nativeomahan wrote: Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:32 pm
I’m impressed by the fairly fast pace we are seeing these neighborhoods virtually in the shadow of the Med Center being redeveloped, with a needed emphasis on upping the density of housing. We can (and should) quibble/debate building standards, the current design codes, etc. But don’t lose sight of the bigger picture: these sorts of housing and mixed use developments are a sign of Omaha’s maturing from a quiet, bucolic Midwest community into a vibrant urban center. Don’t be forgetful of Omaha’s past, but let’s focus on her future.
The fast pace only illustrates poor quality and incredibly inept design. Maybe the emphasis should be on good design and the increased density will naturally follow. You can't transform nor responsibly transform the "quiet, bucolic midwest" overnight.
The sorts of rental housing and mixed use being dropped into the landscape are not a characteristic of maturation into a "vibrant urban center". They're a sign of desperation and irresponsible design.
nativeomahan wrote: Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:32 pm
I’m impressed by the fairly fast pace we are seeing these neighborhoods virtually in the shadow of the Med Center being redeveloped, with a needed emphasis on upping the density of housing. We can (and should) quibble/debate building standards, the current design codes, etc. But don’t lose sight of the bigger picture: these sorts of housing and mixed use developments are a sign of Omaha’s maturing from a quiet, bucolic Midwest community into a vibrant urban center. Don’t be forgetful of Omaha’s past, but let’s focus on her future.
I actually don't mind the design, it's slightly better than say the new apartments going up by crossroads. Overall the bar is really low for these infill developments and in 50 years generations will probably be disgusted by this style like we are with many of the boxes of the 60s-70s.
Does the bar have to be this low? The Muth Electric/Forest Green building on the site has more charm than this and that's on the demo list.
This building will literally be the same size as Baxter Arena!
daveoma wrote: Fri Dec 24, 2021 6:43 pm
I agree. I think it's the perfect location for an increase in density too.
For sure. I would like to see projects of every scale, but seeing another infill development taking an empty concrete lot is always great.
As far as design goes, I know not of us here have higher expectations, but the common consumer likely doesn't. They care more about having a place to live that they can afford that is new, or nice, or clean, or all the above. Design, scale, etc. is not on their mind. If renters generally start protesting the things we argue about, then maybe we would see some design improvements. It's how we needed up with behemoth trucks and SUVs in America with horrific Texas sized grills and menacing faces ruling the road ad automobile sales.
Reading through this conversation, I’m on the fence. This is is great density and this makes me happy, but there are good points made here about aesthetics and scale that I don’t disagree with. I don’t know…I spent four years traveling around Europe, though the aesthetics are different there is a lot of huge block multi-family housing in many cities. And it’s worse in Japan. I think it’s inevitable for a growing metro that’s building up, to some extent. The renderings just look meh to me but at least these aren’t the massive, monolithic housing blocks still around in the former Soviet republics in Eastern Europe lol We’ll see how this turns out.
blackrock wrote: Fri Dec 24, 2021 7:21 pm
Reading through this conversation, I’m on the fence. This is is great density and this makes me happy, but there are good points made here about aesthetics and scale that I don’t disagree with. I don’t know…I spent four years traveling around Europe, though the aesthetics are different there is a lot of huge block multi-family housing in many cities. And it’s worse in Japan. I think it’s inevitable for a growing metro that’s building up, to some extent. The renderings just look meh to me but at least these aren’t the massive, monolithic housing blocks still around in the former Soviet republics in Eastern Europe lol We’ll see how this turns out.
The building is literally the size of Baxter Arena. I've simply asked people, "what do you think of this?".
They reply by asking if it's "some sort of a correctional center?".
Interesting strategy to put the “town house” look towards the neighborhood. I wish it were more oriented towards Saddle creek and didn’t have those little retail buildings
I've looked at projects by both the developer and the architect. They've done some really nice work. Little to none is reflected in this design.
It's puzzling. Developer said the "town house" look on the west was the result of City Planning's input.
blackrock wrote: Fri Dec 24, 2021 7:21 pm
Reading through this conversation, I’m on the fence. This is is great density and this makes me happy, but there are good points made here about aesthetics and scale that I don’t disagree with. I don’t know…I spent four years traveling around Europe, though the aesthetics are different there is a lot of huge block multi-family housing in many cities. And it’s worse in Japan. I think it’s inevitable for a growing metro that’s building up, to some extent. The renderings just look meh to me but at least these aren’t the massive, monolithic housing blocks still around in the former Soviet republics in Eastern Europe lol We’ll see how this turns out.
The building is literally the size of Baxter Arena. I've simply asked people, "what do you think of this?".
They reply by asking if it's "some sort of a correctional center?".
I don’t disagree, it does have a prison vibe with that layout. I do wonder who thought it would be a good idea to design it as all one solid building surrounding the central courtyard with no open breaks to the exterior. It’s not like there’s going to be a secret botanical garden tucked away in there
Same developer did The Conrad and this appears essentially the same layout as that building. I have been in this courtyard and it's nice, they have a firepit, grills, small pool. They do local craft beer happy hours for residents often that is a nice touch.
iamjacobm wrote: Fri Dec 31, 2021 1:01 pm
Same developer did The Conrad and this appears essentially the same layout as that building. I have been in this courtyard and it's nice, they have a firepit, grills, small pool. They do local craft beer happy hours for residents often that is a nice touch.
Ah I see…thanks for that info. Looking at the plans again the drawings do have little umbrella-looking things in the courtyard. Maybe there’ll be a pool in there or something. The craft beer happy hours sound like a pretty tasty perk lol
I am confused by the lack of detail on the outlot buildings in the renderings. Is the design of these buildings still up in the air? I hope so, because they could do a lot better.
Taco wrote: Fri Dec 31, 2021 2:21 pm
I am confused by the lack of detail on the outlot buildings in the renderings. Is the design of these buildings still up in the air? I hope so, because they could do a lot better.
Attend the Planning Board on Jan 5th and ask them that. They need feedback from more people with constructive ideas.
They just built the BOS 2 years ago. Why does this neighborhood have to have such giant apt buildings?
Why does it have to be all rentals?
280 parking spots for 195 units? Not counting 40+ for a bank and coffee shop?
Its too much parking, its too monolithic. The goal here should be to make Saddle Creek look better and build it up as a commercial corridor not just be a carcentric wasteland with 1 story buildings and seas of parking.
Heres a better plan. Build a small 3 over 1 facing saddle creek with commercial on the 1st floor and parking hidden in the back. Build 2 smaller 3 story buildings on mayberry and Pacific Line 49th with real standalone townhouses as and built a stairway down into the parking below.
Increasing density doesnt have to equal 1 building thats 180,000 square feet and a drivethru bank.
Mapguy wrote: Mon Jan 03, 2022 9:47 am
They just built the BOS 2 years ago. Why does this neighborhood have to have such giant apt buildings?
Why does it have to be all rentals?
280 parking spots for 195 units? Not counting 40+ for a bank and coffee shop?
Its too much parking, its too monolithic. The goal here should be to make Saddle Creek look better and build it up as a commercial corridor not just be a carcentric wasteland with 1 story buildings and seas of parking.
Heres a better plan. Build a small 3 over 1 facing saddle creek with commercial on the 1st floor and parking hidden in the back. Build 2 smaller 3 story buildings on mayberry and Pacific Line 49th with real standalone townhouses as and built a stairway down into the parking below.
Increasing density doesnt have to equal 1 building thats 180,000 square feet and a drivethru bank.
Please attend the Planning Board on Jan 5 or email/write the Board beforehand. I agree. It's very suburban and poorly conceived and I believe it is a contradiction to the Master Plan. It tears down 2 perfectly good buildings that could be fantastic if re-invented, a wonderful mid-century and a simple small brick warehouse.
In fact, good buildings. Could easily be rehabbed and repurposed into something far more interesting than a formulaic drive-through coffee kiosk and a drive-through credit union, which is the plan. Turning Saddle Creek into West Maple or West Center is short-sighted.
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 5:10 pm
Turning Saddle Creek into West Maple or West Center is short-sighted.
Assuming the new development will create a West Maple or West Center look alike is short-sighted as well..as we have little, if any, idea that would be the case..along with also not knowing the extent of disrepair of the current buildings- which have been neglected for so many years. I’m all for preservation, and appreciate your zeal for it, but not every old development in our older core sections of the city are worthy of it…
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 5:10 pm
Turning Saddle Creek into West Maple or West Center is short-sighted.
Assuming the new development will create a West Maple or West Center look alike is short-sighted as well..as we have little, if any, idea that would be the case..along with also not knowing the extent of disrepair of the current buildings- which have been neglected for so many years. I’m all for preservation, and appreciate your zeal for it, but not every old development in our older core sections of the city are worthy of it…
Ciao..LiO…Peace
I apologize. Aside from my zeal, I'm completely incorrect and completely uninformed as usual.
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 5:10 pm
Disagree...
In fact, good buildings. Could easily be rehabbed and repurposed into something far more interesting than a formulaic drive-through coffee kiosk and a drive-through credit union, which is the plan. Turning Saddle Creek into West Maple or West Center is short-sighted.
This is already down the road from a credit union, a bakers with a massive parking lot and gas station, a Jiffy Lube, a credit Union, and a power substation to name a few. Saddle Creek hasn’t ever exactly been one of Omaha’s small neighborhood business districts like Dundee or Blackstone, but rather a pretty car focused industrial leaning area. It’s basically like eastern Omaha’s version of Industrial Road.
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 5:10 pm
Disagree...
In fact, good buildings. Could easily be rehabbed and repurposed into something far more interesting than a formulaic drive-through coffee kiosk and a drive-through credit union, which is the plan. Turning Saddle Creek into West Maple or West Center is short-sighted.
What else are they going to build, some residential tower? Sometimes we need to manage our expectations and remember were in Omaha not New York.
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 5:10 pm
Disagree...
In fact, good buildings. Could easily be rehabbed and repurposed into something far more interesting than a formulaic drive-through coffee kiosk and a drive-through credit union, which is the plan. Turning Saddle Creek into West Maple or West Center is short-sighted.
This is already down the road from a credit union, a bakers with a massive parking lot and gas station, a Jiffy Lube, a credit Union, and a power substation to name a few. Saddle Creek hasn’t ever exactly been one of Omaha’s small neighborhood business districts like Dundee or Blackstone, but rather a pretty car focused industrial leaning area. It’s basically like eastern Omaha’s version of Industrial Road.
Right. Adding more of what's already there and reinforcing the car-focused industrial road elements is absolutely the best approach.
The Baxter-Arena-sized apartment building adds to the industrial chic. Unfortunately, it may fall short of the charm a customary Big Box store delivers.
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 5:10 pm
Disagree...
In fact, good buildings. Could easily be rehabbed and repurposed into something far more interesting than a formulaic drive-through coffee kiosk and a drive-through credit union, which is the plan. Turning Saddle Creek into West Maple or West Center is short-sighted.
What else are they going to build, some residential tower? Sometimes we need to manage our expectations and remember were in Omaha not New York.
Absolutely! We must continue to lower the bar. Long live mediocrity.
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 5:10 pm
Disagree...
In fact, good buildings. Could easily be rehabbed and repurposed into something far more interesting than a formulaic drive-through coffee kiosk and a drive-through credit union, which is the plan. Turning Saddle Creek into West Maple or West Center is short-sighted.
What else are they going to build, some residential tower? Sometimes we need to manage our expectations and remember were in Omaha not New York.
Absolutely! We must continue to lower the bar. Long live mediocrity.
Well considering we have massive empty lots downtown for 10+ years now, maybe we should
Sarcasm aside it's really not a big deal the only somewhat interesting part of the building is a 10 foot brick wall. It would be a different story if it were a substantial building but these types of small warehouses can be found in any town in the state of Nebraska.
Pretty soon were going to hear complaints about tearing down a scooters because it was built in 2007 and Paul McCartney got a latte there 12 years ago.
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 5:10 pm
Turning Saddle Creek into West Maple or West Center is short-sighted.
Assuming the new development will create a West Maple or West Center look alike is short-sighted as well..as we have little, if any, idea that would be the case..along with also not knowing the extent of disrepair of the current buildings- which have been neglected for so many years. I’m all for preservation, and appreciate your zeal for it, but not every old development in our older core sections of the city are worthy of it…
Ciao..LiO…Peace
I apologize. Aside from my zeal, I'm completely incorrect and completely uninformed as usual.
He never indicated you were incorrect or uninformed. He disagreed with your assumptive opinion. And submitting defensive posts such as this does nothing to enhance the endless positions of dissatisfaction you have with pretty much every proposed new development east of 72nd street. In the end, I agree that not every older development which has sat and became more and more of an eyesore, is worthy of preservation. Sometimes it is better to start over with a new and fresh development; even if the proposal might seem out of place in the area to some.
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 5:10 pm
Disagree...
In fact, good buildings. Could easily be rehabbed and repurposed into something far more interesting than a formulaic drive-through coffee kiosk and a drive-through credit union, which is the plan. Turning Saddle Creek into West Maple or West Center is short-sighted.
What else are they going to build, some residential tower? Sometimes we need to manage our expectations and remember were in Omaha not New York.
Absolutely! We must continue to lower the bar. Long live mediocrity.
Well considering we have massive empty lots downtown for 10+ years now, maybe we should
Sarcasm aside it's really not a big deal the only somewhat interesting part of the building is a 10 foot brick wall. It would be a different story if it were a substantial building but these types of small warehouses can be found in any town in the state of Nebraska.
Pretty soon were going to hear complaints about tearing down a scooters because it was built in 2007 and Paul McCartney got a latte there 12 years ago.
Like I've said before, there's 2 substantial buildings standing. One is a really nice mid-century design. With a little intelligence, both could be re-purposed for anything. In fact, the brick building is virtually the same footprint of the Scooters or Starbucks in the plan.
And it's a good thing if small warehouses can be found in any town in the state of Nebraska, that's a lot of resources that haven't been wasted. But I do understand the appeal of covering the landscape in boxes, strip malls and drive-thrus covered in DryVit.
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 5:10 pm
Turning Saddle Creek into West Maple or West Center is short-sighted.
Assuming the new development will create a West Maple or West Center look alike is short-sighted as well..as we have little, if any, idea that would be the case..along with also not knowing the extent of disrepair of the current buildings- which have been neglected for so many years. I’m all for preservation, and appreciate your zeal for it, but not every old development in our older core sections of the city are worthy of it…
Ciao..LiO…Peace
I apologize. Aside from my zeal, I'm completely incorrect and completely uninformed as usual.
He never indicated you were incorrect or uninformed. He disagreed with your assumptive opinion. And submitting defensive posts such as this does nothing to enhance the endless positions of dissatisfaction you have with pretty much every proposed new development east of 72nd street. In the end, I agree that not every older development which has sat and became more and more of an eyesore, is worthy of preservation. Sometimes it is better to start over with a new and fresh development; even if the proposal might seem out of place in the area to some.
By defensive posts, I'm sure you're including yours and the many others addressed to me. The individual indicated that I'm short-sighted, that I have no knowledge about the plan or the existing buildings, and sarcastically chose "zeal" to describe me because I brought preservation into the discussion. Unlike many in your "club", I don't condescend to the individual or criticize or make snide remarks about an individual. I criticize and question ideas and planning and design, and none of it is based on assumptions.
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 5:10 pm
Turning Saddle Creek into West Maple or West Center is short-sighted.
Assuming the new development will create a West Maple or West Center look alike is short-sighted as well..as we have little, if any, idea that would be the case..along with also not knowing the extent of disrepair of the current buildings- which have been neglected for so many years. I’m all for preservation, and appreciate your zeal for it, but not every old development in our older core sections of the city are worthy of it…
Ciao..LiO…Peace
I apologize. Aside from my zeal, I'm completely incorrect and completely uninformed as usual.
He never indicated you were incorrect or uninformed. He disagreed with your assumptive opinion. And submitting defensive posts such as this does nothing to enhance the endless positions of dissatisfaction you have with pretty much every proposed new development east of 72nd street. In the end, I agree that not every older development which has sat and became more and more of an eyesore, is worthy of preservation. Sometimes it is better to start over with a new and fresh development; even if the proposal might seem out of place in the area to some.
By defensive posts, I'm sure you're including yours and the many others addressed to me. The individual indicated that I'm short-sighted, that I have no knowledge about the plan or the existing buildings, and sarcastically chose "zeal" to describe me because I brought preservation into the discussion. Unlike many in your "club", I don't condescend to the individual or criticize or make snide remarks about an individual. I criticize and question ideas and planning and design, and none of it is based on assumptions.
Don’t break your arm because you’re really reaching here. “Me against the world” right? With due respect to the admin/moderation team, I’ll stay on topic and ask you then, what specific intel do you have about the current state of this specific area of SaddleCreek that any other poster here does not know? Have you spoken with the current owners of the dilapidating properties and or toured the 2 “substantial buildings” standing to get a read on their worthiness of preservation? Additionally, have you inside information regarding the proposed development and have it on good authority this new plan would turn SaddleCreek into West Maple or West Center? I want to have a sense of what you know that everyone else here doesn’t.
I think what this boils down to is a lack of understanding. Some of you are looking at this from a drive-by perspective of "these buildings look like |expletive| on my commute to work, lets change that".
Some of us are looking at this from a perspective of this is in my backyard and id rather keep whats there than have 200 new neighbors and 200 new cars and a drivethru bank and parking garage to look at.
What irks me about this whole process was that the City has stated that theyve been working with this particular developer for over a year on incentives and design. Theyve worked with the neighbors for a little over a month once all the agreements are in place and ready to go. And they wonder why there's pushback??
Is that good planning policy? You dont get buy-in from people using a top down approach of this is whats good for you now shut up and accept it.
Components of this plan could have been hammered out over a year ago and built consensus without tipping a developers hand. Zoning could have been changed a year ago and that would have been a perfect start to a conversation of how many people will be moving in and how high a structure might get. But instead the neighborhood gets everything changed without any local input.
The planning board talks a great game about housing and density, but what does this development do to increase affordable or moderate income apts? It bulldozes at least 6 units. Are those units replaced and incusively zoned into the development? No. Why not?
We need to put some rails on the TIFF program. There should be community engagement and buy-in for a project. Affordable units destroyed should be replaced. After all TIFF is a subsidy---its a grant thats repayed by taxes---shouldnt the city be asking for affordable units to be at least replaced if a developer asks for 5 million bucks?
Community buy-in and mixed income apts arent exactly ground breaking asks from the people that live here.
With that said I think this project is a done deal. So theres no point in fighting City Hall at this point. I do think the City can and should ask for more from its developers and it should work better with the community. Maybe change the planning department culture and focus from pro developer to community building and engagement.
Mapguy wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 4:13 pm
I do think the City can and should ask for more from its developers and it should work better with the community. Maybe change the planning department culture and focus from pro developer to community building and engagement.
I couldn't agree more with this. I essentially don't have an issue with the idea, but in practice, all the infill that has happened so far hasn't helped anybody. They're just adding higher priced, "overly-amenitied" units, raising surrounding values, raising taxes, pushing existing people out, and the city's paying them to do it. It's all a money grab by developers under the guise of improvement and infill and were all funding it. It's bullshi t.
To be honest, I do think they are taking advantage of Omaha's underdog mentality... And Omaha's not only letting it happen, but helping it happen, and making it happen.
One other thing I want to add is, for the most part, it seems the areas these are mostly happening, aside from Dundee, are, or were depleted of owner-occupied real estate. That has to make it much easier to move past the community input part, if there'd be any community input at all.
Mapguy wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 4:13 pm
I do think the City can and should ask for more from its developers and it should work better with the community. Maybe change the planning department culture and focus from pro developer to community building and engagement.
I couldn't agree more with this. I essentially don't have an issue with the idea, but in practice, all the infill that has happened so far hasn't helped anybody. They're just adding higher priced, "overly-amenitied" units, raising surrounding values, raising taxes, pushing existing people out, and the city's paying them to do it. It's all a money grab by developers under the guise of improvement and infill and were all funding it. It's bullshi t.
To be honest, I do think they are taking advantage of Omaha's underdog mentality... And Omaha's not only letting it happen, but helping it happen, and making it happen.
One other thing I want to add is, for the most part, it seems the areas these are mostly happening, aside from Dundee, are, or were depleted of owner-occupied real estate. That has to make it much easier to move past the community input part, if there'd be any community input at all.
I think most planners these days would agree with you on that, but unfortunately that’s something that’s in the hands of city councils. There should fully be requirements for affordable housing in TIF, along with degrees of rent stabilization. But at the end of the day, planners can only work within the confines of what our city governments push for.
