Old Union Pacific Headquarters Lot

[Omaha Cowboy]

The initial design of this skyscraper proposal is simply a rendering of what it might look like..

The tower, if it ever does get built, will certainly have design adjustments/tweaks if it’s an actual go. The design as it’s currently proposed, I have no problem with...

Ciao..LiO...Peace

[RockHarbor]

Oh, this again? It is neat to see the new renderings and angles of it... I do like it, and think it is pretty cool (especially the night lighting scheme), but I just feel it needs tweaked just a little bit to fit Omaha better and more perfectly. Then, it will be a wonderful addition to the city, imo.

May 15th you said you like it and think it is pretty cool.

I do like it. I do think it is pretty cool. And, I think it needs tweaked a bit to fit into Omaha better -- which I said both today and back on May 15th. Today, I never said anything about not liking it. So = Nothing what I said today contradicts what I said back on May 15th.

Just because I like a building, and think it is cool, doesn't mean it fits into Omaha. I love Hong Kong's LIPPO CENTER ("Koala Bear Buildings"), but I would hate that in Omaha. It looks perfect in Hong Kong.

LIPPO CENTER: https://ilovehongkong.org/wp-content/up ... g-Kong.jpg

That's my whole point: This building is snazzy, but it does not perfectly fit Omaha, and that bothers me. With the opportunity to get a new high rise, I want to see a "perfect fit" for Omaha. I wish people would call HDR or Leo A. Daly firm and run it by them.

While I do agree with you concerning the somewhat out-of-place-ness of the design in our downtown, and even think along the same lines that this looks like something out of an Asian skyline, I think it's fine because of the UP HQ. Our high rises and skyscrapers are built so far apart temporally, that there are only a smattering of several design languages that are a perfect match, unlike many other larger, more urban skylines where several buildings go up at a time. Despite this, I feel like the UP HQ and this proposed building will be a good match for each other, particularly since they will literally be right next to each other. Please note: I am not an architect, historian of architecture, or expert in design; I am merely speaking from my limited view of architectural design.

Thank you. THANK YOU. I knew I couldn't be the only one seeing the "Asian influence" of this building. I knew I couldn't be the only one thinking it doesn't quite fit into Omaha's downtown perfectly. (That's a main key: "Perfectly." We have the ability to have things fit perfectly, if we take the time to get things right. Architectural design displayed on a city skyline isn't something to be rushed, imo.)

You don't have to be some expert on architecture/design to be able to recognize something doesn't fit right. If they built the Taj Mahal in Omaha, you know it wouldn't fit right. If they built a "round house" in the middle of Dundee, you know it wouldn't fit right. And, so on... A high rise, even with a hint of Asian influence, just doesn't work in Omaha. I don't see an example in Chicago, or Boston, or Miami, or New York even. I see it just happening in San Francisco, and it works there, with the "Asia Pacific" aspect.

So, why would that ever work in Omaha? Seriously...

Sometimes, we have to be careful not to dismiss something, because we just can't catch the architect's vision. I think of the TransAmerica Pyramid in San Francisco. When proposed on the SF skyline, it caused a literal uproar. However, it was still approved and built. It is good design for an earthquake zone. Nowadays, it has been established as a lovable iconic, architectural symbol on the city skyline. Since San Francisco is such a quirky California metropolis, I think it works great for San Francisco. I love it; I can't imagine SF without it. I can't imagine any other city where that would work, but San Francisco. However, when viewing the San Francisco skyline, it is always a disruptive, unusual, pointed shape among more usual, conventional buildings. So the unusual & unique presence takes away from some of the elegance and sophistication that could be there on a skyline without it, imo. So, it is like a "double-edged sword" in a way.

TRANSAMERICA PYRAMID, SF: https://s.hdnux.com/photos/50/73/24/113 ... 0x1200.jpg

New York's World Trade Center Buildings are similar in that way. Highly criticized and not liked by many (funny, one critic said: "So banal...not even worthy of a bank headquarters in Omaha"), they still became a highly-recognized, much accepted, iconic symbol of New York City. Although the pair looked kinda odd at certain angles, and I can see why they were highly criticized, I still think they were a very powerful statement. They were a big part of the urban fabric of New York City, standing tall across the city from the Empire State building, and I still have a hard time accepting the "new New York" without them. I loved them. I miss them. I especially love the boxy, minimalist twins, with their silvery grey textures & facades, contrasting behind the gothic, frilly, beautiful white Woolworth building. They were also striking standing beyond the Statue of Liberty. The new New York buildings are very striking and neat, but still, I am sad that they are gone. It was all so tragic.

The twin towers beyond the Woolworth building:
https://media.gettyimages.com/videos/-v ... ?s=640x640
http://www.wirednewyork.com/landmarks/w ... rth_bb.jpg

The twin towers beyond Statue of Liberty: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/1b/1e/e6 ... cd7ffc.jpg

Anyways, my point is: Architecture is very powerful. So, any city needs to be careful.

PotatoeEatsFish: lol

[GetUrban]

RockHarbor, I partially agree with your point that it is possible to design something that is so far out of context for a given city that it just doesn't belong at all, but in a way you disprove your own theory by giving examples of buildings that were highly controversial at their inception, only to later become beloved iconic symbols of the cities where they were built. I'm of the point of view that we shouldn't be too quick to assume we know exactly what's right for any given city and should let architects continually create buildings that add to the city's identity and design vocabulary, and in the best case, even become icons.

[buildomaha]

I've noticed that Omaha will typical follow the national growth trends, just at a slower pace. I'm hoping this is what will happen with high rise growth downtown as nationally there is a lot of growth heightwise in most cities, Omaha just really cannot relate though. Hopefully this project becomes viable and potentially even better than we're all expecting (although I have lots of doubt).

[RockHarbor]

GetUrban: Yes. I agree w/ your point. That's why I said "We have to be careful not to dismiss..." And, then I went on to show how a particular building did work for a city, and also didnt work, all at the same time. Both the TransAmerica Pyramid and WTC were controversial in their look & design -- yet still came out as an icon, loved by many fans. Yet, still, they do/did affect the skyline in both positive & negative ways. Some buildings end up being disliked by most all citizens. Some buildings are true architectural winners: The Empire State Building or Chrysler never have been highly criticized or looked at as a mistake. Neither has the John Hancock in Chicago. They are all beloved skyscrapers.

My point was ultimately: Be careful what you design, approve, and erect.

My other point is very logically-concluded and simple and level-headed: Omaha should never sport an Asian-influenced building before Seattle, Portland, LA, San Diego, Miami, Boston, NYC, Chicago, Houston, ect. WHO & WHAT does it think it is?

[RockHarbor]

I found a building tonight that I feel would look so much more suitable for Omaha, than this current design.

Cleveland's new Ernst & Young building: https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-SwgK ... /FEB39.jpg

It's a similar shape, very sharp, very high tech-looking, has great color, looks like all-American design. I would say it looks a bit more suited for Cleveland than Omaha, but both are Midwest cities, and both could pull this off, imo. Cleveland is a bit older, traditional, and formal than Omaha, so this building works well there. It has an "Eastern/Eastern Midwest USA" look in that design, yet it is still appropriate for the Midwest in general, imo. If this building were put through an "Omaha filter", the building would probably look just a tiny tad less traditional & formal, imo.

If I google pictures of Jakarta, and other cities like it, this current design looks like it could fit right into it. It just has a bit of a foreign look. Who designed it? Who says this current proposal wasn't designed by a foreign firm overseas?

Anyways, if the new building looked like this one, I would be ecstatic, and there would be no concern whatsoever.

[Doctor Fate]

Someone at NAI NP Dodge told me that they have heard an out of town company is in talks to potentially fill 50% of the Lanoha tower. However, they said they didn't have any further details.

[GetUrban]

Rock Harbor, If you have a firm, unwavering, preconceived idea of what you think will look good in Omaha, you also limit the possibilities to only variations of things that have already been built in Omaha or other "similar" cities. Personally, I prefer to see new things that I haven't necessarily seen before, like the original Tack Architects design for a Lanoha tower. We're talking about architectural context here, but I think Omaha still needs to have more different context to work with before we can have building designs all playing-off each other. Context is easier to achieve with more density. We need much more density downtown, like we had from 1890-1965. Also, during the design phase of a typical project in Omaha there isn't really a public "design jury" approving or disapproving any given design. The architectural design is usually left to the architect and owner to hash out with very few opportunities for pubic input. That's probably a good thing, otherwise creativity and innovation could end up being squelched way too often. The architect's reputation is on the line with every building they design. That is usually enough to keep them from going too crazy, with a few exceptions.

[RockHarbor]

Rock Harbor, If you have a firm, unwavering, preconceived idea of what you think will look good in Omaha, you also limit the possibilities to only variations of things that have already been built in Omaha or other "similar" cities. Personally, I prefer to see new things that I haven't necessarily seen before, like the original Tack Architects design for a Lanoha tower. We're talking about architectural context here, but I think Omaha still needs to have more different context to work with before we can have building designs all playing-off each other. Context is easier to achieve with more density. We need much more density downtown, like we had from 1890-1965. Also, during the design phase of a typical project in Omaha there isn't really a public "design jury" approving or disapproving any given design. The architectural design is usually left to the architect and owner to hash out with very few opportunities for pubic input. That's probably a good thing, otherwise creativity and innovation could end up being squelched way too often. The architect's reputation is on the line with every building they design. That is usually enough to keep them from going too crazy, with a few exceptions.

I can't even believe there is an Asian-looking tower proposed for Omaha, and we are having this discussion. (Well, yes I can, actually. That's Omaha for you.)

If there is not a design place in board for Omaha, then they better get one together. I'm sure Des Moines and MInneapolis have one (in fact, I would bet on it, because everything looks tasteful and thoughtful there). What about "Omaha By Design?"

You don't see anything this silly, strange, inappropriate, and out-of-line proposed for Des Moines, Minneapolis, Chicago, Cleveland, Kansas City, ect.?? NO. Because: It is not appropriate for an average-sized Midwest city. Why can't Omaha just get something normal, something safe, something standard?? Why is it always so difficult for Omaha? Why?

Several, quick examples of SAFE, STANDARD, NORMAL, TASTEFUL, APPROPRIATE:

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/ ... rmat=1000w

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... h_main.jpg

http://assets.dmagstatic.com/wp-content ... werFW7.jpg

If I read info correctly, that Lanoha family (who runs that really nice nursery many enjoy out in West Omaha) suddenly got into subdivisions and office building development in the last several years or so. Great for them, but that doesn't mean they technically have a proper & trained design sense -- outside of landscape design. And, I certainly do not want the permanent Omaha skyline (our hometown also) to be their "learning curve" as they go. I'm wondering who & what is behind that exact foreign-looking design.

[ryan311]

Rock Harbor, If you have a firm, unwavering, preconceived idea of what you think will look good in Omaha, you also limit the possibilities to only variations of things that have already been built in Omaha or other "similar" cities. Personally, I prefer to see new things that I haven't necessarily seen before, like the original Tack Architects design for a Lanoha tower. We're talking about architectural context here, but I think Omaha still needs to have more different context to work with before we can have building designs all playing-off each other. Context is easier to achieve with more density. We need much more density downtown, like we had from 1890-1965. Also, during the design phase of a typical project in Omaha there isn't really a public "design jury" approving or disapproving any given design. The architectural design is usually left to the architect and owner to hash out with very few opportunities for pubic input. That's probably a good thing, otherwise creativity and innovation could end up being squelched way too often. The architect's reputation is on the line with every building they design. That is usually enough to keep them from going too crazy, with a few exceptions.

I can't even believe there is an Asian-looking tower proposed for Omaha, and we are having this discussion. (Well, yes I can, actually. That's Omaha for you.)

If there is not a design place in board for Omaha, then they better get one together. I'm sure Des Moines and MInneapolis have one (in fact, I would bet on it, because everything looks tasteful and thoughtful there). What about "Omaha By Design?"

You don't see anything this silly, strange, inappropriate, and out-of-line proposed for Des Moines, Minneapolis, Chicago, Cleveland, Kansas City, ect.?? NO. Because: It is not appropriate for an average-sized Midwest city. Why can't Omaha just get something normal, something safe, something standard?? Why is it always so difficult for Omaha? Why?

Several, quick examples of SAFE, STANDARD, NORMAL, TASTEFUL, APPROPRIATE:

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/ ... rmat=1000w

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... h_main.jpg

http://assets.dmagstatic.com/wp-content ... werFW7.jpg

If I read info correctly, that Lanoha family (who runs that really nice nursery many enjoy out in West Omaha) suddenly got into subdivisions and office building development in the last several years or so. Great for them, but that doesn't mean they technically have a proper & trained design sense -- outside of landscape design. And, I certainly do not want the permanent Omaha skyline (our hometown also) to be their "learning curve" as they go. I'm wondering who & what is behind that exact foreign-looking design.

Maybe they should commission Omaha native Randy Brown to redesign this proposal and see how you feel about it then. Honestly, I like it and think it adds some diversity to the boring skyline that currently exists.

[RockHarbor]

I'm guessing you would be happy w/ any new significant building proposed for "boring skyline Omaha" then?

You're entitled to your opinion, but who goes to say you're not the person (or neighbor) who paints your house some outlandish, distasteful color, making all your neighbors cringe, while you're thinking, and patting yourself on the back: "I think it looks nice! Don't you?" The neighbors that dont have any sense or taste are dreaded on any block, and some do it on purpose, I think.

Again: It's a nice building altogether, but just not appropriate for Omaha, NE, Midwest USA. There are endless designs out there, and many are not appropriate for cities like Omaha & Des Moines. They should stick with ones that are.

It has nothing to do with the Lanoha Development (Im happy they are involved in new projects). Its strictly do with an inappropriate design.

[TitosBuritoBarn]

No city has a public design review board. That's absurd. That's like going to the mall to buy clothes and having a group of other customers determine if the clothes you're buying are good enough. And if they say no you can't buy them.

The planning and zoning commission handles that. It's composed of internal staff and elected (maybe sometimes appointed) officials who are making decisions based on a city's codes and plans. A city's codes and plans are put together by people with a level of expertise in whatever component of the plan they are completing. If it's design standards, they must know something about architecture. Often public comments are allowed on all of these things, including building design, but generally hold little water unless people are really really upset about something (with the exception of San Francisco and maybe a few other similar cities where NIMBYs wield exceptional power).

[Doctor Fate]

Someone at NAI NP Dodge told me that they have heard an out of town company is in talks to potentially fill 50% of the Lanoha tower. However, they said they didn't have any further details.

[RockHarbor]

Well, there has to be SOMETHING in place, because not only can I tell looking at Chicago, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Des Moines, ect, I know Minneapolis rejected Cesar Pelli's first draft for the 1989 Norwest (now Wells Fargo) Tower, and sent him back the drawing board. And, Im so glad they did. His 2nd creation is gorgeous, its exciting, its award winning, and is much more fitting for the city. Even him, my personal favorite MASTER architect, who mostly gets it right, almost everytime, has to go back to the drawing board at times, and rethink, and struggle, and work to find that which is perfect for the city.

[Omaha Cowboy]

Someone at NAI NP Dodge told me that they have heard an out of town company is in talks to potentially fill 50% of the Lanoha tower. However, they said they didn't have any further details.

Now that’s actually very important intel as it relates to the potential of this high rise getting off the ground. If true, it’s extremely significant news ...

Ciao..LiO...Peace

[GetUrban]

Well, there has to be SOMETHING in place, because not only can I tell looking at Chicago, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Des Moines, ect, I know Minneapolis rejected Cesar Pelli's first draft for the 1989 Norwest (now Wells Fargo) Tower, and sent him back the drawing board. And, Im so glad they did. His 2nd creation is gorgeous, its exciting, its award winning, and is much more fitting for the city. Even him, my personal favorite MASTER architect, who mostly gets it right, almost everytime, has to go back to the drawing board at times, and rethink, and struggle, and work to find that which is perfect for the city.

Nope, just the Omaha Planning Board with its enforcement of ordinances that have been passed through the normal government processes. LaVista does have a Design Review Board (DRB) run through their Planning Department and they do have some aesthetic restrictions on which materials can be used in certain parts of LaVista. Metro Community College (MCC) also has a DRB.

No offense, but overall we're much better off not having a DRB, made up of people like yourself, dictating what can and cannot be built based on their own aesthetic preferences, beyond the necessary life-safety and zoning ordinances passed into law by elected officials. As I said before, creativity and innovation are in danger every time a DRB gets involved. My opinion, of course.

[ita]

Someone at NAI NP Dodge told me that they have heard an out of town company is in talks to potentially fill 50% of the Lanoha tower. However, they said they didn't have any further details.

Now that’s actually very important intel as it relates to the potential of this high rise getting off the ground. If true, it’s extremely significant news ...

Ciao..LiO...Peace

I wonder, is that 50% of the total project, ie. one of the proposed towers? Or 50% of the the first tower? More likely the latter, right?

[Doctor Fate]

Someone at NAI NP Dodge told me that they have heard an out of town company is in talks to potentially fill 50% of the Lanoha tower. However, they said they didn't have any further details.

Now that’s actually very important intel as it relates to the potential of this high rise getting off the ground. If true, it’s extremely significant news ...

Ciao..LiO...Peace

I wonder, is that 50% of the total project, ie. one of the proposed towers? Or 50% of the the first tower? More likely the latter, right?

That's what I would think since they said the 30 story tower would be build first.

[RockHarbor]

You guys sound so excited.

I question their motives, suddenly jumping into skyscrapers & subdivisions, after being content in the nursery business for decades, buying that downtown lot, and proposing another hulky, cube-shaped for downtown -- when the UP buillding's cube shape has faced some criticism. Is the motive a love for Omaha, the best for Omaha? If not, then what are they doing?

If they ruin Omaha's skyline w/ some funky, hulking, flashy "Lotus Flower" high rise that is straight out of Bangkok, I won't think well of that family, or their nursery again -- and I grew up loving their nursery, and thinking well of them.

If the skyline changes for the worse, I'm sure my attitude will follow.

[Omaha Cowboy]

Someone at NAI NP Dodge told me that they have heard an out of town company is in talks to potentially fill 50% of the Lanoha tower. However, they said they didn't have any further details.

Now that’s actually very important intel as it relates to the potential of this high rise getting off the ground. If true, it’s extremely significant news ...

Ciao..LiO...Peace

I wonder, is that 50% of the total project, ie. one of the proposed towers? Or 50% of the the first tower? More likely the latter, right?

That's what I would think since they said the 30 story tower would be build first.

I would agree- if this comes to fruition, it would be 50% of the first 30 story tower.. It’ll be interesting to see if there are any legs to this one...

Ciao..LiO...Peace

[OmahaJaysCU]

Someone at NAI NP Dodge told me that they have heard an out of town company is in talks to potentially fill 50% of the Lanoha tower. However, they said they didn't have any further details.

THIS is more like the conversation I was hoping not to have. Good to hear. Fingers crossed these two rumors are on the same track...

[ryan311]

You guys sound so excited.

I question their motives, suddenly jumping into skyscrapers & subdivisions, after being content in the nursery business for decades, buying that downtown lot, and proposing another hulky, cube-shaped for downtown -- when the UP buillding's cube shape has faced some criticism. Is the motive a love for Omaha, the best for Omaha? If not, then what are they doing?

If they ruin Omaha's skyline w/ some funky, hulking, flashy "Lotus Flower" high rise that is straight out of Bangkok, I won't think well of that family, or their nursery again -- and I grew up loving their nursery, and thinking well of them.

If the skyline changes for the worse, I'm sure my attitude will follow.

It seems obvious that you already have the opinion that this will ruin the skyline. It is not a final design so why not just wait and see what materializes? I also get the feeling that you think Omaha should conform to a specific style rather than push any typical midwest standards and break the mold. Why pigeon hole design? The example you gave in a previous post of a Cleveland building is simply blah... it looks like it would fit right in at Aksarben Village and be forgettable. Let's not settle for forgettable.

[ryan311]

Straight from the design firms site. Pretty sure the design WILL change....

Still early in the Preliminary Design Phase, the new 696,500 s.f. new development will consist of a nine-story parking structure with 34,500 s.f. ground retail, 30-story west tower and 27-story east tower that will have corporate office space and other potential hospitality tenants. The structure will also include a 27,000 s.f. sky patio and lobby with a one-of-a-kind view of Downtown Omaha.

[GoWest]

If they ruin Omaha's skyline w/ some funky, hulking, flashy "Lotus Flower" high rise that is straight out of Bangkok, I won't think well of that family, or their nursery again -- and I grew up loving their nursery, and thinking well of them.

If the skyline changes for the worse, I'm sure my attitude will follow.

I don't post on here very often but i'm trying to figure out if I should be offended by the "Asian looking design" stuff or not. I'm half Thai and I didn't know they were known for such crappy design. I think the building looks pretty good. It's not my dream design but I don't think it looks bad. It looks like a plain boxy style to me. I don't understand the controversy. Maybe it's just the "Asian" in me.

[RockHarbor]

Oh my gosh. Have I not stated a ZILLION times, GoWest, that it is a great building, but it just is NOT appropriate in Omaha?? (How is that so hard to understand, since even Chicago & New York dont even sport an Asian-looking skyscraper? San Francisco has the first, and it works there since it is part of the Asian Pacific ring.)

Second of all, I dont have to like ANY countries architecture (or food, ect) if I dont, because it doesnt have anything to do w/ people/race, of course. Are you required to like American architecture? Are you required to like a cheeseburger & fries? Should I be personally offended if you don't? NO. Why are we even talking about this? It's so common knowledge.

But, on the subject: I appreciate all the world's architecture -- including Thailand. In fact, Im almost growing tired of American skylines, so I have a Bangkok screensaver right now. I also started a Tokyo thread quite awhile ago here. Ive been to Shanghai, and follow all their amazing architecture. And, London's. And, Canada's. And, so on. Even Canada's buildings have a slight "foreign twist" look to them, compared to American buildings, that I wouldnt want seen in Omaha. Study the Chicago cityscape, than look at Jakarta or Bangkok, or Shanghai, or Tokyo, then you'll see the difference. Chicago's an International City, but it fully has an American cityscape.

Ryan: Thanks for that. Let's hope it changes -- for the better.

[OmahaJaysCU]

Dude you have completely ruined this entire forum. Please read more post lest good |expletive|.

[GoWest]

Oh my gosh. Have I not stated a ZILLION times, GoWest, that it is a great building, but it just is NOT appropriate in Omaha?? (How is that so hard to understand, since even Chicago & New York dont even sport an Asian-looking skyscraper? San Francisco has the first, and it works there since it is part of the Asian Pacific ring.)

Second of all, I dont have to like ANY countries architecture (or food, ect) if I dont, because it doesnt have anything to do w/ people/race, of course. Are you required to like American architecture? Are you required to like a cheeseburger & fries? Should I be personally offended if you don't? NO. Why are we even talking about this? It's so common knowledge.

But, on the subject: I appreciate all the world's architecture -- including Thailand. In fact, Im almost growing tired of American skylines, so I have a Bangkok screensaver right now. I also started a Tokyo thread quite awhile ago here. Ive been to Shanghai, and follow all their amazing architecture. And, London's. And, Canada's. And, so on. Even Canada's buildings have a slight "foreign twist" look to them, compared to American buildings, that I wouldnt want seen in Omaha. Study the Chicago cityscape, than look at Jakarta or Bangkok, or Shanghai, or Tokyo, then you'll see the difference. Chicago's an International City, but it fully has an American cityscape.

Ryan: Thanks for that. Let's hope it changes -- for the better.

Ya.. this isn't really worth it for me to get riled up about but this isn't the response I expected from you. I have a million problems in this world and this isn't one of them. I have liked a lot of your posts but this isn't one of your better ones. I said I didn't know if I should be offended or not. I agree with you 100 percent that you don't have to like anything. I'll post again in another 10 years.

[RockHarbor]

Shut up, OmahaJay. Go watch your little Creighton basketball games, with your little blue jersey on. You dont see me hanging around basketball threads, acting like I know something about basketball, telling you suck, do you? No. Because Im not threatened by you. I hardly notice you.

The only reason you get by saying that kinda stuff to me here, and I dont, is because people know you're the underdog. Im expected to take the higher road. Not you. It's why I dont like Omaha's "We Dont Coast" caption. Should Miami and Boston start "We Dont Inland River" campaigns? No. They take the higher road, like they are expected to, and dont pick on inland interior Midwest cities. Its somehow OK for Omaha, though.

GoWest: You're unreasonable, and not logical, and way to sensitive. What response were you expecting? You just cant argue my points, so you flee. Later.

[Admin]

Ok. I have to warn you Rock Harbor, about you posts.
Here I thought you were a practicing Christian when you asked to change your name.

[RockHarbor]

Asked to change my name back in...what...2008...when I was actually at a beautiful rocky harbor up in Minnesota? What are you talking about now?

I don't EVER talk religion and politics on this forum. And, my personal beliefs are NONE of your business. And, whether I'm living up to them, is ALSO not your business.

Just because I can effectively tackle people's personal mean verbal attacks on me, and sort through all their bull lightning fast, over & over here, doesn't make me the "bad guy."

[RockHarbor]

Well, there has to be SOMETHING in place, because not only can I tell looking at Chicago, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Des Moines, ect, I know Minneapolis rejected Cesar Pelli's first draft for the 1989 Norwest (now Wells Fargo) Tower, and sent him back the drawing board. And, Im so glad they did. His 2nd creation is gorgeous, its exciting, its award winning, and is much more fitting for the city. Even him, my personal favorite MASTER architect, who mostly gets it right, almost everytime, has to go back to the drawing board at times, and rethink, and struggle, and work to find that which is perfect for the city.

Nope, just the Omaha Planning Board with its enforcement of ordinances that have been passed through the normal government processes. LaVista does have a Design Review Board (DRB) run through their Planning Department and they do have some aesthetic restrictions on which materials can be used in certain parts of LaVista. Metro Community College (MCC) also has a DRB.

No offense, but overall we're much better off not having a DRB, made up of people like yourself, dictating what can and cannot be built based on their own aesthetic preferences, beyond the necessary life-safety and zoning ordinances passed into law by elected officials. As I said before, creativity and innovation are in danger every time a DRB gets involved. My opinion, of course.

I appreciate your point, but I don't quite believe you. I don't believe an international city, where foreign people invest, like New York, LA, Chicago, Seattle, Boston, Miami, ect., have perfectly all-American skylines and cityscapes, without some sort of filter or checkpoint in place.

[OmahaJaysCU]

Kindly leave.

[Doctor Fate]

Someone at NAI NP Dodge told me that they have heard an out of town company is in talks to potentially fill 50% of the Lanoha tower. However, they said they didn't have any further details.

THIS is more like the conversation I was hoping not to have. Good to hear. Fingers crossed these two rumors are on the same track...

Agreed! I am PRAYING that this gets built...

[EastCB]

Shut up, OmahaJay. Go watch your little Creighton basketball games, with your little blue jersey on. You dont see me hanging around basketball threads, acting like I know something about basketball, telling you suck, do you? No. Because Im not threatened by you. I hardly notice you.

The only reason you get by saying that kinda stuff to me here, and I dont, is because people know you're the underdog. Im expected to take the higher road. Not you. It's why I dont like Omaha's "We Dont Coast" caption. Should Miami and Boston start "We Dont Inland River" campaigns? No. They take the higher road, like they are expected to, and dont pick on inland interior Midwest cities. Its somehow OK for Omaha, though.

GoWest: You're unreasonable, and not logical, and way to sensitive. What response were you expecting? You just cant argue my points, so you flee. Later.

You have major problems.

[RockHarbor]

No, you boys are DULL and not "fiercely smart" and probably have little simple "mouse mind" IQ's of 50, like a lot of people do -- and that makes me the WOLF. Is what.

[EastCB]

No, you boys are DULL and not "fiercely smart" and probably have little simple "mouse mind" IQ's of 50, like a lot of people do -- and that makes me the WOLF. Is what.

Oh, Mr. Intellengent. You are so right. We are dumb. But I'd rather be dumb and simple than an IDIOT like you. I actually feel sorry for you. You don't know how stupid you are.

[Admin]

Rock Harbour has been officially granted a 7 day hiatus, to calm his |expletive| down.

[iamjacobm]

A 600K square foot tower in DTO with a $200 Million investment with some credible members suggesting smoke for a tenant is good news incase anyone else missed the important part here.

[Professor Woland]

Frankly I'm more excited about the potential of a new-to-the-area business locating downtown than the tower itself. Towers are cool and all, but ultimately they aren't that important, it's what fills the towers that matters. Hopefully this speculation becomes reality soon.

[MadMartin8]

Rock Harbour has been officially granted a 7 day hiatus, to calm his |expletive| down.

Thank you.

Getting back to the topic at hand before it was hijacked; I am excited to see there being legs to this rumor, and really do agree that it's more exciting that a potentially new to the area place is going to fill half of a 600k sq ft tower. Here's to hoping it happens!