City Architecture

Cermak · Post by **Cermak** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:10 pm

When looking at Nashville on google earth I can see three big buildings getting built downtown, Memphis has none. Omaha and Lincoln are both growing at roughly the same rate. Why in Tennessee in two cities of relatively the same size. Is one growing like gangbusters and the other hardly grows at all ?. Really strange. This would bother me if I lived in Memphis. Out of all four of Tennessee’s biggest cities just Nashville is really growing alot. I’m wondering if the state is pouring all it’s resources into just one metro and the others are just bottom feeders ?.

Knoxville has the big state university, Chattanooga has beautiful mountain scenery, and is only a few hours drive from Atlanta. Memphis has Elvis and Beal street. And Nashville gets all the rest, what a great deal for Nashville. I’m glad Omaha and Lincoln are both growing at similar rates, and one city isn’t left out. Iowa also has a similar situation like Tennessee’s. Des Moines gets most of the growth and is the state capital, Iowa City gets a good amount and the rest of the state sees very little growth except Cedar Rapids which gets a respectable amount but nothing like Des Moines or Iowa City. Waterloo, Sioux City and Davenport all struggle and are seen as Iowa’s old economy focused on mainly agri-business.

This is why I think Omaha and Lincoln need to team up and promote themselves more as one region. Both cities are growing, they can grow even more together. Currently I don’t think they team up enough. They are only 50 miles apart, which in the Great Plains region is nothing. On the east coast 50 miles is much farther drive than it is here. With Lincoln and Omaha packaged together you get alot more than having them stay and act separate. We only have two cities and I always thought it was odd that they are so close together in such a large state geographically , just 50 miles. I realize our metro’s won’t be merged anytime soon in the census rankings, but that doesn’t mean we can’t start acting like one big metro now.

When I was in Indianapolis, I kept seeing signs on buildings that said Purdue, Purdue this, Purdue that. Indianapolis seems to have taken Purdue university under its wing. I think they mainly did this for economic development not because they want to be nice. Omaha and Lincoln can do similar and be marketed as more as one region. Des Moines and Ames also market themselves together a lot I’ve noticed, even though Ames is its own metropolitan area. But they both share the same TV market. It would be great if Omaha and Lincoln could be one TV market. Right now they are separate media markets. Being one TV market would be a start in helping tie the two together more.

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 10:38 pm

That's a great idea about Omaha & Lincoln marketed as one region more -- not two. The widened I-80 between the two makes them feel more connected, imo. As they slowly merge together, we may see suburbs growing in between them, like Waverly. (Down in Texas, you can drive from Dallas-FW to Waco to Austin to San Antonio, and its basically built up w/ industry the entire way along the freeway. I almost want Omaha to Lincoln to feel like that.)

BTW, I almost feel like the minute Lincoln gets confidence and too proud a head, it almost gets a "slapping from Omaha", almost shot down quickly, to remember and be reminded of its place as "City #2" in Nebraska. Is that just my perception? If it is true, than that is NOT right.

NASHVILLE: That town has never appealed to me that much, and I think its because of the "Country Hick Hollywood" aspect of it. It is a fun city to visit and stuff, though. And, there are major buildings going up. If you check out their Cool Springs area by Franklin, there are many neat office buildings along the freeway. It is a pretty setting, too, with lots of trees. In a way, it is kind of another "Austin." For some reason, the worn & gritty "Jazz & Blues" aspect of Memphis appeals to me more than Nashville, personally. Yet. Nashville feels more boomin' & hoppin' and stuff. That "Star/Hollywood" feeling around pastures, trees, barns, fence lines, forests, heat & humidity, fall & winter, old red brick buildings w/ colonial accents, feels strange to me, though. Not used to it. I associate that feeling with palm trees, sunshine & water (LA, Miami) or New York City. It's almost the land of boot-wearin' Dolly Parton, Carrie Underwood, Miranda Lambert, Faith Hill, and Tim McGraw, and Keith Urban. I do really like country music, and think Tennessee is pretty, but I'm not sure I would "sign up" to live around all that. It is an increasingly attractive area, though. I'm sure plenty of people live there and don't even like country music -- like plenty live in Vegas and don't gamble. It's almost like a woodsy, super-sized "Branson, MO" or something.

Suburban office buildings in the Cool Springs area, near Franklin, TN:

https://livability.com/sites/default/fi ... so2063.jpg

http://media.bizj.us/view/img/6344712/n ... 6-0-46.jpg

http://hobnobfranklin.com/wp-content/up ... vation.jpg

http://pics4.city-data.com/cpicv/vfiles29447.jpg (It almost reminds me of a "Denver Tech Center" yet with Tennessee scenery.)

.................................................................................................................................

Look at some of the amazing construction going on there downtown and around the area:

https://www.nashvillepublicradio.org/si ... .33_pm.png

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/qfcvDB9 ... 518835.jpg (The developing area around the new Omni Hotel)

https://media.bizj.us/view/img/10300635 ... -0-202.jpg (The Omni Hotel)

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/o6gui2w_D6w/maxresdefault.jpg

https://ak6.picdn.net/shutterstock/vide ... humb/1.jpg

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/kQ1QBXNQlqs/maxresdefault.jpg

(That new glass, squarish tower downtown could be the tallest building. It's higher than the roof of the "Batman Building", but I don't think it is taller than its twin antennae features, though. Therefore, I'm sure it is #2 tallest.)

iamjacobm · Post by **iamjacobm** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 1:34 am

The city halls of Dallas and Fort Worth are closer than the city halls of Lincoln and Gretna, let alone Omaha. Omaha and Lincoln aren't as close together as you would like to think.

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 1:37 am

iamjacobm wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 1:34 am The city halls of Dallas and Fort Worth are closer than the city halls of Lincoln and Gretna, let alone Omaha. Omaha and Lincoln aren't as close together as you would like to think.

Right, they are too far apart to be "twin cities" or a "metroplex" probably. Minneapolis-St Paul are only 10 miles apart (close enough to pull off the "twin" nickname). Dallas-Fort Worth are 30 miles apart (close enough to pull off the "metroplex" nickname). San Francisco and Tampa are just across the bay from Oakland and St. Petersburgh. Seattle-Tacoma are probably around 50 miles apart, but that whole hyphenated name started with the big Sea-Tac International Airport built in between the two cities. So, if they built an "Omaha-Lincoln International Airport" in the middle, we might have hope of what Seattle-Tacoma has. Maybe we could be called "OMA-LIN."

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 2:16 am

By the way, for a long time, it was difficult to find an updated picture of Denver's new sharp-looking glass skyscraper, but I'm finding some now. Denver's getting very glassy. I've wanted to talk about this new building for awhile. It has a meandering top edge, just like the top edge of the Rockies meander... That specific area, over by the new Hyatt Hotel, is getting so sharp.

https://denverinfill.com/blog/wp-conten ... nth_04.jpg

https://denverinfill.com/blog/wp-conten ... nth_01.jpg

https://images.fineartamerica.com/image ... -calip.jpg

Here's another one with the outside of the new tower almost done: http://www.cpr.org/sites/default/files/ ... k=JeR5bF0o

A close up of the top: https://si.wsj.net/public/resources/ima ... 165631.jpg

Pics of getting built: http://denverurbanreview.com/wp-content ... G_4679.jpg (This is the best I could find for awhile on it.)

http://denverurbanreview.com/wp-content ... ifteen.jpg

A side view: https://crej.com/wp-content/uploads/201 ... 8-copy.jpg

The original rendering: http://www.denver-cityscape.com/images/ ... g-6915.jpg

It really is a very sharp & slick skyscraper. I'm liking the Denver skyline more & more. I've always liked it to a degree, and I felt the boxy-ness of it was appropriate to a degree, although criticized, because it is the nontraditional, dry, inland West, and it is simply a city on a high plain next to the Rockies, so skyscrapers that are too embellished & fanciful don't feel appropriate to me there (just like they don't in Salt Lake City, Boise, and Phoenix). But, the newest high rise designs, although still held within certain appropriate, restraining design boundaries, is adding more pizzazz & excitement & flash to the skyline.

A new super cool building proposed in Denver. I hope they build it -- of course. Again, simpler geometry is appropriate there. http://lanthiahoggdesigns.com/wp-conten ... denver.jpg

Cermak · Post by **Cermak** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 3:22 am

Denver is looking better, it’s still very dominated by 1970-80’s skyscrapers. Size wise downtown Denver and Minneapolis seem similar to me. I actually like DT Minneapolis better. The cash register building is still the best high rise in Denver in my opinion, it is an iconic high rise that instantly says “Denver” to me whenever I see it in person. It’s status could be challenged soon with all the new construction going on in the city now. I find it interesting that Denver has many many skyscrapers and has a large Downtown, while nearby and smaller Colorado Springs has a smallish Downtown with very few high rises. In fact it is almost absent of high rises except for a few buildings. At least it appears that way.

Downtown Nashville is impressive with all its new buildings. It seems to be jockeying for a new position in the order of southern cities. I consider Texas and Florida their own separate regions and don’t include them as southern cities of the traditional south. Traditional south states are Georgia, North and South Carolina, Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi, Kentucky, Arkansas and Louisiana. Atlanta is obviously number one and Charlotte is two. Number three would either be Nashville, New Orleans or Raleigh/Durham. Memphis and Birmingham represent the older slow growth metro’s. Poor Memphis cant get a break. Louisville is also hard to classify as it’s not very south but I don’t consider it Midwest either.

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:19 am

Cermak wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 3:22 am Denver is looking better, it’s still very dominated by 1970-80’s skyscrapers. Size wise downtown Denver and Minneapolis seem similar to me. I actually like DT Minneapolis better. The cash register building is still the best high rise in Denver in my opinion, it is an iconic high rise that instantly says “Denver” to me whenever I see it in person. It’s status could be challenged soon with all the new construction going on in the city now. I find it interesting that Denver has many many skyscrapers and has a large Downtown, while nearby and smaller Colorado Springs has a smallish Downtown with very few high rises. In fact it is almost absent of high rises except for a few buildings. At least it appears that way.

Downtown Nashville is impressive with all its new buildings. It seems to be jockeying for a new position in the order of southern cities. I consider Texas and Florida their own separate regions and don’t include them as southern cities of the traditional south. Traditional south states are Georgia, North and South Carolina, Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi, Kentucky, Arkansas and Louisiana. Atlanta is obviously number one and Charlotte is two. Number three would either be Nashville, New Orleans or Raleigh/Durham. Memphis and Birmingham represent the older slow growth metro’s. Poor Memphis cant get a break. Louisville is also hard to classify as it’s not very south but I don’t consider it Midwest either.

DENVER: Yes, Minneapolis reminds me (in downtown size and energy and vibrance, and location on the edge of a wilderness playground) almost the "Denver of the middle of the country" or the "Seattle of the Midwest." Minneapolis's skyline excites me more than Denver's, but I like both, and feel like they are appropriate looking for their region. I wouldnt like the blue, glassy Minnesota skyline on the dry high plains next to dry Rocky Mountains -- I like it up in green, lower elevation Minnesota around blue lakes. Denver's "Cash Register", a Philip Johnson skyscraper originally designed for a Texas city, and a simple skyscraper that could technically work in any town I think, has become a symbol of Denver, with its simple, yet eye-catching crown. Denver's associated heavily with the historic Gold Rush, so the old cash register shape works, and the curves subconsciencely remind me of the capital "D" in Denver, so that works, too. I love the simple & beautiful, white Republic Plaza, almost like a sharp piece of snowy, frosty, gleaming ice. Its my favorite of SOM's white boxes of the 80's. The brown Qwest Tower I like OK, but I understand why its not even featured in my AIA Denver architecture guide. Its almost like the architect had fun with octogonal shapes, and creating ledges and tiered steps to "pimp up" the skyscraper -- but all of it doesnt really mean anything that one can define.

NASHVILLE: Tennessee is a "very with it" key state in the region, like Minnesota and Colorado are, so it doesnt surprise me Nashville is the "with it" city of the region. To me, Memphis has so much soul, that part of the gloom & neglect only help to foster it. I almost would hate to see it overrun with new glassy condo towers, and new malls, and all the "new money" and "white collar" culture that goes with it. Besides the two coasts, it seems like the inland "very with it" hot cities hopscotch and are found every other major city, or two, or so. The hot & booming cities often arent staunch & stuffy & old & "heavy with tradition." Even in some cities in the East, you can mostly escape that feeling, in ultra-eccentric New York City, DC probably, and in newer big cities like Atlanta & Charlotte & Nashville -- and, of course, the Florida cities the most. Philadelphia and Richmond and Hartford are pretty staunch & stuffy & traditional -- Philadelphia probably seeming less than it used to be. (It's not a criticism. Being "staunch" is often a respectable attribute. I'm talking atmosphere. It's the difference of working at a tanning salon/gym vs. the Hartford Group or Lloyds of London.) It's kind of what you see in Ohio: Cleveland is almost the big, old, industrial giant -- some may call "sleepy giant"( but I dont think that is true anymore). Cincinatti is an older, ornate city that is pretty and unique, but not booming and new and fully hopping. Columbus is mostly the hot "Nashville" or "Austin" in that state -- the youngest & newest-seeming city most free of old heavy tradition and staunch & stuffy atmosphere, the one most poised for new growth. That doesnt mean it is the most interesting and beautiful and soulful city, though. Kansas City is less staunch & traditional feeling than St Louis or Milwaukee is -- as another example. Omaha & Des Moines & Minneapolis are like Kansas City in that way. Omaha is not staunch, stuffy, or heavy with tradition at all -- and that is one reason it constantly is a growing town, I think. It welcomes the newcomer. (Boston is old & staunchy and heavy with tradition, but it is desirable there, as that is very expected there, the history & charm is part of the allure of that old & beautiful Massachussettes city, kind of like what New Orleans & Charleston & Savannah offer.)

THE SOUTH: Memphis and Louisville are considered the South, but it's more the start of the South. Its not the "Deep South." Thats the difference. When you drive from St Louis to Memphis, or Indianapolis to Louisville, you cross a line.

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:59 pm

BTW, I forgot to mention in my last entry that Seattle's brand new Hyatt Hotel has similar qualities to Denver's Republic Plaza. It's geometry so simple & basic & minimulist, along with the basic color white, that it is exciting, imo.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... y_2018.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DpQHRnkUUAAO5G8.jpg

https://assets.hyatt.com/content/dam/hy ... or.4x3.jpg

https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-cont ... 0x1244.jpg

(I'm almost wondering if Denver is a little PO'ed about it, so they are now on a mission to get glassy condo towers, like Seattle. It is an architectural statement that Denver has had exclusively for years in the West -- as it is the most simple & pure of all of SOM's "white boxes" from the 80's. I doubt they are PO'ed. The Hyatt Hotel is different enough from the Republic Plaza that Denver can't quite yell "Copy Cat!" But, I do feel Denver & Seattle look at each other from a far and compete, and probably get ideas from each other. However, I can't imagine Seattle leaders saying to an architect "We want a simple & basic & pure & white skyscraper like Denver's Republic Plaza." So, I'm guessing the hotel's architect appreciates that kind of basic, pure, and timeless design, and therefore designed that style of hotel, and the city simply approved it. Who knows.... I wonder how that all works.)

Denver's Republic Plaza: https://www.emporis.com/images/show/651 ... -south.jpg

Cermak · Post by **Cermak** » Sat Feb 02, 2019 2:50 am

Republic Plaza does have a simple clean lined beauty about it. It was built about the same time as our twin towers. Downtown Denver has so many boxy buildings. Like Omaha they pretty much missed the 1985-1995 era that had all the pointy top buildings so many other cities have. Denver had a huge building boom and I mean huge from 1981-84. Most of Denver’s buildings are flat topped. Think Des Moines has more pointy top buildings than Denver.

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:53 am

Cermak wrote: Sat Feb 02, 2019 2:50 am Republic Plaza does have a simple clean lined beauty about it. It was built about the same time as our twin towers. Downtown Denver has so many boxy buildings. Like Omaha they pretty much missed the 1985-1995 era that had all the pointy top buildings so many other cities have. Denver had a huge building boom and I mean huge from 1981-84. Most of Denver’s buildings are flat topped. Think Des Moines has more pointy top buildings than Denver.

I hear ya. I think Denver pulls flat-roofed and curved-roofed buildings well, as the city is so void of the old heavy traditions of the East. On that dry plain, adjacent to the jagged, stony Rockies, I feel basic geometry works best with modern/contemporary styles --- rather than frilly ornate touches & fanciful Old World embellishments. Sure, ANY American city has historic buildings w/ typical ornate touches, and it works. But, as far as modern skyscrapers go, I think Denver should stick to basic modern/contemporary. Its not whimsical Whistler, Banff, or Victoria. Its not frilly & graceful Atlanta or Charlotte. Its like Boise in a way, or Salt Lake City kinda, imo -- which stick to more basic shows of geometry & design. (The one exception I can think of is Tampa's tallest w/ the row of sharply-pointed gothic windows at the top. Florida cities dont normally have modern white/grey skyscrapers w/ gothic touches. Strange. Yet, I like the building, and I think it works for Tampa. How does that work for Tampa? I think its because the gothic windows are not arched, they are sharply pointed -- which is a modern & abstract translation of a gothic window, like St Louis' tallest has.. And, there are actually white/grey island churches that have those pointy gothic windows in the Caribbean -- so that touch is present in that Gulf/Caribbean region already. We cant think that gothic touches have no place in a tropical region -- it is just not true.)

Cermak · Post by **Cermak** » Sat Feb 02, 2019 4:10 am

Yes it seems to work in Denver. The mountains are the real star of the show there. Denver from some angles has a long boxy skyline similar to LA. I have not been to the city since 2016. And I’m not sure when I will get back again. If I remember they have the big three, like Minneapolis. But the city is actually bigger than Minneapolis and I believe they have more office space.

I just don’t feel like Omaha has much in common with Denver anymore so I really don’t pay much attention to it now. I still feel some ties between Omaha and Minneapolis.

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Sat Feb 02, 2019 5:34 am

Cermak wrote: Sat Feb 02, 2019 4:10 am Yes it seems to work in Denver. The mountains are the real star of the show there. Denver from some angles has a long boxy skyline similar to LA. I have not been to the city since 2016. And I’m not sure when I will get back again. If I remember they have the big three, like Minneapolis. But the city is actually bigger than Minneapolis and I believe they have more office space.

I just don’t feel like Omaha has much in common with Denver anymore so I really don’t pay much attention to it now. I still feel some ties between Omaha and Minneapolis.

"Anymore?" Im curious what you feel has changed between Denver & Omaha, compared to the past? LA has flat-topped skyscrapers because of the helicopter pad rule the city had up until recently. Also, California cities often feature garish & glitzy skyscrapers, yet ones still bound by the more basic & simpler geometry that characterizes skyscrapers of nontraditional, newer cities of the West. Los Angeles' tubular US Bank building is a great building for LA because it has that white stucco looking quality that matches sunny & bright Southern CA well, and it sports those stair-stepping ledges steeply leading up to a climaxing crown. The Sanwa Bank building is great for LA because of the stair-stepping quality (that was popular in LA in the 1990s) leading steeply up to an octogonal neon crown. Cesar Pelli's skyscraper is white w/ steep stair-stepping ledges also. Why do skyscrapers with steeply stair-stepping ledges work well for LA? I have ideas that are kind "out there", but Im not 100% sure yet... Since the helicopter rule was lifted, the newest LA skyscraper has a sweeping arch w/ a needle that I do love seeing w/ palm trees in the foreground.

Cermak · Post by **Cermak** » Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:28 pm

Denver might have more in common with California cities or Austin. Its feel and culture is not very Midwest to me. It’s a huge sprawling metro that lacks some of the charm and character the Midwest cities have. It’s one of the most expensive cities in the country. Especially for not being on the coast. At one time years ago Omaha and Denver had some stuff in common maybe back in the 70’s or 80’s but not really anymore in my opinion . I look for it to continue growing like crazy. As transferees never bat an eyelash about moving there, it’s one of those cities everyone likes because it sounds nice “Denver”. As the entire front range including Colorado Springs approaches 4 million people.

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Sat Feb 02, 2019 8:49 pm

Cermak wrote: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:28 pm Denver might have more in common with California cities or Austin. Its feel and culture is not very Midwest to me. It’s a huge sprawling metro that lacks some of the charm and character the Midwest cities have. It’s one of the most expensive cities in the country. Especially for not being on the coast. At one time years ago Omaha and Denver had some stuff in common maybe back in the 70’s or 80’s but not really anymore in my opinion . I look for it to continue growing like crazy. As transferees never bat an eyelash about moving there, it’s one of those cities everyone likes because it sounds nice “Denver”. As the entire front range including Colorado Springs approaches 4 million people.

I hear ya now... I get what you mean. It is more like Austin, then Omaha. I'll always like Denver cityscape-wise, but there are things that have "put a bad taste in my mouth" about it, culture-wise, in the past. However, no 'tude in a city is gonna make me not live there if I want to live there, because local culture takes a "back seat" behind scenery, cityscape, weather, and location to me. My first impression of Denver was in 1985, as a kid, driving through on a CO family vacation, and I was struck by the taller (then new, very crisp) skyscrapers, and I remember seeing the "Cash Register" building. Growing up, I was excited to fly through Denver, when flying up to Seattle to see relatives/cousins every summer. So, I still think "Denver!!" to this day when I see it, and I like the city's nice name, too. However, from living there for a period of my life, after living in Southern CA first, I was struck by the arrogance & upity attitude people had as a whole there (for a former "cowtown" on a mere prairie). Its a highly educated city, and fierce sports city, and has great civic pride and all, but people are not "movie stars" there, and there is no ocean, hardly a river, and the greenery & colors are semi-dull, too. The craggy, majestic, panoramic range & playground of the Rockies is the "claim to fame" there, though, of course. Thinking it was maybe just my own solo impression of Denver for years, Ive come to hear that from other people about Denver, too, and they were turned off, and were surprised to find the culture much nicer in cities like Portland & even snobbier Seattle -- and we are talking nicely-dressed, succesful, professional people, that watched sports and wore Eddie Bauer & Gap, felt that about Denver. First off, I think the West Coast cities are all more "zany", and are more tolerant of eccentric & unique & different & creative people than Denver. The arrogance in Denver, to me, feels like the solid pride/arrogance you get around talented & driven & hot-headed snowboarders & skiiers, or the top highschool jock or popular cheerleader, or a successful lawyer or doctor (not necessarily creative people) -- or something. People that may admire artwork in a gallery, and tell themselves they are sophisticated & cultured with a day on the town, but they are not ever friends with the local "weird eccentric artist" -- that type of thing. I think probably most people there, no matter how perfectly they fit in or not, feel that about Denver, and maybe feel insecure in some moments -- no matter who you are. I also think its all kinda funny to me... And, I dont care about Denver's snobbiness anymore -- I think: "Who cares. Let people be who they want to be." When I go to Denver, I enjoy the buildings, the mountains, the Tech Center, the sprawl, the new toll roads. In many ways, it is a sharp & progressive city. However, I admit, because of Denver's notable & very noticed arrogance, I do think its kinda funny that it will always be held back by its location, and will never have the advantage cities like seaside & mountainous Seattle or San Diego or Honolulu have. You leave the Denver area, and on three sides, its surrounded by an ocean of windblown prairie grass, and tumble weeds blowing across the interstate, hitting traffic & scratching new cars, and stark, dull, dusty towns like Sterling are the uninspiring places to stop for gas and to get a bite to eat. Nearby cities, like very dusty "Old West" feeling Cheyenne & Casper, WY, show what Denver would really feel/be like, if not the financial capitol of the Rockies, not constantly driven to be big, sophisticated, and "with it" city on the stage of US cities. I also think Denver was a strange and inappropriate setting for the "Dynasty" evening soap, which was a spin-off of Dallas. Dallas & places like CA's wine country (Falcon Crest) are better, more believable settings for jewel-clad, sophisticated & rich folks, who have a mansion with a swimming pool. Denver's too high elevation, windswept, and dusty (imo), and not romantic of a setting, imo -- for an evening soap. Its almost too cold to even swim there in the summer, or have that golden beautiful tan we see on Dallas. Yes, the day can be hot, yet the evenings cool down fast, and snowflakes can be seen into even June. Denver, like anywhere, doesnt have it all.

Cermak · Post by **Cermak** » Sun Feb 03, 2019 9:15 pm

Denver’s terrain is pretty ugly to the east. I always thought Omaha looks so much better in the summer than Denver. Omaha is more lush and green. Here is a pic of Denver’s tallest

Was wondering who has a better tallest Denver or Minneapolis ?

I’ve been inside IDS in Minneapolis but never inside Republic Plaza in Denver. I initially say IDS is better, but Republic plaza kinda grows on you the more you look at it. It’s about 10 years newer than IDS. To me IDS says Minneapolis I’m not sure if any other buildings like IDS exist in another city. While Republic Plaza is more of the standard design that does not necessarily say Denver to me. It was built right before my favorite architecture period 1985-1995, so no pointy cap at the top or set backs along the sides. It’s more reserved but has great lines and I like the windows, I like square windows on buildings in general. So that alone is a big swaying factor to me. Overall I would give the edge to Denver’s Republic Plaza in a close contest. It really comes down to personal preference. Republic Plaza doesn’t jump out at you, but it just graces the skyline with a understated beauty with simple clean lines yet a sophisticated look and a natural looking warm color.

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Mon Feb 04, 2019 1:09 am

Cermak wrote: Sun Feb 03, 2019 9:15 pm Denver’s terrain is pretty ugly to the east. I always thought Omaha looks so much better in the summer than Denver. Omaha is more lush and green. Here is a pic of Denver’s tallest

Was wondering who has a better tallest Denver or Minneapolis ?

I’ve been inside IDS in Minneapolis but never inside Republic Plaza in Denver. I initially say IDS is better, but Republic plaza kinda grows on you the more you look at it. It’s about 10 years newer than IDS. To me IDS says Minneapolis I’m not sure if any other buildings like IDS exist in another city. While Republic Plaza is more of the standard design that does not necessarily say Denver to me. It was built right before my favorite architecture period 1985-1995, so no pointy cap at the top or set backs along the sides. It’s more reserved but has great lines and I like the windows, I like square windows on buildings in general. So that alone is a big swaying factor to me. Overall I would give the edge to Denver’s Republic Plaza in a close contest. It really comes down to personal preference. Republic Plaza doesn’t jump out at you, but it just graces the skyline with a understated beauty with simple clean lines yet a sophisticated look and a natural looking warm color.

I love our discussions...

First off, Minneapolis has noteworthy architecture (the IDS & Wells Fargo Tower), while Denver really doesn't (yet). The IDS and Wells Fargo both are more likely to appear in USA architecture books than any of Denver's current skyscrapers. Since I love the blue glass & zigzags (the IDS's back-stepping corners dubbed "zogs" by Philip Johnson) topped by a heavy black cap, I think the IDS is a prettier & unique & bolder statement, and is a more loved building overall than the Republic Plaza. (Btw, Dallas's Thanksgiving Tower was likely inspired by the IDS Tower -- yet not noteworthy architecture like the IDS.) However, there is a lot of appreciation from locals in Denver of the way the Republic Plaza reflects the sky and gleams, and I think people naturally recognize that it is a celebration & purposeful statement of the simplist & most practical forms of geometry (the rectangle & square). The Denver architecture guides states the design "triumphs" from ground to the top. So, thats why I love it, too.

On a winters day in Denver, with snow showers coming down from the Rockies, it stands there reflecting the quickly changing light, standing tall & rectangular, not competing with the backdrop of nature's mountain grandeur. Because its a simple white box, I dont think one claim it's "Denver" anymore than it is "Houston" or "Milwaukee" or "New Orleans" (other cities that have a very similar SOM white box skyscraper from the 1980's). However, I do feel its the most perfectly balanced one in terms of getting that particular universal/international architectural statement perfectly right & flawlessly proportioned. Republic Plaza most looks like New Orlean's One Shell Square first, then Houston's One Shell Plaza second. Milwaukee's building has the two rows of X-bracing, which I love for Milwaukee's statement, so their "white box" is a bit different. Also, Im not sure if any of the others are gleamy & mirror-like, and completely flat-faced, like Denver's very reflective skyscraper. Because Denver skyscraper architecture, as a whole, tends to lean on more the use of basic & simple geometry & lines (which I feel is appropriate for that city, I would do the same thing if an architect there), and Republic Plaza fits that clean & basic quality well, and is also gleamy & reflective of light, like a big sheet of ice on a wintry mountain lake or glacier, I think its a perfect skyscraper & statement for Denver. (Palm trees would look nice with a white box skyscraper, too. Yet, Denver's is gleaming & glossy & reflective -- again, like that ice & snow up in those nearby mountains.)

Also, the contrast against nature: The building stands tall as a basic & perfect rectangular shape (a very basic shape existing in geometry & mathematics, but not usually found & seen in physical nature -- like the black domino-like monolith in space on 2001) decked in gleamy crystal-like white, like an icy snowflake, cutting straight-up vertically through the wavering horizontal line of the snowy, craggy, natural Rockies seen beyond it. Below are some pics Ive taken of it w/ the Denver skyline. The one w/ the similar angle you posted is from the new Hyatt Hotel. In that picture, notice how Republic Plaza has similar facade patterns to the shorter white building adjacent to it, plus it echoes the squarish glass box skyscraper -- which was Denver's tallest for years, and kind of looks like an "all glass Woodmen Tower." Funny, that tower came after Omaha's Woodmen and is actually just a bit taller, and around the exact same proportions. (Mmmm? Was Denver inspired by Omaha at one time?) OMAHA'S GREENERY: Yes, I love Omaha's greenery. (I know a local lady here who had a boyfriend from Omaha for years, and she visited there several times. She went to Westroads and loved Omaha, she said. She mentioned how green & pretty it was.) When you come from Denver or the inland West, Omaha looks so lush. However, if you come from leafier Minneapolis, Milwaukee or Indianapolis or St Louis (or even Des Moines), you can spot how Omaha is where the drier West is just kicking in, as the greenery is a little more muted & dull, and trees are more sparse and stark, and not quite as tall & full. (Oklahoma City & Amarillo are even more so than Omaha, as they are further out on the Plains, so I dont only spot it, Im being logical. Omaha originally was an almost treeless prairie.) Indianapolis has the prettiest & fairest greenery in the Upper Midwest, imo. Im not sure why, but it is slightly more ornamental & fair & fuller looking than cities I would expect the greenery to be the same in, if not better in (like Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Columbus). It must be local Indiana soil? Trees in Indiana seem to grow a bit taller and more spindly & spidery than other states... I dont know why. But, I can see it in person & pictures. I have pictures of 3-story newer apartments in suburban Indianapolis, and the robust pin oaks tower over them noticably more than pin oaks would in Omaha.

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:20 am

Indianapolis's gorgeous greenery: A mostly flat landscape w/ very tall & fair lush trees & evergreens, the city has a particular lush Midwest look I dont quite see anywhere else. (Sure, its very similar to greenery in nearby Cincinatti & Columbus & St Louis, but something is a little bit different, imo.) Trees seen reaching high, rows of them across flat golf courses, some spindly & spidery in form, and healthy tall evergreens fluffy & looming, these are the perfect elements to create a horizontal-long estate designed on a flat line, with very vertical stately trees accenting it, standing tall in a very green yard -- a grand look I really appreciate for residential statements. Compare this greenery to Oklahoma City & Dallas, too, and not just Omaha -- you'll see a difference. (The city is around 700 feet in elevation, about 300-500 lower than Omaha. Its even latitude-wise with Kansas City, basically -- so warmer winters than Omaha, closer to the Gulf, located further into the humid East. Lake Michigan may have been covering Indiana's flat landscape eons ago, so maybe the soil is richer, and maybe roots can grow deeper than Omaha -- Im speculating.)

Omaha's greenery: Plenty green city, especially if you come from Denver or Cheyenne, but trees are shorter, not as full, and more sparse -- the city not as leafy & woodsy as those futher East (as it used to be former grassy & hilly prairie). Omaha's look is more open with less & shorter trees and bigger skies and more rolling hills -- which I like, because I not only grew up around it, but its like having the Midwest's greenery mixed with the wide open western frontier. That helps Omaha feel more like a newer city, like those in the West -- just like Dallas & Oklahoma City feel, although in the middle of the country. That's what I remind myself of, when I'm almost tempted to envy & covet Indianapolis's greenery... (I'm just showing how Omaha's greenery looks different, depending which direction you are coming from.) This is also why I disregard it when hot booming western cities, maybe like Denver, possibly arrogantly look down on more stagnant, slower-growing, Midwest cities like Indiana's capitol. They may have the mountains, but Denver does not have that lush & fair greenery... There's great points & special features about everywhere.

Cermak · Post by **Cermak** » Tue Feb 05, 2019 3:14 am

Indianapolis does have nice lush greenery, I’m guessing they get a fair amount of rain and probably have better soil than we have in eastern Nebraska. Omaha reminds me somewhat of a smaller version of Indianapolis without the capital and we don’t sit in the middle of the state like they do. I’m not overly crazy about their tallest but it adds some nice height to their skyline. Some of my favorite buildings are the Conrad hotel, Hyatt Regency/PNC building and the Simon building. Any of these three buildings would look great in DT Omaha. The Hyatt Regency/PNC building is a massive entire block complex built back in the 70’s when Indy was struggling and transitioning out of being a rust belt city. Indy was trying to redevelop its downtown and improve its image nationally. To me this complex showed how serious the city was about rebuilding the core. It looks like something you might see in a larger city maybe San Francisco or Minneapolis. It’s a beautiful building and looks to be in great shape especially for its age. Indy was thinking big and it paid off.

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Tue Feb 05, 2019 4:25 am

Yes, I admire that heavy, bulky, lengthy, massive trapezoidal brick Hyatt Hotel in Indianapolis. It's just great & pleasing & satisfying architecture from that era. I was so drawn to it when I was there, and took many pics of it. I went up in it, and a lady at the rooftop restaurant was very nice to let me take pictures out the windows. The Simon Building: I like it, too. I think its high tech & sharp, and it reminds me of Omaha' green glass UP Building -- definitely in the same family of design. Yet, like Omaha's UP Building, I feel it is 99% perfect -- not 100%. The Conrad Hotel: Looking like no expense was spared, yes, it is a very classy-looking stone hotel that enriches Downtown Indianapolis. It reminds me of very solid-looking stone/brick buildings on Bellevue, WA's skyline -- maybe. (I wonder how Omaha would look with that solid stone classy new touch? I think it would really add nicely to the city, kind of tieing in with old buildings like the First National Bank and the Orpheum Tower, possibly inserting more historic & rich touch back into the skyline.) I could talk Indianapolis architecture for days...

In the far north suburbs, at Keystone Crossing, the Sheraton Hotel borrows similar design ideas from the downtown trapezoidal Hyatt Hotel. Its a look that works well for Indianapolis -- maybe because their flat landscape gives a great platform for big, hefty, trapezoidal hotels like this. Indianapolis has two main highrise themes going on I spot: 1) Trapezoidal (See Indianapolis' 2nd tallest building, and the trapezoidal twins nearby.) 2) Skyscrapers with mansard-like rooflines.

I happen to like Indianapolis' tallest skyscraper myself... An intense & eye-catching statement, standing very tall & bold w/ twin antennas, it stakes the center of the flat metropolis, where all the freeways, snaking into the city from every direction, merge on downtown. Having a roofline that matches the other mansard-roofed skyscrapers, yet enough of a full pyramid to match the historic pyramid-topped building nearby, use of color and stripes of glass and set backs that match the skyline well, and topped w/ twin antennas that harken to the powerful look seen in nearby Chicago's Sears/Willis Tower and John Hancock Center, I think its very appropriate for midwestern Indianapolis. But, just my opinion...

Lastly, I think this skyscraper on Meridian St is underrated & deserves more attention. Clad in rich red marble, and having dark glass and verticle stripes and fanciful embellishments leading up to a mansard-roofed top, I think it adds a great presence on the skyline. Funny, how it is not noticed enough there, but would create a major change if in Omaha.

The skyline from the museums & canal. Great postcard view of Indianapolis...

Cermak · Post by **Cermak** » Tue Feb 05, 2019 5:10 am

Right, Indy has some very nice 20-30 story skyscrapers DT. But it’s not like they have a bunch of tall buildings like Minneapolis or Denver. But just enough to give it a big city feel, just barely enough. That’s what I liked about the Simon building, this type of building could easily be in Omaha and would add a lot to our DT. Between Lincoln looking like it might get a new high rise (finally) and Des Moines getting some high rise apartments. I’m growing increasingly frustrated with Omaha’s ability to pull something off soon. The pressure is only growing as these smaller cities make announcements. It’s time to build something at least 250 ft or preferably much more in Downtown Omaha or even midtown.

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:12 am

Cermak wrote: Tue Feb 05, 2019 5:10 am Right, Indy has some very nice 20-30 story skyscrapers DT. But it’s not like they have a bunch of tall buildings like Minneapolis or Denver. But just enough to give it a big city feel, just barely enough. That’s what I liked about the Simon building, this type of building could easily be in Omaha and would add a lot to our DT. Between Lincoln looking like it might get a new high rise (finally) and Des Moines getting some high rise apartments. I’m growing increasingly frustrated with Omaha’s ability to pull something off soon. The pressure is only growing as these smaller cities make announcements. It’s time to build something at least 250 ft or preferably much more in Downtown Omaha or even midtown.

Yes, I hope Omaha gets something new & spectacular soon. Sure, Indianapolis might not be Minneapolis or Denver, but its more like Kansas City size, in a way... So, there's still a much larger batch of structures downtown than Omaha or Des Moines. The thing Ive learned is: Enjoy a city on foot, block by block. Buildings that are not even hardly visible on the skyline from a distance on the freeway can seem really big & monumental & impressive when you're walking by them -- like the Hyatt, Simon, and the Conrad. Indianapolis also has many beautiful blocks of historic structures, too. Here's my favorite angle of Indianapolis (ironically it doesnt involve the tallest, but I love this angle involving the Monument Circle and Sailor's Monument, that white rectangular hotel jutting in, with the blue & beige skyscrapers):

Indianapolis's tallest building in the suburbs at Keystone Crossing -- a slick & curving one, with a tubular portion at the head. Its right near the loop interstate. (Notice Indy design uses lots of horizontal ribbon bands of windows.)

That Conrad Hotel kept reminding me of some building, and I kept thinking of Bellevue, WA's buildings. But, it was this rich & solid-looking complex in Dallas.

An odd pic I took on my cell of Omaha in Summer of 2017, which captures the textures of the city. I like what the Marriott Hotel brings to the city. Its still tricky finding new pics of Omaha w/ the new Marriott, and I have to remind myself it is there.

Well, Im probably going to limit my time here every other day, or at least mostly try to, as Im just spending way too much time here... (I bet you feel the same way.) However, its not a solid rule, or anything. I could talk architecture like a coach talks football. Speaking of football, I watched the Super Bowl.

Cermak · Post by **Cermak** » Tue Feb 05, 2019 1:47 pm

Exactly, not many pics of the new Omaha Marriott yet. Capital district really helped make that part of downtown feel more dense. Capital district Marriott Is the best new building built DT since the UP building, that’s a long time about 15 years. I don’t want to wait another 15 years for something to top the Marriott. The Kiewit building is going up this summer, I’m hoping it looks better in real life than in those renderings. That’s probably the best project DT right now. Along with the 3 hotels, Moxie in Old Market , hotel near Woodmen and Indigo.

Right, you can start spending to much time on this forum. I actually wasn’t on it as much last week . Somedays I have nothing to say or we have periods in Omaha when we have no new development news for weeks. I think the post yesterday about Lanoha woke alot of people up that had been on the sidelines.

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:40 am

Thanks for understanding. Yeah, I spend half the night (or more) thinking about what I'm going to say to you, what pictures I'm gonna show you, all lately... It's getting out of hand, but I can contribute to this thread every other day, or so... I don't want your time affected too much either. We have so much to discuss. Boston has such beautiful new buildings to show you. Kansas City has such great architecture to discuss. And, Minneapolis.... Ect.

Cermak · Post by **Cermak** » Wed Feb 06, 2019 5:02 am

It eventually starts to almost take over your life. I’ve noticed some days I don’t feel like looking at the forum and I’m fine with that, other days I check it on and off all day. Depends what kind of mood I’m in. Sometimes I need to think about other things besides buildings and Omaha. I know if Omaha has a big announcement of a new big development everything changes. Right now It feels like Omaha is in kinda a lull with really just some medium size projects and nothing that I’m overly excited

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:22 am

Cermak wrote: Wed Feb 06, 2019 5:02 am It eventually starts to almost take over your life. I’ve noticed some days I don’t feel like looking at the forum and I’m fine with that, other days I check it on and off all day. Depends what kind of mood I’m in. Sometimes I need to think about other things besides buildings and Omaha. I know if Omaha has a big announcement of a new big development everything changes. Right now It feels like Omaha is in kinda a lull with really just some medium size projects and nothing that I’m overly excited

Yeah, I go from not having to look at the Omaha forum at all -- like I did for many months -- to having to check it everyday. And, that happens whether I live in town or not. Sometimes, after a long time away I check in, but it is so quiet, it is like watching paint dry -- so I leave for a long time again. I always wonder what happened to the founder, Eomaha? I just remember his perfect worded caption: "Omaha: Excitement Building on the Plains."

What should we discuss next, since I "put a wrench" in the nice & natural flow that was here? Kansas City architecture? Minneapolis? Des Moines' sharp new additions? Wichita? Dallas? Whatever works...

Cermak · Post by **Cermak** » Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:22 am

I remember Eomaha, wonder what happened ?. Hope he or she is Ok. I was in Downtown Phoenix in 2013 and was at the Hyatt Regency right in the heart of downtown. My room was on I think the 17th floor facing the core of downtown (west). What a fantastic view. I particularly like the cities tallest building. It was built just a few years after our Woodmen but was so much better. I walked over to look at it. It was in great shape and took up an entire city block. I liked downtown Phoenix a little more than I thought I would. They must have some sorta height restrictions as the airport is close. The DT is not huge for a metro of 4 million but is big enough to make it feel like a major city . They had some nice historic 10-14 story buildings that I thought gave the city some substance, Including the famous San Carlos hotel. You could tell it’s been an important city in the southwest for a long time. Even though metro Phoenix is bigger than Denver, downtown Phoenix is probably half the size of DT Denver. I think Denver’s DT is bigger because it might be a bigger financial hub and is still somewhat of a Oil town. Another building I liked was One and Two Renaissance Square. A Twin tower complex both around 350 ft tall built during 1986 and 1990. Sometimes I wish our twin towers were a little taller, maybe 17 floors instead of 15, or stagger them, make one 12 floors and the other 16. Phoenix impressed, definitely the king of Southwest cities. Albuquerque would probably be a distant second, then Tucson and El Paso. I consider Denver to be in a separate region with Salt Lake City, Colorado Springs and Boise.

TitosBuritoBarn · Post by **TitosBuritoBarn** » Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:46 am

Eomaha = Stargazer.

He changed his name when he turned the site over to new management.

Cermak · Post by **Cermak** » Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:00 pm

Thanks for the info, thought might be dead or in prison. Feel better now.

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Thu Feb 07, 2019 6:26 pm

Oh, Eomaha is Stargazer?! I didnt know that... Glad to know that. Thanks. Cermak: I meant to respond to this last night, but ended up being a "listening ear" to somebody unexpectedly, that needed it. I went to respond to this afterwards, and logged in, but was too tired. Before we close the door on Indianapolis completely and start in on Phoenix, I wanted to post "The Pyramids" in the Indy suburbs. They are noteworthy architecture I have found in several USA architecture books, so I had to stop by them. You can see them on the horizon line to the north of the city from the top of the downtown skyscrapers. Im wondering if these 70's pyramids started the trapezoidal trend/theme in Indianapolis. Possibly....

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Thu Feb 07, 2019 6:28 pm

Phoenix... Where "urban" unravels into "suburban" immediately outside of the Central Phoenix skyline. (See 2nd picture I posted)

This is my favorite section of Phoenix. I've always loved how that simple pyramidal tower stands in the valley with palms trees and the brown mountains. That's "Phoenix!" to me. http://arizonaoddities.com/wp-content/u ... hoenix.jpg

I was in Downtown Phoenix in 2013 and was at the Hyatt Regency right in the heart of downtown. My room was on I think the 17th floor facing the core of downtown (west). What a fantastic view. I particularly like the cities tallest building. It was built just a few years after our Woodmen but was so much better. I walked over to look at it. It was in great shape and took up an entire city block.

That's awesome. I stayed at the new Sheraton and my view was to the north. It was such a great hotel. I love the design, too. On the sides of the narrow, blocky hotel, there were windows, and I could see west. Phoenix's tallest was right in my face.

I've always had mixed emotions for Phoenix's tallest -- but I think it works still, and I overall like it. It works because it is ultimately very simple, boxy, glassy, and modern -- and that very modern "minimalist design" works in a desert well. I also like it better with the CHASE logo covering some of the broad areas of cement. https://kjzz.org/sites/default/files/st ... k=EucDUPl8 From the north & south sides, funny, it also slightly reminds me of a saguaro cactus of Arizona (or at least one of those glass ones you can buy for your shelf that is made out of blocks of glass). https://www.emporis.com/images/show/868 ... kyline.jpg

I liked downtown Phoenix a little more than I thought I would. They must have some sorta height restrictions as the airport is close. The DT is not huge for a metro of 4 million but is big enough to make it feel like a major city . They had some nice historic 10-14 story buildings that I thought gave the city some substance, Including the famous San Carlos hotel. You could tell it’s been an important city in the southwest for a long time.

Yes, their downtown has come a long ways. Last time I was there, I was very impressed with how much more life was downtown -- stores, pedestrians, and even light rail. It has a way's to go still, but they are definitely making progress that is good to see. Yes, they have gorgeous historic buildings -- old "gem" beauties that match the desert well, and look fantastic surrounded by palms and desert flora. Love them. Height restriction: I think there is one in PHX because of the nearby Sky Harbor Airport. However, I recently learned that ALBQ has height restrictions due to the soil type supporting downtown adjacent to the Rio Grande River. (With San Francisco's new tallest reportedly sinking & leaning, soil type needs to be 100% looked into thoroughly -- of course.) I also think the local landscape affects design -- logically. Phoenix is on a broad plain next to long stretches of shorter brown desert mountains, so "short" and "long" works there well. (I notice Lincoln has more long & low prairie style architecture than Omaha, and it works well with the flatter prairie landscape.)

Even though metro Phoenix is bigger than Denver, downtown Phoenix is probably half the size of DT Denver. I think Denver’s DT is bigger because it might be a bigger financial hub and is still somewhat of a Oil town. Another building I liked was One and Two Renaissance Square. A Twin tower complex both around 350 ft tall built during 1986 and 1990. Sometimes I wish our twin towers were a little taller, maybe 17 floors instead of 15, or stagger them, make one 12 floors and the other 16. Phoenix impressed, definitely the king of Southwest cities. Albuquerque would probably be a distant second, then Tucson and El Paso. I consider Denver to be in a separate region with Salt Lake City, Colorado Springs and Boise.

Denver's definitely bigger (at least taller) than Phoenix. However, if you push together Downtown Phoenix and all the buildings lining Central Ave, it would be a lot of buildings. I like those Renaissance Square buildings, too -- yet they are slightly odd to me, too. Downtown Phoenix has a difficult time looking right, or coming together, at some angles, in my opinion, and I think it is probably mainly because most added buildings are around the same height. I agree with you on your breakdown on Phoenix, and the rest of the major western desert cities basically -- but you missed Las Vegas. I would put it #2 after Phoenix. One of Phoenix's nicknames is "The Star of the Desert." I love that. I've lived in Phoenix before, and miss things about it. However, it is very hot for a good portion of every year, and of course, and I do miss regular grass, trees, and other greenery there. It also lacks a "soul" in some ways -- something a city cant buy for itself with money, something much smaller cities, like Omaha and Des Moines, dont lack. Yet, I love the unique desert flora, too. Las Vegas is similar, yet has definite identity & soul, on a slightly higher desert. Yes, Denver is in the Rocky Mountain Region, yet some consider it a "City of the Southwest." Dallas & Houston can be considered that, too, on some lists.

Well, more about PHX architecture later...

Stargazer · Post by **Stargazer** » Fri Feb 08, 2019 2:33 am

So many words... so little substance.

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Fri Feb 08, 2019 3:13 am

Stargazer wrote: Fri Feb 08, 2019 2:33 am So many words... so little substance.

Well, "strong & silent" might work in your house & family & with your little kiddies who look up to their daddy, but it doesnt work on a forum, now does it? Unless we are a bunch of "mind readers" gathered here. If you are not taking a jab at me with the caption "so many words", then who are you, Stargazer? "So many words" cant be critical of everyone -- as any thread has many words, and that criticism wouldnt make sense here. Little substance, eh? Would you like me to join City Data and take jabs at Omaha with my "many words, no substance" quality? Believe me, there would be noticably less "Excitement Building on the Plains" on the Nebraska Plains in no time, Im sure of it - and I dont even know why, really. No matter how much you want to deny a person, or maybe deny something you know they possess, you're better off to leave certain people alone, or be truly honest when you do confront that person, or talk about them with others -- or you'll only make the "tangle in the web" worse. People try yawn-worthy "elementary games" to make me think the opposite of what is true -- all the time. Do people do that to you? You dont walk up to Marilyn Monroe at 40 years old, and tell her she isnt, and was never, pretty. You know? It just doesnt work at that point -- after all the obvious evidence to the contrary that has passed in her life. (To think I talked about you good in another thread recently. I should have never put you "on the spot." I thought you were gone... After I learned you were here, I knew it would backfire. Now, how about that City Data forum?)

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Fri Feb 08, 2019 4:15 am

Cermak wrote: Fri Feb 08, 2019 2:56 am Centre village in Minneapolis big and bulky 276 ft tall.

I’ll take it.

Well, I applaud your attempt. But, thats not a big, fat, cubish building -- just like our new Marriott isnt. Its actually kind of a big, bulky, large rectangular, solid, massive building -- like the B-J Hospital in St Louis, which I like passing by -- and is really refreshingly cool & different. Is that approved in MPLS? I think MPLS has enough bulk in their skyline to pull that off. But, boy -- that's big. I dont know. Again: The point is "The Cube." True cube-shaped buildings are pretty rare. Its funny that such a basic, 3D square is not a commonly used building shape out there -- but it isn't. Instead, it is sort of looked as odd. Jack-in-the-Boxes always use them, though, and Rubix Cubes -- you know, things in the toy & games section.

Cermak · Post by **Cermak** » Fri Feb 08, 2019 4:36 am

This building is already built, has been in DT Minneapolis since the 80’s. I remember it because it was one of the first buildings I saw anywhere built on top of a parking garage. Des Moines has a few as well. We have one to Hyatt Place in the Old Market. I’ve always thought building on top of a parking garage was sorta cheating to create more height, but at this stage of the game for Omaha, I’ll take it. I just got done scouring DT Chicago on google earth looking for buildings built on parking garages and couldn’t really find any , at least nothing obvious.

When reading the World Hearald article it sounds like Lanoha really wants to do this. He mentioned they could even build the building in sections, which to me sounds like they want to make it work even if all the pieces don’t fall in place right away. My guess is they will build the 9 story garage first then at least one tower, hopefully the taller one. Their is a possibility we could have just one half tower if the economy tanked or just a 9 story parking garage. Unsure how that might look. That’s one of the risks with this type of building. Tomorrow I’m going to go buy a World-Herald first time in years.

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Fri Feb 08, 2019 4:58 am

Cermak wrote: Fri Feb 08, 2019 4:36 am This building is already built, has been in DT Minneapolis since the 80’s. I remember it because it was one of the first buildings I saw anywhere built on top of a parking garage. Des Moines has a few as well. I’ve always thought building on top of a parking garage was sorta cheating to create more height, but at this stage of the game for Omaha, I’ll take it. I just got done scouring DT Chicago on google earth looking for buildings built on parking garages and couldn’t really find any , at least nothing obvious.

When reading the World Hearald article it sounds like Lanoha really wants to do this. He mentioned they could even build the building in sections, which to me sounds like they want to make it work even if all the pieces don’t fall in place right away. My guess is they will build the 9 story garage first then at least one tower, hopefully the taller one. Their is a possibility we could have just one half tower if the economy tanked. Unsure how that might. Look . That’s one of the risks with this type of building. Tomorrow I’m going to go buy a World-Herald first time in years.

That building is already in Minneapolis?! How have I missed it?! Im going straight to all my Mpls pictures right away. You said it is under 300' -- maybe that is why I have missed it. Maybe it is more lost within the buildings when looking at a more distant vantage point? I just cant believe I have never noticed that before. The new Omaha high rise: Its really a sharp design. However, I think the patio on the base and overhangs at the top (obviously to cover & shade a rooftop patio probably) makes it look too leisurely and relaxing to me, like Omaha is "Miami" and they need shade from the hot sun. I keep picture girls walking in bikinis w/ a drink in hand -- or something -- up there, on the high patio, leaving the pool. (Lol) It also looks more "fun residential" design to me in nature -- instead of hard work, and serious corporate business, and level-headedness. Even if they built that base with ONE of those glassy tower sections without those funky "umbrella" overhangs, I would be much happier with it, I think. Its too massive & big of a flashy, glassy "production & show" for a conservative Midwest town the size of Omaha, I think. Whatever, just build....whatever. I dont care much anymore, I think.

Cermak · Post by **Cermak** » Fri Feb 08, 2019 5:14 am

The building is on the eastside of DT Minneapolis. It shows up Okay from the new football stadium. You won’t even notice it on the Westside. In Omaha it would look massive. This whole project could fizzle out and we would be back to square one. I found it interesting Lanoha said they aren’t adding residential, I wonder if that means DT is reaching a saturation point for apartments and condo’s ?

RockHarbor · Post by **RockHarbor** » Fri Feb 08, 2019 6:38 am

Cermak wrote: Fri Feb 08, 2019 5:14 am The building is on the eastside of DT Minneapolis. It shows up Okay from the new football stadium. You won’t even notice it on the Westside. In Omaha it would look massive. This whole project could fizzle out and we would be back to square one. I found it interesting Lanoha said they aren’t adding residential, I wonder if that means DT is reaching a saturation point for apartments and condo’s ?

In all my pics of MPLS Ive taken, I find a few where it is showing. (Behind the octagonal, glassy Helmut Jahn high rise, and on the far right of the skyline.) Yeah, I've just never focused-in on it before. Approaching the city on South I-35, it is also hidden from view behind another building, most of the time -- I checked my pictures at different stages, approaching the downtown. When, Im over in that corner of downtown, Im also mostly focused on the flashier buildings over there, including the unique Thrivent cascading glass building. Also, your picture makes it look bigger & taller & more "neato" than any picture I have of it. Thanks for pointing it out... Im gonna look at some online net photos of the city to check it out more.

Back to Lanoha... (It looks they designed it for both office & residential space in mind -- and that was also originally announced as well. Yet, yes, now it is all just office, and no residential. Yet, you dont just make it all "office" now and lazily not tweak the design at all, imo.)

Garrett · Post by **Garrett** » Fri Feb 08, 2019 8:11 am

RockHarbor wrote: Fri Feb 08, 2019 3:13 am
Stargazer wrote: Fri Feb 08, 2019 2:33 am So many words... so little substance.
Well, "strong & silent" might work in your house & family & with your little kiddies who look up to their daddy, but it doesnt work on a forum, now does it? Unless we are a bunch of "mind readers" gathered here. If you are not taking a jab at me with the caption "so many words", then who are you, Stargazer? "So many words" cant be critical of everyone -- as any thread has many words, and that criticism wouldnt make sense here. Little substance, eh? Would you like me to join City Data and take jabs at Omaha with my "many words, no substance" quality? Believe me, there would be noticably less "Excitement Building on the Plains" on the Nebraska Plains in no time, Im sure of it - and I dont even know why, really. No matter how much you want to deny a person, or maybe deny something you know they possess, you're better off to leave certain people alone, or be truly honest when you do confront that person, or talk about them with others -- or you'll only make the "tangle in the web" worse. People try yawn-worthy "elementary games" to make me think the opposite of what is true -- all the time. Do people do that to you? You dont walk up to Marilyn Monroe at 40 years old, and tell her she isnt, and was never, pretty. You know? It just doesnt work at that point -- after all the obvious evidence to the contrary that has passed in her life. (To think I talked about you good in another thread recently. I should have never put you "on the spot." I thought you were gone... After I learned you were here, I knew it would backfire. Now, how about that City Data forum?)

I love a point proven.

Uffda · Post by **Uffda** » Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:31 pm

Garrett wrote: Fri Feb 08, 2019 8:11 am
RockHarbor wrote: Fri Feb 08, 2019 3:13 am
Stargazer wrote: Fri Feb 08, 2019 2:33 am So many words... so little substance.
Well, "strong & silent" might work in your house & family & with your little kiddies who look up to their daddy, but it doesnt work on a forum, now does it? Unless we are a bunch of "mind readers" gathered here. If you are not taking a jab at me with the caption "so many words", then who are you, Stargazer? "So many words" cant be critical of everyone -- as any thread has many words, and that criticism wouldnt make sense here. Little substance, eh? Would you like me to join City Data and take jabs at Omaha with my "many words, no substance" quality? Believe me, there would be noticably less "Excitement Building on the Plains" on the Nebraska Plains in no time, Im sure of it - and I dont even know why, really. No matter how much you want to deny a person, or maybe deny something you know they possess, you're better off to leave certain people alone, or be truly honest when you do confront that person, or talk about them with others -- or you'll only make the "tangle in the web" worse. People try yawn-worthy "elementary games" to make me think the opposite of what is true -- all the time. Do people do that to you? You dont walk up to Marilyn Monroe at 40 years old, and tell her she isnt, and was never, pretty. You know? It just doesnt work at that point -- after all the obvious evidence to the contrary that has passed in her life. (To think I talked about you good in another thread recently. I should have never put you "on the spot." I thought you were gone... After I learned you were here, I knew it would backfire. Now, how about that City Data forum?)
I love a point proven.

Cermak · Post by **Cermak** » Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:39 pm

Right, Centre village is not the most exciting building in DT Minneapolis, in fact it looks to be almost an experiment, as I don’t see any other buildings DT like it. At one time a Embassy suites was in it but they moved somewhere else. It’s very close to the Thrivent building, another building I think would look good in Omaha. But Centre village came to mind when I saw the renderings of Lanoha project. Minneapolis was probably trying to get some height and bulk in that eastern part of DT. It seems the western part of DT as well as Nicollet mall is the most vibrant part of The CBD. Who knows maybe Centre village will Be imploded someday and replaced with something better. Wouldn’t surprise me. This is Minneapolis we are talking about, besides Chicago it’s probably the next most concerned about its image and brand in the Midwest. A late footnote here; After looking on google earth again I did find Marina city buildings in Chicago are built on top of parking garages. Austin Texas seems to have some as well. Marina city was built back in the 60’s and was sorta a milestone for urban development at the time. Two sixty story tubular buildings, still unique to Chicago. DT Austin is like a Mecca for new highrises, most look to be hotels and residential, unbelievable.