WallStreet Tower Omaha

nebport5 · Post by **nebport5** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:32 pm

Well clearly they haven't given up...and as of today the sales center was open and staffed.

Bob from Omaha · Post by **Bob from Omaha** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:35 pm

Stargazer wrote:I understand the winning construction bid went to Shirk Brothers Construction.

Now THAT'S funny. And my sense of the median age on this board tells me that Jeff and I are the two that were alive when that line was first said.

Two weeks? Two weeks? That's funny. It sounds like a parakeet.

S33 · Post by **S33** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:44 pm

Bob from Omaha wrote:
Stargazer wrote:I understand the winning construction bid went to Shirk Brothers Construction.
Now THAT'S funny. And my sense of the median age on this board tells me that Jeff and I are the two that were alive when that line was first said.

And here I was thinking that was a legit construction company... :shock:

Post by **nebugeater** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:47 pm

S33 wrote:
Bob from Omaha wrote:
Stargazer wrote:I understand the winning construction bid went to Shirk Brothers Construction.
Now THAT'S funny. And my sense of the median age on this board tells me that Jeff and I are the two that were alive when that line was first said.
And here I was thinking that was a legit construction company... :shock:

I assume you are referencing the "Money Pit" and if so that is well within my age bracket.

Tornado · Post by **Tornado** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:15 pm

I must admit I was excited reading this update today in the paper. I won't truly believe anything until I actually see cranes :D, but that article is definitely a lot better than reading that the WallStreet tower project is done/dead/canceled!

Jason4225 · Post by **Jason4225** » Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:42 am

Bob from Omaha wrote:
Stargazer wrote:I understand the winning construction bid went to Shirk Brothers Construction.
Now THAT'S funny. And my sense of the median age on this board tells me that Jeff and I are the two that were alive when that line was first said.

Two weeks? Two weeks? That's funny. It sounds like a parakeet.

I had a friend that had a project started at their house last summer. The contractor said "two weeks" and it just got finished recently. I kept using the quote, but nobody got it. I was so disappointed.

OmahaJaysCU · Post by **OmahaJaysCU** » Fri Apr 16, 2010 4:54 am

"As I told my brother, the president, we can be cutting this ribbon within two months."

And I said: “That’s why you’re no longer president. Two weeks! Let’s do it in two weeks!

HskrFanMike · Post by **HskrFanMike** » Fri Apr 16, 2010 6:00 pm

justnick wrote:At least 45 is a new number. Variety is the spice of life!

Only took 9 months for 15 days worth of progress. Groundbreaking in the fall of 2012!

Post by **Brad** » Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:27 pm

This was the presentation he gave at CREW

http://www.crewmidwest.com/pdf/2010/J.T ... %20PPT.pdf

Nothing concrete (pun) was mentioned.

Haha... That's a weird PDF. Josh and D'Shawn might want to check out one of the later pages.

Linkin5 · Post by **Linkin5** » Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:51 pm

Brad wrote:
This was the presentation he gave at CREW

http://www.crewmidwest.com/pdf/2010/J.T ... %20PPT.pdf

Nothing concrete (pun) was mentioned.
Haha... That's a weird PDF. Josh and D'Shawn might want to check out one of the later pages.

Looks like he must lurk these forums and took that picture, cool I guess?

justnick · Post by **justnick** » Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:53 pm

This was the presentation he gave at CREW

http://www.crewmidwest.com/pdf/2010/J.T ... %20PPT.pdf

Nothing concrete (pun) was mentioned.

The pregnant crackhead in my info 1001 class last winter had a better presentation than that. I bet in slideshow form it had lovely transitions and sound effects, too. That's what twenty five year olds (who everyone wants to BE) must find entertaining, I suppose.

Big E · Post by **Big E** » Thu Apr 22, 2010 6:48 pm

Had someone told me Scarlett Johannson was planning to live there I would have built the thing myself.

S33 · Post by **S33** » Thu Apr 22, 2010 8:10 pm

So the logic I'm following, is that everyone wants to be like us in our mid-twenties...sweet

Bob from Omaha · Post by **Bob from Omaha** » Thu Apr 22, 2010 8:39 pm

At some point, when asked by the city when he's going to actually do something, I imagine he is going to say his dog ate his homework.

Wake up and smell the bull****. He's a non starter and the city is going to have to find a real developer.

StreetsOfOmaha · Post by **StreetsOfOmaha** » Thu Apr 22, 2010 9:12 pm

Did anyone catch in the presentation where it says that Brandeis has 40,000 employees within 1 block? :o

Also, I'm still waiting on this "fine retail" at the Brandeis as well.

It's almost amazing that this guy has a job. He seems to make ridiculous claims and never do anything to substantiate them.

Also, the presentation seemed corrupted, as there seemed to be "slides" stacked on top of each other making them illegible.

Seth · Post by **Seth** » Thu Apr 22, 2010 9:19 pm

StreetsOfOmaha wrote:Also, the presentation seemed corrupted, as there seemed to be "slides" stacked on top of each other making them illegible.

That's just because his PowerPoint had a lot of fancy transitions and animations on single slides. When played in PowerPoint, they animate to show one (or several) at a time, but when it's printed they all get layered on one another.

I agree that it looked like a shady operation. The first few slides were serious and professional, but it went downhill fast after that.

S33 · Post by **S33** » Thu Apr 22, 2010 9:39 pm

StreetsOfOmaha wrote:
It's almost amazing that this guy has a job. .

He's a partner, but yeah, presentations don't appear as their strong suit. However, the content of the speaker is usually 3/4 of the presentation, as long as it flows with the slides.

StreetsOfOmaha · Post by **StreetsOfOmaha** » Fri Apr 23, 2010 2:02 am

I'm not even talking about the quality of the presentation. I'm asking, how many other jobs in the world are there where you can string people out for years at a time making empty promises that you never make good on? (I know some of you will have some good, sarcastic answers to that rhetorical quesion :) )

S33 · Post by **S33** » Fri Apr 23, 2010 2:18 am

StreetsOfOmaha wrote:I'm not even talking about the quality of the presentation. I'm asking, how many other jobs in the world are there where you can string people out for years at a time making empty promises that you never make good on? (I know some of you will have some good, sarcastic answers to that rhetorical quesion :) )

I hear ya, but he does have some circumstances that were out of his control. On top of that, Omaha was really pushing for high rise residential in a lousy market, I highly doubt there are any existing possible proposals with any additional credibility. I'm sure they'll get another year or so to make a move.

justnick · Post by **justnick** » Fri Apr 23, 2010 2:49 am

StreetsOfOmaha wrote:I'm not even talking about the quality of the presentation. I'm asking, how many other jobs in the world are there where you can string people out for years at a time making empty promises that you never make good on? (I know some of you will have some good, sarcastic answers to that rhetorical quesion :) )

Barack Obama comes to mind.

nebport5 · Post by **nebport5** » Fri Apr 23, 2010 3:51 am

How disappointing to keep showing "the original rendering". At least he knew better than to actually show the new one in all its disappointment.

michaelsjewel · Post by **michaelsjewel** » Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:41 am

so, is this project officially dead that it's moved to the UNBUILT category... or is it just speculation?

nebport5 · Post by **nebport5** » Sun Apr 25, 2010 6:05 am

michaelsjewel wrote:so, is this project officially dead that it's moved to the UNBUILT category... or is it just speculation?

purely skepticism and frustration from the administrators as there has been no such announcement.

OmahaJaysCU · Post by **OmahaJaysCU** » Sat May 22, 2010 8:55 pm

anyone notice that this project was not on the downtown living tour this year? why would a struggling project not be all over showing their models off to prospective buyers? because the project is DEAD.

thenewguy · Post by **thenewguy** » Sun May 23, 2010 4:41 pm

or they finally met their goal and didn't need to push it anymore.

...If only...

nebport5 · Post by **nebport5** » Sun May 23, 2010 5:34 pm

OmahaJaysCU wrote:anyone notice that this project was not on the downtown living tour this year? why would a struggling project not be all over showing their models off to prospective buyers? because the project is DEAD.

and yet the sales office continues to be open and staffed.

OmahaJaysCU · Post by **OmahaJaysCU** » Mon May 24, 2010 12:29 am

Tried calling the sales office number listed on the website? It's no longer in service.

justnick · Post by **justnick** » Mon May 24, 2010 1:38 am

OmahaJaysCU wrote:Tried calling the sales office number listed on the website? It's no longer in service.

There'll be a new one in 90 days?

nebport5 · Post by **nebport5** » Mon May 24, 2010 7:19 am

OmahaJaysCU wrote:Tried calling the sales office number listed on the website? It's no longer in service.

what number would that be? CBS Home no longer has telephone service?

Stargazer · Post by **Stargazer** » Mon May 24, 2010 7:33 pm

964-6500 ... doesn't seem to be disconnected... not answering, although the sales office is supposed to be closed Monday.

HskrFanMike · Post by **HskrFanMike** » Tue Jun 01, 2010 5:22 pm

Brad wrote:Developer: Deal in reach on tower

http://www.omaha.com/article/20100415/M ... h-on-tower

Jeffrey Robb WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER on April 15th wrote:The dirt work happening this week at downtown's WallStreet Tower site is not a sign that the long-awaited project is starting.

But the developer said Wednesday that behind-the-scenes work is proceeding.

Jason Townsend, president of developer Townsend Inc., said the project's prospective lender is in the final stages of its “due diligence” in evaluating the project. Townsend said he thinks the high-rise condominium, office and retail development is within 45 days of closing its financing deal, which would lead to construction.

“We believe we're quite literally to the end of the line,” he said.

Another timeframe passes uneventfully...

S33 · Post by **S33** » Tue Jun 01, 2010 5:30 pm

I still think they can have this thing at least framed by the time the CWS rolls around. :)

OmahaJaysCU · Post by **OmahaJaysCU** » Wed Jun 02, 2010 2:45 am

nebport5 · Post by **nebport5** » Wed Jun 02, 2010 3:59 am

OmahaJaysCu, how much did you bet against this project succeeding?

OmahaJaysCU · Post by **OmahaJaysCU** » Wed Jun 02, 2010 4:30 am

nebport5 wrote:OmahaJaysCu, how much did you bet against this project succeeding?

Idk...i've been doing this reverse psychology thing on this project for a couple years...if this work I will be |expletive| elated hahaha.

nebport5 · Post by **nebport5** » Wed Jun 02, 2010 5:09 pm

OmahaJaysCU wrote:
nebport5 wrote:OmahaJaysCu, how much did you bet against this project succeeding?
Idk...i've been doing this reverse psychology thing on this project for a couple years...if this work I will be |expletive| elated hahaha.

fair enough, I can appreciate that.

ShawJ · Post by **ShawJ** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 2:23 pm

Another article about the project in the money section today. Much of the same, though.

OmahaJaysCU · Post by **OmahaJaysCU** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 3:07 pm

Can't wait for the next update in September!

Coyote · Post by **Coyote** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 3:28 pm

Tower back to square one

Jeffrey Robb WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER wrote:Stalled by a lack of financing, downtown Omaha's WallStreet Tower proposal must start over to get city approval of its plans and development incentives. The developer has yet to finalize financing for costs that have escalated from $122 million to $241 million as the project's makeup shifted.

For the city, there is no going back on the choice of developers. Townsend closed on the purchase of the square block at 14th and Dodge Streets, and city officials say the deal doesn't allow the city to take back the land for lack of performance.

guy4omaha · Post by **guy4omaha** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 3:38 pm

You know this scaled down 1/2 of a tower rendering is so ugly I seriously hope the project doesn't get built in its current form. Maybe my opinion is wrong, but this toothpick tower would be an eyesore to the rest of the skyline.