Fort Calhoun wrote: Wed Feb 22, 2023 8:27 am
The lobby for the Doubletree is above street level. The area beneath the lobby is a large underutilized hallway. Is there any possibility of opening this up and have 16th street pass under the hotel
I suppose you could, but you wouldn't negate the barrier a large tunnel creates to non-motorized traffic unless you jazzed the absolute f out of it. I'm not sure there are enough benefits to the urban fabric to rationalize going that route as opposed to keeping it a super block.
The tunnel would be less than a block long, how hard would it be to add sidewalks?
It's not a matter of adding the sidewalks, it's a matter of who is going to want to walk through a dark, scary tunnel. What would draw someone to choose that route and, at the same time, why would we spend money on offering that route when more appealing options are available?
C'mon, this isn't a new concept. Has nobody ever went through the PedWay in Chicago, O'Hare pedestrian tunnels, ped tunnels in Newark Penn Station, or....the tunnel under Dodge on Dundee? heck, it's wouldn't really be hugely different from the updated 10th Street bridge in the GLM.
This really could be a cool pedestrian thru-way if the idea ever got traction and funding. You know, the usual ifs and resultant barriers.
I think the biggest hold up would be fnbo as any tunnel through 16th is going to cut off their private underground ped tunnel. I am all for it though. Get fnbo to do something about their street level on 16th too while they are at it.
Fort Calhoun wrote: Wed Feb 22, 2023 8:27 am
The lobby for the Doubletree is above street level. The area beneath the lobby is a large underutilized hallway. Is there any possibility of opening this up and have 16th street pass under the hotel
I suppose you could, but you wouldn't negate the barrier a large tunnel creates to non-motorized traffic unless you jazzed the absolute f out of it. I'm not sure there are enough benefits to the urban fabric to rationalize going that route as opposed to keeping it a super block.
The tunnel would be less than a block long, how hard would it be to add sidewalks?
It's not a matter of adding the sidewalks, it's a matter of who is going to want to walk through a dark, scary tunnel. What would draw someone to choose that route and, at the same time, why would we spend money on offering that route when more appealing options are available?
I guess by "tunnel" I thought of more of a lower version of the parking garage over 17th than a true underground tunnel
One possibly option is to move the transit lines one or two blocks over (14th or 15th St). This would free up 16th to restore the pedestrian mall concept. Raise the street level same as sidewalk.
Great examples are Pearl Street in Boulder, CO or downtown Charlottesville, VA.
Dusty wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 5:02 pm
One possibly option is to move the transit lines one or two blocks over (14th or 15th St). This would free up 16th to restore the pedestrian mall concept. Raise the street level same as sidewalk.
Great examples are Pearl Street in Boulder, CO or downtown Charlottesville, VA.
The pedestrian mall concept doesn’t often work well in the US unless it’s in a very high density area or near a large college campus. Both of your examples are near large college campuses.
"Video game violence is not a new problem. Who could forget in the wake of SimCity how children everywhere took up urban planning." - Stephen Colbert
Dusty wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 5:02 pm
One possibly option is to move the transit lines one or two blocks over (14th or 15th St). This would free up 16th to restore the pedestrian mall concept. Raise the street level same as sidewalk.
Great examples are Pearl Street in Boulder, CO or downtown Charlottesville, VA.
The pedestrian mall concept doesn’t often work well in the US unless it’s in a very high density area or near a large college campus. Both of your examples are near large college campuses.
I will second this and add that enhancing public transportation infrastructure would probably be a better investment.
I suggested this as a possibility since it was the most simple approach. A facelift to the area. Honestly, I think the space is not big enough scope to do it justice. The reason most fail is because we market them as an attraction or destination we can drive to. When people get there and can't find parking 5 feet from it, they go somewhere else. It's not a density issue, but a spoiled car- dependent mindset.
I like the idea of creating "living streets." It's not an attraction, but a slower paced street with elements of public space and great walkability. We can customize it any way we want. I would just hate to see the whole area ripped out so we can line both sides with parking stalls. IMO, we have way too much parking downtown as it is. Most garages are under-utilized or empty while people drive around looking for the perfect spot.
I agree the focus needs to be strengthening the transit system, adding better bike infrastructure, increasing more foot traffic.
TitosBuritoBarn wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 6:31 pm
The pedestrian mall concept doesn’t often work well in the US unless it’s in a very high density area or near a large college campus. Both of your examples are near large college campuses.
It also helps when it’s more than 2 blocks long, isn’t 45% parking garages, and doesn’t have a hotel planted in the middle of it.
Dusty wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 4:42 pm
The reason most fail is because we market them as an attraction or destination we can drive to. When people get there and can't find parking 5 feet from it, they go somewhere else. It's not a density issue, but a spoiled car- dependent mindset.
Six of one, half dozen of the other. If you don't market them as a drive-to destination and they fail, then it is indeed a density issue.
Dusty wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 4:42 pm
The reason most fail is because we market them as an attraction or destination we can drive to. When people get there and can't find parking 5 feet from it, they go somewhere else. It's not a density issue, but a spoiled car- dependent mindset.
Six of one, half dozen of the other. If you don't market them as a drive-to destination and they fail, then it is indeed a density issue.
Agreed. A successful pedestrian mall in the United States need a lot of factors going for it. Jane Jacob’s once said parks need to be where life swirls, and I think that applies to pedestrian malls as well. You need a combination of daytime and nighttime users, it needs to be somewhere people both travel to and live by, and it has to be both beautiful and functional. An 8 year old and an 80 year old should both be able to access the space.
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Dec 09, 2023 5:26 pm
It's time to demolish the former Hilton hotel. It's 50 years old now. Time to go.
Disagree, the Doubletree offers proportional height to the FNBO tower and its not a bad looking building. We have several lots that need to be filled in first in the surrounding area before even thinking of touching buildings like this.
This disposable mentality of getting rid of buildings because they are just 50 years is what has led us to lose beautiful buildings in the past.
The Hilton/Red Lion/Doubletree has long been a point of contention. There was oppostion the hotel's construction because it closed 16th street and thus along with I-480 allegedly killed north downtown. Since its construction there has been repeated expression of support for either tearing the hotel down or building a tunnel of sorts under the hotel to reopen 16th Street. It really is a shame what happened to this area north of Dodge. Is the construction of the hotel and I-480 the total cause? I don't know. But it certainly didn't help.
My old signature got too old. So old it was getting almost as old me as me. Yeah, it was up there in years.
A tunnel would have been a clever idea. If the building of the hotel is what killed North Downtown, were there any restaurants and shops that disappeared? because currently there are no restaurants or shops that indicate that area was ever alive, except the Civic Auditorium.
Also, generally for traffic, foot traffic is the determiner of how viable an area is, so I don't think a blocked street was a major factor.
Last edited by Renovator2559 on Wed Dec 20, 2023 1:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Renovator2559 wrote: Wed Dec 20, 2023 1:28 pm
Also, generally for traffic is the determiner of how viable an area is, so I don't think a blocked street was a major factor.
Especially since it was a one intersection block. Go 500 feet to the left or right and you’re back to where you were planning to go. Not quite the Berlin Wall.
16th St. was the center of downtown’s retail activity until the 80’s or so, but was really thriving before the 70’s. I remember 16th before the Doubletree/Red Lion/Hilton and frankly, you really didn’t want to go North of there unless you were looking for trouble or going to work. North downtown was full of flop houses, pawn shops, reeealy divey dive bars, ancient factories/warehouses, and U.P.’s lovely rail yard. I’ve posted here before about downtown’s “super block” master plan from the 60’s, and this was one of the 2 completed before the city came to its senses. I don’t think the city is going to make an effort to remove it, since traffic downtown has been pretty light for the last several decades anyway. 16th St. will come back if people have a reason to go there. Make a commitment to patronize neighborhoods you’d like to see thrive. Take the family. Parking is ridiculously plentiful everywhere downtown. Shame your Elkhorn/Papillion/Gretna,etc. neighbors for not patronizing downtown. Invite them along. I spent 2 weeks in Omaha recently, dragging my suburban relatives to points east of 42nd to introduce them to places they’d never heard of let alone visited.
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Dec 09, 2023 5:26 pm
It's time to demolish the former Hilton hotel. It's 50 years old now. Time to go.
I completely disagree with this. It's a 19-story building that plays an important role in our skyline and it remains quite functional. Incredible amounts of resources -- money, man hours, building supplies and unrecoverable spent energy -- go into the building process. Whenever you tear down a building, you waste all of that investment. It's time Omaha learns from its past mistakes and stop tearing down substantive buildings just because someone declares them to be "ugly" or someone is bothered by the mythical idea that the building was designed to seal off north Omaha.
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Dec 09, 2023 5:26 pm
It's time to demolish the former Hilton hotel. It's 50 years old now. Time to go.
I completely disagree with this. It's a 19-story building that plays an important role in our skyline and it remains quite functional. Incredible amounts of resources -- money, man hours, building supplies and unrecoverable spent energy -- go into the building process. Whenever you tear down a building, you waste all of that investment. It's time Omaha learns from its past mistakes and stop tearing down substantive buildings just because someone declares them to be "ugly" or someone is bothered by the mythical idea that the building was designed to seal off north Omaha.
Let's go through the list of all the historic landmark buildings and districts in Omaha that have been destroyed and sent to the landfill over the past 60 years. Only then can there be a discussion of wasting resources -- money, man hours, building supplies and unrecoverable spent energy -- including investment.
That building is neither substantive nor significant. "Important role in our skyline" is aggrandizing.
And mythical idea or not, plopping it in the middle of 16th Street was a non-rational and absurd decision.
And speaking of wasted resources, you may recall the Old Omaha Post Office was demolished for the Hilton.
No, we should not buy and tear down a functioning 414 room, 3-star hotel because it sits on the one impenetrable super block in this part of downtown. That's not good planning and getting rid of the super block here will not have a significant enough impact on street activity to warrant what you're suggesting be done.
"Video game violence is not a new problem. Who could forget in the wake of SimCity how children everywhere took up urban planning." - Stephen Colbert
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Dec 09, 2023 5:26 pm
It's time to demolish the former Hilton hotel. It's 50 years old now. Time to go.
I completely disagree with this. It's a 19-story building that plays an important role in our skyline and it remains quite functional. Incredible amounts of resources -- money, man hours, building supplies and unrecoverable spent energy -- go into the building process. Whenever you tear down a building, you waste all of that investment. It's time Omaha learns from its past mistakes and stop tearing down substantive buildings just because someone declares them to be "ugly" or someone is bothered by the mythical idea that the building was designed to seal off north Omaha.
Let's go through the list of all the historic landmark buildings and districts in Omaha that have been destroyed and sent to the landfill over the past 60 years. Only then can there be a discussion of wasting resources -- money, man hours, building supplies and unrecoverable spent energy -- including investment.
That building is neither substantive nor significant. "Important role in our skyline" is aggrandizing.
And mythical idea or not, plopping it in the middle of 16th Street was a non-rational and absurd decision.
And speaking of wasted resources, you may recall the Old Omaha Post Office was demolished for the Hilton.
Two wrongs don't make a right. We can do absolutely nothing to undo past sins, but we can prevent committing new ones. Taking down a perfectly fine building is a terrible mistake. Leave the DoubleTree Hotel building exactly where it is and build around it.
Vitruvius wrote: Sat Dec 09, 2023 5:26 pm
It's time to demolish the former Hilton hotel. It's 50 years old now. Time to go.
I completely disagree with this. It's a 19-story building that plays an important role in our skyline and it remains quite functional. Incredible amounts of resources -- money, man hours, building supplies and unrecoverable spent energy -- go into the building process. Whenever you tear down a building, you waste all of that investment. It's time Omaha learns from its past mistakes and stop tearing down substantive buildings just because someone declares them to be "ugly" or someone is bothered by the mythical idea that the building was designed to seal off north Omaha.
Let's go through the list of all the historic landmark buildings and districts in Omaha that have been destroyed and sent to the landfill over the past 60 years. Only then can there be a discussion of wasting resources -- money, man hours, building supplies and unrecoverable spent energy -- including investment.
That building is neither substantive nor significant. "Important role in our skyline" is aggrandizing.
And mythical idea or not, plopping it in the middle of 16th Street was a non-rational and absurd decision.
And speaking of wasted resources, you may recall the Old Omaha Post Office was demolished for the Hilton.
Two wrongs don't make a right. We can do absolutely nothing to undo past sins, but we can prevent committing new ones. Taking down a perfectly fine building is a terrible mistake. Leave the DoubleTree Hotel building exactly where it is and build around it.
Two wrongs would certainly make a right if something of architectural significance were to replace it.
"perfectly fine building"? How long shall we wallow in mediocrity?
"Replace it with something significant"??
There are empty lots on significant land that have wallowed for years if not decades. Tear this down and open 16th Street and you've got two pieces of land that could also sit for a long time. Not to mention that the current owner might have something to say about tearing down its building. The owner lives in Houston so maybe he won't notice right away but still....
Bob from Omaha wrote: Thu Dec 21, 2023 5:21 pm
"Replace it with something significant"??
Yes, good architecture.
There are empty lots on significant land that have wallowed for years if not decades. Tear this down and open 16th Street and you've got two pieces of land that could also sit for a long time. Not to mention that the current owner might have something to say about tearing down its building. The owner lives in Houston so maybe he won't notice right away but still....
I'm sure the owner would sell for a price, and the city has courted owners out of their buildings in the past for development.
Absolutely open up 16th Street. The resulting two pieces of land wouldn't sit vacant for long if there was any real vision for downtown redevelopment, including attracting some big businesses, some new businesses, and new jobs. That would be a much better approach than just moving business and employees into a new location and vacating the old one.
Things only wallow for years in the absence of visionary, genuine leadership.
I’m sure the only thing holding Omaha back from attracting all these major corporations is 16th St. They tour the newest redeveloped parks downtown but then as their car pulls up to 17th st to go North they gasp. The single extra block traveled made the CEO decide to persuade new opportunities.
ita wrote: Fri Jan 05, 2024 9:14 am
Really wish Alexander Payne would finally do something with King Fong's. That has been closed for too long.
I pulled this quote from another thread. Makes more sense here.
I have said before I want the city to rebrand this area as "Theatre Row". There is rich history along Douglas and 16th street of Omaha once having theaters lined down the street. You can tell King Fong used to be a theater at one time. That fact that Alexander Payne owns the building is a major plus.
Bring in more improv groups, magic shows, comedy clubs, dinner theater shows, etc along 16th Street. Backline Comedy Theatre is right on 16th and Harney. Attract a few more to these empty bays and they area will quickly change.
Maybe talk Opera Omaha to move from 18th to 16th Street to be closer all the other Theatre based businesses.
skinzfan23 wrote: Fri Jan 05, 2024 11:26 am
Actually, King Fong was not a theater. It was a fancy restaurant for a few years before it closed and turned into King Fong.
Yes, but what was it built for originally? It was built in 1880. For 29 years it was something. Might have to dig deep into the archives to find the origins of the building. In 1909 it became a fancy restaurant as you stated. Owner had to dump a bunch of money into it to fix it up. In 1920 King Fong took over the spot.
Here is old picture of the building when it was Hanson's Cafe. You have two lamp posts on either side of the left window. This made me think it was a former ticket window.
This is the only info I could find: But according to the assessor, you are right it is showing 1880 for the year built.
King Fong’s opened in 1920 at 315 S. 16th St. The building previously housed dining entrepreneur Tolf Hanson’s Cafe Beautiful, an ambitious French restaurant that ended up a financial disaster (the bankrupted Hanson committed suicide in 1909, a year after Cafe Beautiful opened). To remodel the magnificent space, Chin went all the way to Canton (present-day Guangdong province) to retrieve the traditional furniture and décor that would fill King Fong’s second and third levels. Chin even took the boat back to America with his teak tables, chandeliers, and silk embroideries to keep the investment safe.
skinzfan23 wrote: Fri Jan 05, 2024 2:52 pm
This is the only info I could find: But according to the assessor, you are right it is showing 1880 for the year built.
King Fong’s opened in 1920 at 315 S. 16th St. The building previously housed dining entrepreneur Tolf Hanson’s Cafe Beautiful, an ambitious French restaurant that ended up a financial disaster (the bankrupted Hanson committed suicide in 1909, a year after Cafe Beautiful opened). To remodel the magnificent space, Chin went all the way to Canton (present-day Guangdong province) to retrieve the traditional furniture and décor that would fill King Fong’s second and third levels. Chin even took the boat back to America with his teak tables, chandeliers, and silk embroideries to keep the investment safe.
His initials (TH) are at the top center of the building.
I thought I read somewhere that MoMo station was going into the old culprit spot on 16th but on grow Omaha they mentioned that a new cocktail/tapas bar called Cattle Call was going in there. Does anyone know if that means MoMo is lmoving back into the old Cumbia location across the street? I think that was there old location. Also any guesses on where Cumbia is moving to?
BIGO88 wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2024 8:36 am
I thought I read somewhere that MoMo station was going into the old culprit spot on 16th but on grow Omaha they mentioned that a new cocktail/tapas bar called Cattle Call was going in there. Does anyone know if that means MoMo is lmoving back into the old Cumbia location across the street? I think that was there old location. Also any guesses on where Cumbia is moving to?
Yeah, I heard that, too. MoMo's website still says "1603 Farnam St, Suite 101", which I believe is the old Culprit. News of both moves was in last week's program, so I'd imagine they just misspoke on where the new tapas place is going, rather than the MoMo move falling through. At least I hope it didn't.
Two wrongs would certainly make a right if something of architectural significance were to replace it.
