Pinnacle / Swanson Site (10th and Capitol)

Finn · Post by **Finn** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:03 am

Amen Greg. The Hilton is a nice hotel with beautiful features and art. It does blend nicely with the Quest Center. I believe that it was built with the ability to accommodate more floors in the future - if the need arises. But, of course, if they build a few more stories as the market increases, some will complain that they didn't do it right in the first place. It is nice to see someone else post without skyscraper envy!

OhioStreetKid · Post by **OhioStreetKid** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 12:29 pm

Yes, Hilton haters should recognize the fact that the hotel is both the largest and highest rated hotel in Nebraska(not sure if that is saying a whole lot, but it shouldn't be minimized either).

OmahaDevelopmentMan · Post by **OmahaDevelopmentMan** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 3:20 pm

Guys, as much as I hate to say it...you're right. I mean a beautiful Hilton full of beautiful art and great amenities beats some Marriott in all ways...except height. But that theatre idea is great. It would be a good spot with the Qwest Center and old market right there. I just wish someone at maybe douglas theatres or amc thinks of that.

DTO Luv · Post by **DTO Luv** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 8:00 pm

The Hilton is a big let down. Heght aside it does not even match the Qwest Center. At night when the Qwest Center is lit up with blue, the Hilton is red and purple. In the day it looks like a fancy Super 8 with its beige coloring. The Marriott would have been a four star hotel too. And when they add to the Hilton they won't go any higher they will just build out on top of the parking garage.

OhioStreetKid · Post by **OhioStreetKid** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 8:10 pm

Ok a plea from a LOT of us. Please let go of the Marriott. It wasn't built so move on. There was a reason it wasn't built after all. I believe the marriot cost quite a bit more. You will also recall that the nation was in the grips of a nasty recession. It would have been insane to pay for that hotel. Paying for the Hilton has already been enough of a challenge. So please, lay off the height obsession. You have wanted to knock down about every building it DT at some point. I would have to think that if a couple of 50 story buildings went up downtown, all of the sudden you would want us to knock down FNC and Woodmen so we could have 60 story buildings. I start to wonder if you luv DTO or a DTO that only exists in as a figment of your imagination.

DTO Luv · Post by **DTO Luv** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 8:28 pm

Whatever. You make me laugh.

A glimpse of what could have been.

CountOfMC · Post by **CountOfMC** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 9:04 pm

That hotel would've been a masterpiece. When I head to the Qwest for a game or if I'm driving back from the airport, the Hilton just looks bland and outdated.. especially during the day. The Marriot wasn't THAT MUCH MORE was it?! I'm sure it's aesthetically pleasing inside and what not, but we kinda goofed on that one, and I'm not speaking in terms of height here.. I just mean the building alone.. it does look like a spruced up Motel 8. You can't win 'em all I guess. Fahey's just a spook.

DTO Luv · Post by **DTO Luv** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 9:34 pm

His decision was about cost but when the Hilton got done the OWH reported that it would have been about the same price to build the Marriot.

CountOfMC · Post by **CountOfMC** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 9:46 pm

DTO Luv wrote:His decision was about cost but when the Hilton got done the OWH reported that it would have been about the same price to build the Marriot.

Who'da thunk it? Man, that Fahey, he's gotta be the jack of all trades...

projectman · Post by **projectman** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 9:47 pm

I wanna straighten out his mouth when he speaks.

redfield · Post by **redfield** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 10:40 pm

I could get over the size and height of the hilton if just at least one tiny little bit of effort have been put in to make it look like it belonged next to and attached to the qwest center. The Hilton does not look right at all from the outside, either day or night due to poor coloring, contradicting design, and even worse lighting. The same goes for inside, a really modern feel in the qwest center, then you cross the walkway right into a hidious retro seventies feel complete with retarded looking distorted jelly bean light fixtures that look like they cost a fortune, puke yellow walls, and wannabe casino carpet. The "grand ballroom" looks no different than the hallways except it has bigger more expensive jelly bean lights.

Then theres the functionality of the place or lack thereof. The walkway from the convention center leads into the meeting and ballroom section instead of the lobby or elevators. Walking in the "front" door, any first timer stands little chance of finding said meeting rooms without exploring a bit or asking somebody since the escelators are celeverly hidden on the other side of a center island from the entrance. The outdoor seating area off the lobby faces north, away from the sun. The entrance from the garage to the hotel is well, where is it?

Both the architect and the interior designer should be ashamed of themselves.

My appologies to those tired of the complaints....this is my last one.

UNOstudent · Post by **UNOstudent** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 12:25 am

i thought i remember the marriott being somewhere around 90 million and the hilton was like 65 million. eventhough the marriott would have cost more, low interest rates on a 90 million dollar hotel would be similar to regular interest rates on a 65 million dollar hotel. there was an article this summer about how the city refinanced the qwest center to save 2 million a month in payments. it would have been a gamble, but if we are already gambling on a state of the art arena/convention center then we should have an equally impressive hotel attached to it.

Will · Post by **Will** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 12:38 am

The owh never compared apples to apples. The price tag of the marriott was the whole thing hotel and parking garage package for @100 mill. The hilton was just the hotel, not the parking garage or the skywalk. these were quietly added in later. It may have been the right thing to do if the city were never to go forward again, but it just showes that the mayor is unwilling to commmit to something grand (inside and out). The only thing that realy makes the hilton stand out is that it acheived 4 stars. Could the marriott not gotten 4 stars also?

Greg S · Post by **Greg S** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 12:14 pm

The city was being asked to guarantee a lot of more the risk involved in the Marriott. I think the Hilton has more than lived up to it's expectations. There's obviously a core group on this site that is continually fixated on size. Height of buildings, number of seats in the Qwest Center etc. I have yet to hear of one convention that was not booked at Qwest Center because the Hilton was not large enough.

For the record I was in favor of the Marriott but have been pleasantly surprised with how nice the Hilton is. The bar, restaraunts and such are all top notch. I also like the outside seating they have. They've also been great to those of us in UNO's Blue Line Club.

Greg

AZCorey · Post by **AZCorey** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 12:31 pm

Okay guys, I have to agree with OhioStreetKid's previous post....although the Marriott was an exciting idea at the time, it didn't happen, and everything happens for a reason. I think Omaha should be grateful that they have a four star Hilton, and a first class arena and convention center. It wasn't that long ago that all 'we' had was the Red Lion! I've posted several times previously that it is inevitable with all the condos, and redevelopment in DTO that more highrises will be built....but let's remember, this is Omaha, not NYC!

I am so excited to come home from Phoenix on Tuesday and see DTO again and all the changes.....you really need to take a step back and appreciate all that's happened and all that's happening.....!!!

Bomaha · Post by **Bomaha** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 2:42 pm

Yeah this is a lame and weird idea for ideas on skyscraper design. This might be childish too but oh well.

I have played Sim City 4 and the skyscrapers that are built in the game are into so much detail that I am not suprised that firms have used these designs in real life. Or these could be buildings used from real life in the game, I don't know.

And No, you cannot see the interior but we can leave that up to the architects and engineers as well.

It's just a thought.

eomaha · Post by **eomaha** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 6:12 pm

I'm with Ohio and Corey... let it go already. Look ahead... not to the past.

TitosBuritoBarn · Post by **TitosBuritoBarn** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 4:05 am

How do we even know that the picture Marriot showed us would look much like the final product. How often do pre-construction renderings look like the final product? It seems like there's always some money issue that comes up hindering the dream from becoming a true reality. In fact, developers often add certain things to their first renderings in order to sell it and then say, "oh, well, in order to stay in budget, we need to cut this, this and this..." The height would have been nice, but I'm very pleased with the Hilton myself.

almighty_tuna · Post by **almighty_tuna** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 5:14 am

I think the Marriott was a great hotel concept but the wrong location. Naturally it would've been where the Hilton stands now, and mucho grande tall. But we really would have lost valuable perspective. The Qwest Center sure is no uber-arena but as far as I'm concerned its scale is very impressive. With a 28-story Marriott across the street, the QC would have been dwarfed and its impact lost. Secondly, every time I come up the hill towards Iowa from the 480/NB75 split the QC seemingly looms above the freeway and is really an impressive visual statement. The Marriott would be a 28-story literal brick-wall.

The QC is, and should be, the stand-out structure of that area. The lighting designers seemingly haven't realized its potential, but that's neither here nor there. OmahaDevelopmentMan posted in a recent thread that the parking lots should be replaced by movie theatres and other food/entertainment. I wholly agree - the lot area is a giant wasted opportunity to build an entire destination location. It would be a place of the ESPNzone (appropriate w/the arena a block away), movie theatres, grand pedestrian avenues, blues club ala the Zoo Bar among other things mentioned by OmahaDevelopmentMan. If I had my druthers I would also connect the blooming One Riverfront area (remember, pedestrian retail, a pad site for a restaurant, rick's boatyard, the riverfront, future pedestrian bridge across the river) with a asthetically pleasing pedestrian bridge over the railroad tracks, themed like its big brother across the Mighty Mo. Those tracks are a horrible barrier. One could even have those old fashioned pay-per-view binoculars at the pinnacle of the smaller bridge to view DTO, the Riverfront, etc...

As north downtown progresses - Tip Top building up through to Creighton - that area would really become a focal point of entertainment. There really isn't anything *exciting* for non-residents to do north of 480 so concert-goers, soccer fans, etc just show up for their event and leave just as quickly as traffic can take them. Replace the lots with outer ring garages, rail from the garages to the entertainment/QC/Creighton/OM and give people a reason to stick around.

BTW, that rendering of the Marriott reminds me of the Overland Park Sheraton hi-rise.

redfield · Post by **redfield** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 2:30 pm

I'm a big fan of these ideas for the parking lots and north downtown.

Isn't HDR doing a study on how to best utilize the area? I would not be suprised if their recommendations end up sounding a lot like what you guys are talking about.

omahahawk · Post by **omahahawk** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 4:35 pm

Call me ignorant if you will, but why the mad rush to get rid of the parking lots. I can understand wanting to create kind of an entertainment center around the Creighton area but don't those parking lots generally fill up when there is an event at the Qwest? I guess I don't see them being removed anytime soon or the pheasibility of doing so, especially after all the money spent to create them and being as new as they are.

projectman · Post by **projectman** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 4:40 pm

The parking lots take up too much valuable land and the sea of concrete is very unattractive and like an oven in the summer.

guy4omaha · Post by **guy4omaha** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 7:19 pm

Call me ignorant, too!

I have no problems with replacing the parking lots with the types of attractions and destinations suggested in the thread. It all sounds pretty cool. Heck we could even throw in a moat with gondolas and restaurants with front and back doors. Oops, Lormung Lo already thought of that.

However, I have to ask.... where do we park all of the vehicles at events that now use the parking lots? Are we talking major garage construction or something else altogether? How does this affect ingress and egress fromt the area?

almighty_tuna · Post by **almighty_tuna** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:26 am

Meh, if you have perhaps four garages of OmahaPark 8 size, I believe that will be more than adequate to accomodate existing capacity. As far as integration into the existing street infrastructure, I see no reason why you wouldn't have the garage exit lanes merge into traffic as their own lanes. Much in the style of an interchange onramp. One wouldn't even need to regulate outflow of the garages. If the city went on a standard rate, $3 to park during non-events and the current $6 during events, one would only collect the money upon entry. Thus, exiting the parking structure would not need to be regulated - traffic would be free to exit and merge. Placement of garages would be according to the "ring" concept.

OmahaDevelopmentMan · Post by **OmahaDevelopmentMan** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:32 pm

However, I have to ask.... where do we park all of the vehicles at events that now use the parking lots? Are we talking major garage construction or something else altogether? How does this affect ingress and egress fromt the area?

This may be an unpopular idea but...here it goes...we put garages on the swanson plant's land. Or if it's possible, it would be cool to squeeze them under I-480 somehow.

DTO Luv · Post by **DTO Luv** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:33 pm

Pariking garages at the Qwest Center would be a pain in the |expletive|. Don't most garages have one way in and out? The parking lots have more than one way but most people don't realize it. If we had 4 big garages down there and it would block the view of the Qwest Center. There's still plenty of places around the Qwest Center that can become entertainment districts and what not, but the parking lots are fine. And putting parking on the Swanson sight is out of the question.

OhioStreetKid · Post by **OhioStreetKid** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:55 pm

There is a first for everything, and I definetly agree with DTO's statement. Parking garages are a pain in the rear for several reasons. The only parking lot I am open to removing is the small one bound by 12th, 13th, Cuming, and Webster Sts. The three large ones however need to stay.

DTO Luv · Post by **DTO Luv** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 6:42 pm

That's the employee lot. So it's not going anywhere. I used to have to park there and walk all the way to the back of the arena when I worked their. Cold days especially sucked.

OmahaDevelopmentMan · Post by **OmahaDevelopmentMan** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 7:01 pm

We survived with Garages at the Civic didn't we?

DTO Luv · Post by **DTO Luv** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 8:06 pm

The Civic to the Qwest Center is apples and Watermelons.

OmahaDevelopmentMan · Post by **OmahaDevelopmentMan** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 8:13 pm

How about this, we get rid of the lots on the west side of the building and then keep the lots to the north and add a garage somewhere.

DTO Luv · Post by **DTO Luv** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 8:46 pm

Garages for arenas suck. When I or my brothers were in the All City Music festival at the Civic (If you have musician kids in OPS you know what this is.) leaving the parking garage would take at least half an hour to get out of. The Civic held about 10,000 for this event and that was bad enough. Think about 15,000 people trying to get out of garages after a Qwest Center show/game. I think it's fine how the garage at the Qwest Center is mostly for the suite owners and those willing to pay $10 to park. I have never parked in a Qwest Center lot so I can't comment on how it is but a lot is way better for the Qwest Center than garages ever could be.

OmahaDevelopmentMan · Post by **OmahaDevelopmentMan** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 9:15 pm

That civic garage sucked though, there are better designs that do work. I mean besides parking lots have traffic too jams too.

Will · Post by **Will** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 12:55 am

they should build one garage the size of eppley's in the back of the center close to the interstate. That area is already a parking lot so if they build one there it would not be an eye sore.

Raraavis · Post by **Raraavis** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:43 am

Urban arenas have parking garages.

I have never understood why people are so afraid to park in parking garages. I have worked in real cities and in DT Omaha and parked each day in a parking garage. It is more convienent and you are somewhat protected from the elements.
What Omaha needs are more garages open to the general public so we can go downtown and not have to worry about where we are going to park or that we are going to have to park six blocks away from the place you are going.

Bomaha · Post by **Bomaha** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 8:28 pm

What we should do instead of wasting land just build parking garages underground under buildings downtown and a large underground parking garage under where the parking lots are now at the Qwest Center and have a large underground tunnel connecting it to Qwest. I dont know where the funding would come but its an idea. Dont know if its a good one but an idea.

eomaha · Post by **eomaha** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:30 pm

I'd be content with a parking garage with some ground level office/merchant space (let's see... across from the Qwest? How about a sports memorabilia store, a travel agent, of course a cafe, etc)

omahahawk · Post by **omahahawk** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:52 pm

These are all fine ideas but does anybody really think there is a chance of any of them happening in the near future? Parking garages are a whole lot more expensive than lots and these lots are brand new and probably cost quite a bit themselves. Not trying to be negative, but I guess I just don't see it happening.

eomaha · Post by **eomaha** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:58 pm

These are just ideas hawk. Although much to the disliking of the forums height obsessed... I would suggest that a parking garage here is probably more likely to occur before another 600 foot office building... and it could certainly come as part of any development recommended by the forthcoming North Downtown study.

omahahawk · Post by **omahahawk** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:23 pm

I've been hearing a little bit about this North O study. Do you have any idea when they'll make the findings public?

Omaha Forums

Pinnacle / Swanson Site (10th and Capitol)

Okay this is kind of lame but