are already doing a lot to attract more companies and offices to locate downtown, but maybe they still need to step up the effort a few more notches. As long as they don't give away too much. Better mass transit to and from downtown would help too, of course. Maybe a light rail connection to West O and the airport too? If only the money was there, right?

The money issue would be solved if they would stop paving the way (literally with interstate widenings and such) for suburbanites to move further and further from the core. They are the ones who don’t want to pay for the streetcar or any public transportation so why would the rest of the city pay for the unsustainable suburban lifestyle?[/quote]

The obvious clearly stated!

If only most of Omaha got this.

OmahaOmaha
Home Owners Association
Posts: 119
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:30 pm
Location: West Omaha

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby OmahaOmaha » Wed Jan 10, 2018 9:35 am

Athomsfere wrote:
buildomaha wrote:I'm sure the Mayor and Chamber of Commerce are already doing a lot to attract more companies and offices to locate downtown, but maybe they still need to step up the effort a few more notches. As long as they don't give away too much. Better mass transit to and from downtown would help too, of course. Maybe a light rail connection to West O and the airport too? If only the money was there, right?

The money issue would be solved if they would stop paving the way (literally with interstate widenings and such) for suburbanites to move further and further from the core. They are the ones who don’t want to pay for the streetcar or any public transportation so why would the rest of the city pay for the unsustainable suburban lifestyle?


The obvious clearly stated!

If only most of Omaha got this.[/quote]

Some of us like living in the suburbs. Not all of us want to live in the urban core. Not everyone wants to live in a hundred year old house that's not energy efficient and needs a bunch of updates. Some of us don't want to live in a new infill project located next to older run down homes. Some of us don't like looking at all those unsightly utility lines going all over the place, seeing graffiti, seeing people park on their front lawn, or having neighbors who don't weed their lawns,they spit gum out on the sidewalk, and they don't pick up after their dogs. Some of us prefer to shop at the big box stores where there's lots of parking. Some of us like living in the suburbs so we can send our kids to newer schools. Some of don't want to deal with all the crime in the urban areas.

Some of us don't want to ride a bus, street car, or light rail system. We don't want to stand around in the heat, cold, rain, or snow waiting for a ride. We don't want to sit next to someone who wets him or herself, someone who talks to him or herself, someone who smells like an ashtray, someone who doesn't shower, someone who is mentally ill, or a thug that might want to rob us at our next stop. Some of us like those wide freeways. Some of us think it's a waste of tax payer dollars providing all these buses that you see driving around town with just one or two people in it. I'm sure my post won't be very popular on here. Let the suburban bashing begin.

nativeomahan
Planning Board
Posts: 3490
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:46 pm
Location: Omaha and Puerto Vallarta

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby nativeomahan » Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:38 am

It’s funny how many people growing up and living in the US perceive living in an urban core to be less than highly desirable. People in virtually the entire rest of the planet just scratch their heads at this notion. The urban core is where the arts and entertainment and civic centers of every great city and virtually every smaller town are located. You don’t see people clamoring to live in exurban locales in London, Paris, Mexico City, Shanghai or Moscow, or any other large city. The same is true in Chicago, Miami, D.C., Seattle, San Francisco and New York to an increasing degree.
Now that I’m retired and living part time in Mexico I note that city centers, town squares and transit hubs are where much of the most expensive and sought after housing is located. The working class and lower economic classes are relegated to the city edges because housing is so much cheaper there, but then they have long bus or transit commutes into the city for virtually everything.
I see the tide slowly turning in the U.S. as even the car manufacturing companies realize that younger generations are increasingly disinterested in car ownership.

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1902
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby GetUrban » Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:02 pm

Good discussions.

The questions as they relate more to this thread are: Why is it a trend in downtown Omaha that more and more buildings are being converted from office use to residential / hospitality or other uses? What will it take for the demand for downtown office space to ever return? Property owners must see a return on their investment or what's the point?

There are still those who want to have it both ways; live in the suburbs or rural setting, but work in an exciting urban environment. At a certain density of office occupancy, the problem arises when people insist on driving their own car even if it means building an ever-increasingly wide freeway to the burbs. At a certain point, mass transit becomes the only way to achieve high downtown density. Look at NYC or even LA as examples. Some people don't want the hassle and prefer to work closer to where they live if they have a choice. Ironically, those same people who live in the outlying areas still find themselves spending more time than they'd like stuck in their cars, caught in traffic jams, just from traversing back and forth between different points in the suburbs.

Maybe downtown office space will only start to re-gain greater demand when the density of downtown residential reaches a tipping point, and nearby schools are as good or better than the outlying areas, and people want to live closer to where they work again.
Last edited by GetUrban on Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

User avatar
nebugeater
County Board
Posts: 6274
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 6:07 pm
Location: Gretna NE

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby nebugeater » Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:09 pm

nativeomahan wrote:It’s funny how many people growing up and living in the US perceive living in an urban core to be less than highly desirable. People in virtually the entire rest of the planet just scratch their heads at this notion. The urban core is where the arts and entertainment and civic centers of every great city and virtually every smaller town are located. You don’t see people clamoring to live in exurban locales in London, Paris, Mexico City, Shanghai or Moscow, or any other large city. The same is true in Chicago, Miami, D.C., Seattle, San Francisco and New York to an increasing degree.
Now that I’m retired and living part time in Mexico I note that city centers, town squares and transit hubs are where much of the most expensive and sought after housing is located. The working class and lower economic classes are relegated to the city edges because housing is so much cheaper there, but then they have long bus or transit commutes into the city for virtually everything.
I see the tide slowly turning in the U.S. as even the car manufacturing companies realize that younger generations are increasingly disinterested in car ownership.



First, I agree with a lot of what you say.

The big BUT is that you can reverse your senerio and the same holds true. There are a lot of Urban folks who look at suburb or rural life and the armpit of existence. The greatest thing is that there are choices. The bigger issue is that this country has turned into "it my way or no way" on this and many other issues.
For the record  NEBUGEATER does not equal BUGEATER    !!!!!!!

Omaha1000
Home Owners Association
Posts: 101
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 3:52 pm

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby Omaha1000 » Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:24 pm

nativeomahan wrote: You don’t see people clamoring to live in exurban locales in London, Paris, Mexico City, Shanghai or Moscow, or any other large city.


I live in Shanghai five-six months each year and completely agree with your assessment. Housing prices increased based on two factors: 1. proximity to city center 2. proximity to a subway line.

nativeomahan
Planning Board
Posts: 3490
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:46 pm
Location: Omaha and Puerto Vallarta

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby nativeomahan » Wed Jan 10, 2018 5:03 pm

I neglected to mention that most institutions of higher learning are located closer to a city center than in the periphery areas. They need to be on mass transit lines, for one thing.
Omaha is very late to the party, even by U.S. standards, but I do see changes afoot. Where is most of the construction excitement occurring in Omaha? The answer is in the area between the Missouri River and Aksarben Village. Omaha is a bit different from other cities because of the natural geographic and legal boundaries posed by the Missouri River. Not quite like Chicago, with a massive lake, but the city is similarly structured, like a hand fan.
Today my husband and I needed to visit a frame shop, then hit the beach (not a need, but a want), followed by the permanent three block long mercado on the Rio Caule. We gathered up our art work (including a Brad Williams photo of the Kerry Bridge) and walked 4 blocks to a bus line, took that a mile or so, got off, walked 3 blocks to the frame shop, then walked two blocks to another bus line, and took it to within 2 blocks of the beach. When we had our fill of sun and sand we walked along the beach a half mile back to the Cuale, then browsed the mercado until we found what we wanted. We were loaded down, so we opted for a taxi, which are as plentiful here as in Manhattan, relatively speaking. 60 pesos ($3.25 U.S.) and 2.5 miles later we were home. Tonight we are doing the weekly “Art Walk” in the gallery district, located within a few blocks of the main city square. 15 galleries participate. In the middle of the District is a square block that becomes home to about 20 food and other vendors on Wednesday evenings. That’s likely where we will have dinner.
From our central Vallarta home we can walk to two cineplexes, a 75 store American style mall, and another American shopping district (home to Walmart, BK, Subway, Dominoes, Little Caesar’s, DQ and Carl’s Jr., if that is your thing). I bought a bicycle (we will not own a car), which makes trips to the various groceries a breeze.
I like our new truly urban lifestyle, in a community of about 200,000, which feels much more urban than Omaha. Busses run every 2-3 minutes, and cost 40 cents equivalent. People walk everywhere. With as much as we are eating out we haven’t gained weight, probably due to the 2-3 miles a day we walk. People actually speak to one another on the sidewalk and on the bus. I’ve met more of my neighbors here in 3 weeks than I have spoken to in my Westside Omaha neighborhood in 30 years.
I think the winds of change are blowing, and not just for me, but for urban U.S. cities. Time will tell, of course. It’s all a question of prioritizing where government resources are spent. More road construction or more mass transit, as just one example. We aren’t there yet.

buildomaha
Home Owners Association
Posts: 222
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 7:06 pm

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby buildomaha » Wed Jan 10, 2018 5:59 pm

OmahaOmaha wrote:
Athomsfere wrote:
buildomaha wrote:I'm sure the Mayor and Chamber of Commerce are already doing a lot to attract more companies and offices to locate downtown, but maybe they still need to step up the effort a few more notches. As long as they don't give away too much. Better mass transit to and from downtown would help too, of course. Maybe a light rail connection to West O and the airport too? If only the money was there, right?

The money issue would be solved if they would stop paving the way (literally with interstate widenings and such) for suburbanites to move further and further from the core. They are the ones who don’t want to pay for the streetcar or any public transportation so why would the rest of the city pay for the unsustainable suburban lifestyle?


The obvious clearly stated!

If only most of Omaha got this.


Some of us like living in the suburbs. Not all of us want to live in the urban core. Not everyone wants to live in a hundred year old house that's not energy efficient and needs a bunch of updates. Some of us don't want to live in a new infill project located next to older run down homes. Some of us don't like looking at all those unsightly utility lines going all over the place, seeing graffiti, seeing people park on their front lawn, or having neighbors who don't weed their lawns,they spit gum out on the sidewalk, and they don't pick up after their dogs. Some of us prefer to shop at the big box stores where there's lots of parking. Some of us like living in the suburbs so we can send our kids to newer schools. Some of don't want to deal with all the crime in the urban areas.

Some of us don't want to ride a bus, street car, or light rail system. We don't want to stand around in the heat, cold, rain, or snow waiting for a ride. We don't want to sit next to someone who wets him or herself, someone who talks to him or herself, someone who smells like an ashtray, someone who doesn't shower, someone who is mentally ill, or a thug that might want to rob us at our next stop. Some of us like those wide freeways. Some of us think it's a waste of tax payer dollars providing all these buses that you see driving around town with just one or two people in it. I'm sure my post won't be very popular on here. Let the suburban bashing begin.[/quote]
Sounds similar to why people stared migrating to the suburbs in the first place. To shove all the poor non white people into a dense urban core so they could have their house, car, new schools, etc. If suburban living where a healthy, efficient lifestyle the US would not be the country with the largest obesity, waste, energy consumption, crises on the planet. The American model of suburbia making up the majority of our cities simply isn’t sustainable. I’m sure everyone would love to live in their own mansion too and shove all the poor people into what our view as a hellhole, but suburbia was essentially built on racism and that’s why there was zero money, nice amenities, or nice housing in the urban cores of America. That is why America has the highest incarceration rate of all developed nations. Because we sectioned off the poor people and surrounded their neighborhoods with interstates to keep them away from us wealthy white people. Schools in urban Omaha are just starting to be pushed higher on the priority list because money is moving back to the core. Urban living is proven to be a healthier happier lifestyle and some people do like spending their time I. Their cars and not interacting with people, that’s why suburbs will always exist. But, in the coming century I think the exact opposite will happen as did in the 20th century, poor people will be pushed to the outskirts of cities and suburbia will become the home of the new poor parts of cities.

bigredmed1
Home Owners Association
Posts: 215
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 10:16 pm

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby bigredmed1 » Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:47 pm

Build, if your logic was correct then why is Europe not having the same problem? They did the reverse, made living in the historic, cool, fun parts of all their capital cities so expensive that regular folks get squeezed into craptastic suburbs or bedroom cities. This has had the effect there of creating people who don't give a tip about the suburbs.

The key to urban planning is to restrain yourself from getting such a raging boner over every little urban planning and being able to step back and ask how this helps the overall city.

A streetcar that goes from MTC to UNMC is a very expensive toy for the Blackstone area. It has no benefit AT ALL to people living in Field Club or Benson, much less Elkhorn. It might give the urban planners the sweats, but it isn't going to make anyone else's life better at all. Not surprising why all the other parts of the city don't want it.

Think "making my whole city benefit" and you will find projects that might benefit Blackstone more, but benefit Aksarben and Cole Creek at least a bit. There you get traction and support.

Impugning others as having evil motivations blocks your ability to reason through a problem and pretty much gaurantees that those people will never trust you in the future. After all, why should I ever do business with someone who called me a racist? You will just do it again when you don't get your way.

GrandpaaSmucker
Library Board
Posts: 252
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2017 3:09 pm

Suburb vs Urban Transportation

Postby GrandpaaSmucker » Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:29 pm

HR Paperstacks wrote:Oh quit being such a partisan hack. Both sides are guilty of writing off a section of the city. You want people to take you seriously and work with you on solutions?


Well if were going to go that route then I'll say it.......I think your still fit to be tied that Hillary lost :fruit:

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1902
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby GetUrban » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:02 pm

GetUrban wrote:
choke wrote:
GetUrban wrote:This will be a great project, assuming it happens. It's a good fit near the Old Market and will add more life to the area 24/7, even though it's sad to see yet more office space disappear from downtown.

Glad to see APMA is the Architect too.


That is too bad about the office space. The article notes that the investors really did not want to go this route. Or is it just the Landmark building? Keiwit is building new and what about the Rail and Commerce building? Of course, ConAgra isn't filling up too fast either. Hines is gonna have to reconsider their plans for office space on that campus.


I'm sure the Mayor and Chamber of Commerce are already doing a lot to attract more companies and offices to locate downtown, but maybe they still need to step up the effort a few more notches. As long as they don't give away too much. Better mass transit to and from downtown would help too, of course. Maybe a light rail connection to West O and the airport too? If only the money was there, right?


People need to be more careful when they include/edit other people’s quotes. My qoute right above somehow was attributed to buildomaha later in this thread. FYI.

Med, in your last post I’m not sure if you’re really talking to me or not. We don’t usually agree much on how cities should work anyway, so I’ll leave it at that.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

daveoma
Human Relations
Posts: 857
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 7:18 pm

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby daveoma » Thu Jan 11, 2018 12:24 am

buildomaha wrote:
OmahaOmaha wrote:
Athomsfere wrote:
buildomaha wrote:I'm sure the Mayor and Chamber of Commerce are already doing a lot to attract more companies and offices to locate downtown, but maybe they still need to step up the effort a few more notches. As long as they don't give away too much. Better mass transit to and from downtown would help too, of course. Maybe a light rail connection to West O and the airport too? If only the money was there, right?

The money issue would be solved if they would stop paving the way (literally with interstate widenings and such) for suburbanites to move further and further from the core. They are the ones who don’t want to pay for the streetcar or any public transportation so why would the rest of the city pay for the unsustainable suburban lifestyle?


The obvious clearly stated!

If only most of Omaha got this.


Some of us like living in the suburbs. Not all of us want to live in the urban core. Not everyone wants to live in a hundred year old house that's not energy efficient and needs a bunch of updates. Some of us don't want to live in a new infill project located next to older run down homes. Some of us don't like looking at all those unsightly utility lines going all over the place, seeing graffiti, seeing people park on their front lawn, or having neighbors who don't weed their lawns,they spit gum out on the sidewalk, and they don't pick up after their dogs. Some of us prefer to shop at the big box stores where there's lots of parking. Some of us like living in the suburbs so we can send our kids to newer schools. Some of don't want to deal with all the crime in the urban areas.

Some of us don't want to ride a bus, street car, or light rail system. We don't want to stand around in the heat, cold, rain, or snow waiting for a ride. We don't want to sit next to someone who wets him or herself, someone who talks to him or herself, someone who smells like an ashtray, someone who doesn't shower, someone who is mentally ill, or a thug that might want to rob us at our next stop. Some of us like those wide freeways. Some of us think it's a waste of tax payer dollars providing all these buses that you see driving around town with just one or two people in it. I'm sure my post won't be very popular on here. Let the suburban bashing begin.

Sounds similar to why people stared migrating to the suburbs in the first place. To shove all the poor non white people into a dense urban core so they could have their house, car, new schools, etc. If suburban living where a healthy, efficient lifestyle the US would not be the country with the largest obesity, waste, energy consumption, crises on the planet. The American model of suburbia making up the majority of our cities simply isn’t sustainable. I’m sure everyone would love to live in their own mansion too and shove all the poor people into what our view as a hellhole, but suburbia was essentially built on racism and that’s why there was zero money, nice amenities, or nice housing in the urban cores of America. That is why America has the highest incarceration rate of all developed nations. Because we sectioned off the poor people and surrounded their neighborhoods with interstates to keep them away from us wealthy white people. Schools in urban Omaha are just starting to be pushed higher on the priority list because money is moving back to the core. Urban living is proven to be a healthier happier lifestyle and some people do like spending their time I. Their cars and not interacting with people, that’s why suburbs will always exist. But, in the coming century I think the exact opposite will happen as did in the 20th century, poor people will be pushed to the outskirts of cities and suburbia will become the home of the new poor parts of cities.[/quote]
Agreed :clap:

Athomsfere
Home Owners Association
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2015 10:03 pm

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby Athomsfere » Thu Jan 11, 2018 7:12 am

OmahaOmaha wrote:
not sure wrote:
Athomsfere wrote:
buildomaha wrote:I'm sure the Mayor and Chamber of Commerce are already doing a lot to attract more companies and offices to locate downtown, but maybe they still need to step up the effort a few more notches. As long as they don't give away too much. Better mass transit to and from downtown would help too, of course. Maybe a light rail connection to West O and the airport too? If only the money was there, right?

The money issue would be solved if they would stop paving the way (literally with interstate widenings and such) for suburbanites to move further and further from the core. They are the ones who don’t want to pay for the streetcar or any public transportation so why would the rest of the city pay for the unsustainable suburban lifestyle?


The obvious clearly stated!

If only most of Omaha got this.


Some of us like living in the suburbs. Not all of us want to live in the urban core. Not everyone wants to live in a hundred year old house that's not energy efficient and needs a bunch of updates. Some of us don't want to live in a new infill project located next to older run down homes. Some of us don't like looking at all those unsightly utility lines going all over the place, seeing graffiti, seeing people park on their front lawn, or having neighbors who don't weed their lawns,they spit gum out on the sidewalk, and they don't pick up after their dogs. Some of us prefer to shop at the big box stores where there's lots of parking. Some of us like living in the suburbs so we can send our kids to newer schools. Some of don't want to deal with all the crime in the urban areas.

Some of us don't want to ride a bus, street car, or light rail system. We don't want to stand around in the heat, cold, rain, or snow waiting for a ride. We don't want to sit next to someone who wets him or herself, someone who talks to him or herself, someone who smells like an ashtray, someone who doesn't shower, someone who is mentally ill, or a thug that might want to rob us at our next stop. Some of us like those wide freeways. Some of us think it's a waste of tax payer dollars providing all these buses that you see driving around town with just one or two people in it. I'm sure my post won't be very popular on here. Let the suburban bashing begin.


A few thoughts,

None of this makes the American Suburbia Model sustainable. You can't really widen highways indefinitely. And even widening highways only does so much, the return on investment seems to drop of very quickly. 1 lane to 2, big difference. 2-4 big difference, 4-6, some difference, 6-8 negligible (Some studies out there with real info I'm just lazy and I think it's a bit of a dead horse)

Look at LA, Atlanta and Austin, at some point you NEED mass transit. Omaha is at that tipping point IMO.

And it's been said here, but American Suburbanite Paranoia of the Urban Core is very much an American oddity. America's largest cities are often the safest, but yet we fear the "crime" in NYC.

We want to save time, and walk less so we drive around the big box parking lot for 10 minutes to find the "prime spot" and then walk around inside the store for 40 minutes.

We collectively have the illusion that lower middle class is "success" and guns provide safety, erode all sense of community with SUVs to transport 1 person 20 miles to work, and wonder how a 3rd world country like Japan can be so safe and happy.

And yes, there is sarcasm above. But these are also consideration cities like Omaha seriously need to start contending with.

GrandpaaSmucker
Library Board
Posts: 252
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2017 3:09 pm

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby GrandpaaSmucker » Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:03 am

daveoma wrote:Sounds similar to why people stared migrating to the suburbs in the first place. To shove all the poor non white people into a dense urban core so they could have their house, car, new schools, etc.


Sounds to me like you got your history lessons from an inaccurate source. I don't need to read what happened I lived it. You got the story all upside down and twisted inside out. It was not like any of that nonsense you are talking about. It got tough in those neighborhoods and it was dog eat dog every man for himself. Nobody got together and collectively thought out any plots or plans. It was run for your life baby and if you had the money to do it you did it. You did it not because you wanted to move , not because you were racist.......you did it for no reason other then self preservation.

GrandpaaSmucker
Library Board
Posts: 252
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2017 3:09 pm

Re: Omaha transportation's $7.4B future

Postby GrandpaaSmucker » Thu Jan 11, 2018 12:28 pm

Busguy2010 wrote:It's a different world out there... It almost makes me wish there was a political divide at I-680 and I-80 to Harrison, and anything west and north of that takes care of itself. Hmm, I'm beginning to think that half of the city couldn't come close to being able to afford all the niceties its experiencing presently. Let's do it!


West Omaha should build a wall......a big 20ft tall wall right down the middle of 72nd.........and then we will make East Omaha pay for it. :koko:

Busguy2010
Human Relations
Posts: 568
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 7:32 pm
Location: North Central Omaha

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby Busguy2010 » Thu Jan 11, 2018 2:52 pm

OmahaOmaha wrote:Some of us think it's a waste of tax payer dollars providing all these buses that you see driving around town with just one or two people in it.


Please, as an honest inquiry for information, when you see an empty or near empty bus, take note of the route number, destination, time of day, and location, and report your information back here so we can get to the bottom of this issue.

In the mean time, I'll offer a case study. I've ridden the 15 fairly regularly throughout my life, and each time, I'm one of the first couple of people to get on at 13th and Farnam. As it travels west, it picks up people steadily through about Mutual of Omaha, and reaches peak capacity right around UNMC. I'd guess there's about 15 people on the bus at that point. Then some get off at the VA, then more at 45th and Center, and even more at Bergan Mercy. As it continues west on Center, it never seems to have more than 8 or 10 people on it during its western portion, if that many. By the time it reaches Oak View, there might only be 2 or 4 people on it. This has been fairly consistent for as long as I've ridden.

The story is same for almost every route that goes west. It's effectively full and starts to thin out as it generally goes past 72nd Street. So depending where and when you see it, you very well would develop an opinion that nobody rides the bus.

I do look forward to seeing the information you compile. Thanks

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

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby Joe_Sovereign » Thu Jan 11, 2018 3:41 pm

It's so funny that people think that some working class / low middle class family that can move out to a new home in some safe starter neighborhood and send their kids to good schools is motivated by racism. What heroes the rich people in Dundee are for living in the city, when they send their kids to private schools and hire nannies instead of utilizing daycare centers in the city core. Look at your housing options with $150k or $200k for a family of four or five across the city, look at the quality of schools, look at the crime rates in the surrounding areas.

Living in Downtown in any major city in America is so culturally enriching they say. You can drive to museums or art galleries. My kids are growing up in the suburbs and they have been to the Joslyn Museum, Durham Museum, Children's Museum more times then they can count. They have been to the Zoo a hundred times, have been to see Broadway Plays at the Orpheum Theater and concerts at the Holland. They have been to the Arts Fair and the Taste of Omaha. At the same time they grew up with a back yard and went to some of the best schools in the state.

If I was single, or married with no kids, or an empty nester and could afford to live in a downtown condo and walk to different bars and restaurants every night, that would be cool. Walk to work instead of drive. I see the appeal. However for a family starting out their choice is really simple and that is why so many people choose the suburbs.

User avatar
Garrett
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1855
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 6:29 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Omaha transportation's $7.4B future

Postby Garrett » Fri Jan 12, 2018 10:07 am

GetUrban wrote:So in summary, nobody wants to pay for anything that helps somebody else's neighborhood and not their own directly.

Ok. :yes:

It’s the baby boomer “I got mine, |expletive| everyone else” mentality to a T.
From Omaha to Chicago
From Axel to Garrett

Still the same guy

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

Re: Omaha transportation's $7.4B future

Postby Linkin5 » Fri Jan 12, 2018 1:20 pm

Garrett wrote:
GetUrban wrote:So in summary, nobody wants to pay for anything that helps somebody else's neighborhood and not their own directly.

Ok. :yes:

It’s the baby boomer “I got mine, |expletive| everyone else” mentality to a T.


But they told me millennials are destroying everything.

Louie
Library Board
Posts: 453
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:23 pm
Location: Dundee at last!

Re: Omaha transportation's $7.4B future

Postby Louie » Fri Jan 12, 2018 3:10 pm

Linkin5 wrote:
Garrett wrote:
GetUrban wrote:So in summary, nobody wants to pay for anything that helps somebody else's neighborhood and not their own directly.

Ok. :yes:

It’s the baby boomer “I got mine, |expletive| everyone else” mentality to a T.


But they told me millennials are destroying everything.

We killed sit-down family chain restaurants!

User avatar
Garrett
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1855
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 6:29 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Omaha transportation's $7.4B future

Postby Garrett » Fri Jan 12, 2018 10:36 pm

Louie wrote:
Linkin5 wrote:
Garrett wrote:
GetUrban wrote:So in summary, nobody wants to pay for anything that helps somebody else's neighborhood and not their own directly.

Ok. :yes:

It’s the baby boomer “I got mine, |expletive| everyone else” mentality to a T.


But they told me millennials are destroying everything.

We killed sit-down family chain restaurants!

We also killed grocery stores.
From Omaha to Chicago
From Axel to Garrett

Still the same guy

GrandpaaSmucker
Library Board
Posts: 252
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2017 3:09 pm

Re: Omaha transportation's $7.4B future

Postby GrandpaaSmucker » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:20 am

Garrett wrote:We also killed grocery stores.


Was that you guys that did that? Something sure did. The only decent grocery stores left are the Hy-Vee's....the rest of em are a bunch of $heetholes!

User avatar
Coyote
City Council
Posts: 21091
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 11:18 am
Location: Three floors down
Contact:

Re: Omaha transportation's $7.4B future

Postby Coyote » Sat Jan 13, 2018 12:10 pm

Don't touch my Hy-Vee.
Image

Padre
New to the Neighborhood
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 9:53 pm

Re: Omaha transportation's $7.4B future

Postby Padre » Sat Jan 13, 2018 1:44 pm

Coyote wrote:Don't touch my Hy-Vee.


They may have already got there. Hy-Vee isn't what it was when I got here 14 years ago.

Louie
Library Board
Posts: 453
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:23 pm
Location: Dundee at last!

Re: Omaha transportation's $7.4B future

Postby Louie » Sat Jan 13, 2018 5:07 pm

Padre wrote:
Coyote wrote:Don't touch my Hy-Vee.


They may have already got there. Hy-Vee isn't what it was when I got here 14 years ago.

That's because they dumped all the profits into the Market Grille failures. Massive mistake.

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

Re: Omaha transportation's $7.4B future

Postby Linkin5 » Sat Jan 13, 2018 9:23 pm

GrandpaaSmucker wrote:
Garrett wrote:We also killed grocery stores.


Was that you guys that did that? Something sure did. The only decent grocery stores left are the Hy-Vee's....the rest of em are a bunch of $heetholes!


Make sure you don’t delete this golden post like you delete others eomaha, great job.

lisanstan
Home Owners Association
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:20 pm
Location: O! (maha)

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby lisanstan » Sat Jan 13, 2018 9:54 pm

I thought after WWII when there was enough prosperity for everyone that people could actually afford to buy a home was the impetus for the suburbs to be born.

I live in Dundee. I'm always amazed at the people that live in Omaha that think we must be rich to live here. There are all price points. My house is would sell for less than $300K, which is a lot less than most in the suburbs. I live across the street from duplexes and a house that sold for over $500K. That doesn't happen in the suburbs.

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

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby TitosBuritoBarn » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:24 pm

lisanstan wrote:I thought after WWII when there was enough prosperity for everyone that people could actually afford to buy a home was the impetus for the suburbs to be born.


There was if you were white and you wanted to build a house in a new, white neighborhood. If you were black and/or wanted to build a house in a black neighborhood, you were denied a loan regardless of how qualified you were for it. Poor, black, inner city neighborhoods did not often bring their situation upon themselves. The government saw to it that the situation was brought to them.
"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

NovakOmaha
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1641
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Metro Detroit Michigan

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby NovakOmaha » Mon Jan 15, 2018 10:06 am

TitosBuritoBarn wrote:
lisanstan wrote:I thought after WWII when there was enough prosperity for everyone that people could actually afford to buy a home was the impetus for the suburbs to be born.


There was if you were white and you wanted to build a house in a new, white neighborhood. If you were black and/or wanted to build a house in a black neighborhood, you were denied a loan regardless of how qualified you were for it. Poor, black, inner city neighborhoods did not often bring their situation upon themselves. The government saw to it that the situation was brought to them.


It was called redlining and according to a recent study the situation hasn't changed.

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1902
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby GetUrban » Mon Jan 15, 2018 1:10 pm

NovakOmaha wrote:
NEDodger wrote:Curious if this thread is going to go back to discussing changes to 1200 Landmark Center? Or if this "discussion" is going to go back to the same beat-the-dead-horse |expletive| that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand?



I'll bite. I was disappointed when this property was originally announced. Not the one this year but when the building was built. Some of the hope from the building of the mall was that it "might" bring some residential buildings along the mall. I never thought it was attractive. It didn't bring any 24/7 life to the area and it cut off the market from the mall. Not unlike the original Hilton did to 16th street. The proposed change in use is a positive however.


It was another case of "We'll take whatever we can get in downtown Omaha", even if it has negative impact on what was best for the GLM and Old Market. One good thing about the design, besides the aesthetics, which some like and other do not, is that it still allowed people to cut back and forth through the atrium/lobby from Farnam to Harney. I did that all the time when I worked in the old market. That connection would have been much better if it had occurred in-line with 12th street, or the development would have left 12th completely open. Back then there wasn't much talk in building new residential downtown. There was still an abundance of loft/warehouse space that was becoming the big thing for conversions into residential, especially after everybody knew that supply would be finite with Jobbers now gone.

Also, even though the discussion got off track a bit in this thread, other than the usual occasional personal jabs, most of the discussion has been related in one way or another. For example: things like why are buildings like this being converted to residential/hotels, or why don't people want to drive downtown to work, or what is the best way to get downtown?
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

Professor Woland
Library Board
Posts: 340
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 8:28 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby Professor Woland » Mon Jan 15, 2018 10:20 pm

GetUrban wrote:
NovakOmaha wrote:
NEDodger wrote:Curious if this thread is going to go back to discussing changes to 1200 Landmark Center? Or if this "discussion" is going to go back to the same beat-the-dead-horse |expletive| that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand?



I'll bite. I was disappointed when this property was originally announced. Not the one this year but when the building was built. Some of the hope from the building of the mall was that it "might" bring some residential buildings along the mall. I never thought it was attractive. It didn't bring any 24/7 life to the area and it cut off the market from the mall. Not unlike the original Hilton did to 16th street. The proposed change in use is a positive however.


It was another case of "We'll take whatever we can get in downtown Omaha", even if it has negative impact on what was best for the GLM and Old Market. One good thing about the design, besides the aesthetics, which some like and other do not, is that it still allowed people to cut back and forth through the atrium/lobby from Farnam to Harney. I did that all the time when I worked in the old market. That connection would have been much better if it had occurred in-line with 12th street, or the development would have left 12th completely open. Back then there wasn't much talk in building new residential downtown. There was still an abundance of loft/warehouse space that was becoming the big thing for conversions into residential, especially after everybody knew that supply would be finite with Jobbers now gone.

Also, even though the discussion got off track a bit in this thread, other than the usual occasional personal jabs, most of the discussion has been related in one way or another. For example: things like why are buildings like this being converted to residential/hotels, or why don't people want to drive downtown to work, or what is the best way to get downtown?


I think if we did a deep dive into most cities we would find that jobs, even high paying jobs are more frequently appearing outside of central business districts. The reasons for this are many, I'm sure, but part of it is that millenials are growing older. Transit use is in decline in most US cities, even ones that have made expensive commitments to transit. Car sales are up and millenials with kids are moving to the suburbs. The generation after the millenials seems to be adopting ideological, lifestyle, and aesthetic commitments far different than their Gen Y predecessors. The trend toward density will probably come to an end in most cities over the next few years and downtowns will increasingly become more oriented toward entertainment, housing for young professionals and committed urbanites, and some large employers. I think Omaha will still be able to support some more urban residential construction, but the future of new housing is going to look more like the nineties with miles and miles of new subdivisions. This will be true in almost all American cities. I could be wrong, obviously, but news coverage and data seem to support this.

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

Re: 1200 Landmark Center

Postby TitosBuritoBarn » Tue Jan 16, 2018 12:51 am

Professor Woland wrote:
GetUrban wrote:
NovakOmaha wrote:
NEDodger wrote:Curious if this thread is going to go back to discussing changes to 1200 Landmark Center? Or if this "discussion" is going to go back to the same beat-the-dead-horse |expletive| that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand?



I'll bite. I was disappointed when this property was originally announced. Not the one this year but when the building was built. Some of the hope from the building of the mall was that it "might" bring some residential buildings along the mall. I never thought it was attractive. It didn't bring any 24/7 life to the area and it cut off the market from the mall. Not unlike the original Hilton did to 16th street. The proposed change in use is a positive however.


It was another case of "We'll take whatever we can get in downtown Omaha", even if it has negative impact on what was best for the GLM and Old Market. One good thing about the design, besides the aesthetics, which some like and other do not, is that it still allowed people to cut back and forth through the atrium/lobby from Farnam to Harney. I did that all the time when I worked in the old market. That connection would have been much better if it had occurred in-line with 12th street, or the development would have left 12th completely open. Back then there wasn't much talk in building new residential downtown. There was still an abundance of loft/warehouse space that was becoming the big thing for conversions into residential, especially after everybody knew that supply would be finite with Jobbers now gone.

Also, even though the discussion got off track a bit in this thread, other than the usual occasional personal jabs, most of the discussion has been related in one way or another. For example: things like why are buildings like this being converted to residential/hotels, or why don't people want to drive downtown to work, or what is the best way to get downtown?


I think if we did a deep dive into most cities we would find that jobs, even high paying jobs are more frequently appearing outside of central business districts. The reasons for this are many, I'm sure, but part of it is that millenials are growing older. Transit use is in decline in most US cities, even ones that have made expensive commitments to transit. Car sales are up and millenials with kids are moving to the suburbs. The generation after the millenials seems to be adopting ideological, lifestyle, and aesthetic commitments far different than their Gen Y predecessors. The trend toward density will probably come to an end in most cities over the next few years and downtowns will increasingly become more oriented toward entertainment, housing for young professionals and committed urbanites, and some large employers. I think Omaha will still be able to support some more urban residential construction, but the future of new housing is going to look more like the nineties with miles and miles of new subdivisions. This will be true in almost all American cities. I could be wrong, obviously, but news coverage and data seem to support this.


The issue with the media's information on the topic is that they rarely do any level of research under the surface. For the most part it seems like a lot of the reports are from someone who has gathered rather basic or partial information and from that has deduced sweeping generalizations which they report in a manner as if they've been trying to win an argument with someone about millennials and their similarities to past generations; like the legislator who brought a snowball into their meeting to prove that global warming isn't real.

The first fallacy in these reports is in how most define "millennials" as one homogeneous group, as if each person in the age cohort is exactly the same as the next one. It ignores the differing educational attainment, cultural backgrounds, political and social ideologies, and lifestyles.

The second fallacy is in treating all cities/metros as if they have the same urban form and structure. Most reports simplify the "city" as the core city of a metropolitan area, and "suburbs" as anything not the core city and use data that simply shows moves to/from the "city" and "suburbs." So, for example, if Jan moves from Council Bluffs to Omaha, Jan would be tallied as moving from the suburbs to the city. But in reality, Jan could have moved from a loft apartment in downtown Council Bluffs's Sawyer Building to an acreage in Omaha's Elkhorn area, which would clearly be a transition from urban to suburban. Limitations in data would still simplify her move as one from suburbs to the city. In contrast, if Dave moves from Los Angeles to Santa Monica, this would be tallied as a move from the city to the suburbs. If in reality, Dave moved from a ranch house in the very suburban Chatsworth neighborhood of Los Angeles to a studio apartment in a 15-story mid-rise on Ocean Ave in Santa Monica, the data used would still show that he moved from the city to the suburbs.

The third fallacy is assuming that all millennials who do leave the city for the suburbs want to do so. This is usually coupled with information about trading loft apartments for single family homes. Of course millennials want more room when they start a family. This should not have been a surprise to anyone. But reports examining this often only look at millennials in the most expensive cities. One from recent memory examined millennials who left DC for the suburbs - as if its the case everywhere that a home with space for a family in the urban core costs around $750k as it does in DC. Anecdotally, I recently traded a small apartment in Chicago for a single family home in St. Louis with three bedrooms, a carport, and a yard. To the reporter it may look like I've gone suburban, but my house was built around the same time that the car was invented in a gridded neighborhood where walking has always been a mode of transportation to run basic errands. What seems to be desired by most is a roomy, affordable home that is still in the city or adjacent to it.

The fourth fallacy is that these reports often ignore the generation behind millennials, assuming only millennials will ever be the urban-centric generation and any subsequent generations will skip ever living in the city in mass quantities.

The fifth fallacy is that these reports completely ignore the issue of why millennials are being priced out of the city (in more expensive places). Skipping over that millennials may not have wanted to leave the city, many reports never consider why they were priced out. Instead they simply conclude that the city will soon empty itself out again and the city will somehow be left with a plethora of $750,000, 1 bedroom condos. Basic economics tells us that if housing is substantially more expensive in the city relative to housing in the suburbs, it's not due to lack of demand. SOMEONE is paying these prices and, consequently, living an urban lifestyle. It just may not be millennials.

If you look hard enough you'll find reports where someone did do their research and usually it'll show the opposite of what these more lazy reports show. This one, for example, finds that in nearly all of the nation's largest metros, the number of educated 25-34 year olds has increased in the core city: http://cityobservatory.org/cities-continue-to-attract-smart-young-adults/. In many cases, this segement of the population has increased despite the overall population of the city decreasing. It's these sorts of reports that I believe are more telling than the more sensational ones you'll find elsewhere.
"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


Return to “eOmahaForums Bar and Grill”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest