Downtown Omaha Master Plan

[ita]

Omaha's Riverfront Revitalization Project



Omaha's Riverfront Revitalization Project is a $300 million transformational development which includes cascading waterfalls, a boardwalk, an urban beach, park-side cafes, and a new science center with riverfront views. Join us for a bird's-eye view of what's to come beginning in summer 2022 with Gene Leahy Mall, 2023 for Lewis and Clark Landing, and 2024 for Heartland of America Park.

This is the first time I've seen the updated fly by's of Heartland and Lewis and Clark. A couple thoughts. First, the Farnam Pier rendering looks neat and will be a nice attraction. I think it will be a new photo spot, particularly against the downtown skyline. Second, it looks like Lewis and Clark has the site north of the science center as 'sports courts'. I know previously, Heritage said those would be pickleball courts, but hopefully the vagueness of the current nomenclature means there is a chance for other types of courts, like basketball. I am really hoping they have at least one there.

Dumb question, but are they really putting in a sand beach and marketing the river as a swimming spot? There are ppl in the video in swimsuits...

Usually with urban beaches along rivers they will bring sand in above the waterline for aesthetics, etc., but the actual 'ground that meets the river' is concrete.

I see, so the representation of individuals wandering the beach in swimwear is simply for aesthetic purposes... unless they are planning on dropping a gym on the beach.

I am actually all for a gym on the beach. That would be pretty cool, even just a body weight one.

I just looked up some urban beaches and ours looks like it will be about the same size and shape as Toronto's Sugar beach. A lot of landlocked European cities utilize them as well, based on my quick google search.

[ita]

https://fb.watch/cNeNRXpJf6/

Mayor Walsh regarding the multimodal bridge. It's a little old, but he does state the bridge likely won't start until 5-10 years from now at the earliest.

[mrsticka]

Can't they reroute I-480 further north? Like a mile or so? That way traffic can still go through downtown uninterrupted and cross into Iowa? Just asking.

[Renovator2559]

Can't they reroute I-480 further north? Like a mile or so? That way traffic can still go through downtown uninterrupted and cross into Iowa? Just asking.

That's what we have 880 for, also it sounds like you are asking the repeat of the 60s of demolishing neighborhoods along the way. Also CB just finished building the i29 interchanges, they would not be to happy to demolish this work that has gone for many years.

The future plan is to bring down the northern part of i480 and convert to a boulevard couplet with roundabouts, to allow for more development and reclaim 6 blocks or so.

[mrsticka]

That's the plan for now. But that can change along the way.

[Garrett]

Can't they reroute I-480 further north? Like a mile or so? That way traffic can still go through downtown uninterrupted and cross into Iowa? Just asking.

Which neighborhood would you destroy for this?

[Bob from Omaha]

I'd imagine those associated with Conestoga School might have a problem. The yellow pin is about 1 mile north and the arrow points to the school. So yeah, no problem.

[mrsticka]

I don't want to destroy anything. It was just a HYPOTHETICAL! I ask a perfectly harmless question and everyone just jumps down my throat and makes me out to be some evil, heartless monster.

[Greg S]

Something is going to be done transportation-wise for North Omaha. They have been reporting for some time about the issues of so many semi’s rolling down 30th through Florence.

Now you have the new industrial park the city is buying with the Economic Recovery Act funds.

[daveoma]

I don't want to destroy anything. It was just a HYPOTHETICAL! I ask a perfectly harmless question and everyone just jumps down my throat and makes me out to be some evil, heartless monster.

We should be able to have thoughtful and mature discussions without being bullied by others.

[mrsticka]

Here's another idea: Lower I-480 underground and make it a tunnel through downtown. That way they can still build all those proposed buildings along that area but keep I-480 there without destroying any neighborhoods.

[Bob from Omaha]

I'm not sure this has been discussed before.

Here's a radical idea. Do away with I-480 from the junction with 75. Have the bridge end & traffic from the bridge just exit to Dodge. Get rid of the over head traffic entirely. That would open up blocks and blocks of land for development, combine downtown with north downtown.

Just a thought.

[ita]

I'm not sure this has been discussed before.

Here's a radical idea. Do away with I-480 from the junction with 75. Have the bridge end & traffic from the bridge just exit to Dodge. Get rid of the over head traffic entirely. That would open up blocks and blocks of land for development, combine downtown with north downtown.

Just a thought.

That's exactly what many of us have suggested over the years to really give elevate downtown. It's also in the chambers urban core plan as one of the major changes that should occur downtown to open up land for development and reconnect/reactivate a large swath of downtown. It is radical in the sense that I doubt the state wants to tear it down anytime soon. They recently spent a decent chunk of change doing maintenance this past year. I may be wrong, but I think the i-480 overpass was completed around 1970. That would put it a little over 50 years old now. It won't be for a while, but serious conversations about maintaining the overpass should be taking place as it ages. For Omaha, it would be amazing to take it down and reclaim it for future development and really help the surrounding areas much more attractive. It would be the next iteration of the Jefferson Square neighborhood.

[mistergutierrez]

I´ve been in Europe this summer, and there are many things I am not used to anymore, the meal times, seeing kids playing on the street at midnight... Also, the distance between the downtowns and the interstates is way bigger than in any US city, for instance, in Toulouse (a French city the same size than Omaha), the downtown is 3 miles (15 min. driving) from the interstate, The result, cities are less car friendly, people use more public transport and neighborhoods are more attractive. Driving at 60 mph from the suburbs all way to downtown shouldn´t be a right.

[mrsticka]

I got the idea to make the I-480 viaduct a tunnel from I-5 in Seattle. It's a tunnel through Downtown Seattle. And there's development above it. They did the same with WA 99 up there. The removed the Alaskan Way viaduct and lowered it underground via a tunnel.

[buildomaha]

I got the idea to make the I-480 viaduct a tunnel from I-5 in Seattle. It's a tunnel through Downtown Seattle. And there's development above it. They did the same with WA 99 up there. The removed the Alaskan Way viaduct and lowered it underground via a tunnel.

Biiiig waste of money to keep encouraging automobile usage. Alana. Way and Boston’s big did are examples not to follow. Instead, we should go the route of the embarcadero in SF.

[nebugeater]

I don't want to destroy anything. It was just a HYPOTHETICAL! I ask a perfectly harmless question and everyone just jumps down my throat and makes me out to be some evil, heartless monster.

We should be able to have thoughtful and mature discussions without being bullied by others.

If that response was bullying we have a totally different issue. The question was a completely ligament follow-up question. Maybe the wording was not perfect, but "Where would you route it" is a fine follow-up.

[nativeomahan]

I'm not sure this has been discussed before.

Here's a radical idea. Do away with I-480 from the junction with 75. Have the bridge end & traffic from the bridge just exit to Dodge. Get rid of the over head traffic entirely. That would open up blocks and blocks of land for development, combine downtown with north downtown.

Just a thought.

When the city can’t seem to even give away the vacant land where the old City Auditorium and UP headquarters once stood you would vacate a dozen or two dozen more city blocks? And expect them to be redeveloped for what? In how many generations?

[Renovator2559]

When the city can’t seem to even give away the vacant land where the old City Auditorium and UP headquarters once stood you would vacate a dozen or two dozen more city blocks? And expect them to be redeveloped for what? In how many generations?

Why would the city just give away the City Auditorium site, the block is huge and it would have not made sense to give it to just any developer. Now the Civic Auditorium site, has a project that will be special.

The UP site was close to being handed to HDR, but HDR chose to build in Aksarben.
Also most large businesses were opting to build along Dodge road; but now the urban core is on a renaissance, the many projects in the UC; will accelerate the growth in the downtown area and will attract future prospectors to build in an attractive area.

[ita]

When the city can’t seem to even give away the vacant land where the old City Auditorium and UP headquarters once stood you would vacate a dozen or two dozen more city blocks? And expect them to be redeveloped for what? In how many generations?

Why would the city just give away the City Auditorium site, the block is huge and it would have not made sense to give it to just any developer. Now the Civic Auditorium site, has a project that will be special.

The UP site was close to being handed to HDR, but HDR chose to build in Aksarben.
Also most large businesses were opting to build along Dodge road; but now the urban core is on a renaissance, the many projects in the UC; will accelerate the growth in the downtown area and will attract future prospectors to build in an attractive area.

A couple other thoughts about how UP and Civic Site compare to I-480. With both sites the City has very specific requirements with development. It's no secret that the City wants something significant in terms of height for the UP site. Not only that, but the City wanted a major office tenant and component to the project. The Civic Auditorium, initially, also had to have a major office tenant attached and seemed to have a similar requirement. The Mayor has been hinting to something with height but maybe not office at UP, and like Renovator said, Civic Site has something more concrete on the table. In my opinion the mere existence of I-480 is a negative for the Civic Site, particularly the north side of the site.

I think if the City was able to successfully take down the overpass and create new developable land with no height or use requirements, they would be developed pretty quickly. By that point, Builder's District and the Civic Site could be built out and the 24th street BRT and street car in operation. Creighton is still there doing their thing. I think those current/future developments would help get those lots developed. Also, by my count, taking down the overpass from 24th to 15th and the 20th street exit, per the Chamber's rendering, opens up 12 city blocks worth of land. It's a lot of land, but again, thinking about downtown 10 years from now, I think those lots would be really valuable and much easier to develop. I know, a lot of assumption in play, but assuming best case scenario and these 12 city blocks get scooped up and developed pretty quickly, ie. over 10-15 years.

[Greg S]

Why does the city have specific requirements for height at the UP site?

[Renovator2559]

Why does the city have specific requirements for height at the UP site?

I'm with the city, we want a variability in height but we want a tall building to take that spot, as the gap distance from FNBO tower is sufficient for another tall building

[ita]

Why does the city have specific requirements for height at the UP site?

Vanity, prestige, density, property tax value. I don't know. My understanding is the City has always wanted something skyline changing there, and that still seems to be the case. I think it's better to hold out rather than get another Gavilon building there, but that's just me.

[Omaha Cowboy]

Why does the city have specific requirements for height at the UP site?

Vanity, prestige, density, property tax value. I don't know. My understanding is the City has always wanted something skyline changing there, and that still seems to be the case. I think it's better to hold out rather than get another Gavilon building there, but that's just me.

This is correct..

The city has always wanted, and continues to want, a tall, skyline enhancing development on this land. Now more than ever, since the city has taken back ownership of the 1416 parcel, there will be no Gavilon type compromise..

I’m hoping we hear about some development proposals for this property before the end of the year…

Ciao..LiO…Peace

[mrsticka]

Remember what was done with I-40 in Oklahoma City through downtown? Or I-70 in Denver?

[thenewguy]

i came across this on a website:.



https://steppingintothemap.com/anthropo ... ems/show/9

interesting read....

[Louie]

Lol, this had to have been from the mid 90s with the arena in a harbor.

[Linkin5]

That would have been an unmitigated disaster with Missouri River flooding we’ve seen in the last 15 years.

[mrsticka]

I just want to say I really like what they city's done over the past 20+ years to clean up the riverside area downtown. Before it was just a huge ugly mess with warehouses, factories and a big trainyard. It was an eyesore. I'm sure most will agree with that.

It's kind of like Spokane before Expo '74.

[GenX]

i came across this on a website:.



https://steppingintothemap.com/anthropo ... ems/show/9

interesting read....

River walk between ASARCO and the river… sign me up!!

[mrsticka]

Here's how I think the roads in Downtown Omaha should've been built back in the 70's and 80's.



Of course, if they had, then downtown would definitely look much different today. Where would the ballpark and the arena have gone?

[Renovator2559]

Here's how I think the roads in Downtown Omaha should've been built back in the 70's and 80's.



Of course, if they had, then downtown would definitely look much different today. Where would the ballpark and the arena have gone?

But I really like the i480 curbing, giving onlookers different angle views as they drive trought i480.

While the i480 overpasses may pose as a barrier to the lower blocks below, I can't deny the fact that driving i480 at 55 mph, gives great views of the downtown.

If the i480 is to be turned into a bi-couplet as defined in the master plan, I don't think the views will be as great as a surface street.

[mrsticka]

Here's how I think the roads in Downtown Omaha should've been built back in the 70's and 80's.



Of course, if they had, then downtown would definitely look much different today. Where would the ballpark and the arena have gone?

But I really like the i480 curbing, giving onlookers different angle views as they drive trought i480.

While the i480 overpasses may pose as a barrier to the lower blocks below, I can't deny the fact that driving i480 at 55 mph, gives great views of the downtown.

If the i480 is to be turned into a bi-couplet as defined in the master plan, I don't think the views will be as great as a surface street.

If they were to remove the I-480 viaduct, then people won't be able to drive through downtown uninterrupted without having to stop and go. I suggested removing it in favor of perhaps lowering it underground like a tunnel similar to what they did with I-70 in Denver. That way, drivers can still drive through downtown uninterrupted.

[Renovator2559]

Here's how I think the roads in Downtown Omaha should've been built back in the 70's and 80's.



Of course, if they had, then downtown would definitely look much different today. Where would the ballpark and the arena have gone?

But I really like the i480 curbing, giving onlookers different angle views as they drive trought i480.

While the i480 overpasses may pose as a barrier to the lower blocks below, I can't deny the fact that driving i480 at 55 mph, gives great views of the downtown.

If the i480 is to be turned into a bi-couplet as defined in the master plan, I don't think the views will be as great as a surface street.

I suggested removing it in favor of perhaps lowering it underground like a tunnel similar to what they did with I-70 in Denver. That way, drivers can still drive through downtown uninterrupted without having to stop and go.

I think one of the places that is in need of being tunneled and would benefit the most, is Dodge St at midtown crossing. Midtown Crossing would no longer be bordered by Dodge street and the north would be connected via a pedestrian plaza and Midtown Crossing would get even more foot traffic.

[mrsticka]

Here's how I think the roads in Downtown Omaha should've been built back in the 70's and 80's.



Of course, if they had, then downtown would definitely look much different today. Where would the ballpark and the arena have gone?

But I really like the i480 curbing, giving onlookers different angle views as they drive trought i480.

While the i480 overpasses may pose as a barrier to the lower blocks below, I can't deny the fact that driving i480 at 55 mph, gives great views of the downtown.

If the i480 is to be turned into a bi-couplet as defined in the master plan, I don't think the views will be as great as a surface street.

I suggested removing it in favor of perhaps lowering it underground like a tunnel similar to what they did with I-70 in Denver. That way, drivers can still drive through downtown uninterrupted without having to stop and go.

I think one of the places that is in need of being tunneled and would benefit the most, is Dodge St at midtown crossing. Midtown Crossing would no longer be bordered by Dodge street and the north would be connected via a pedestrian plaza and Midtown Crossing would get even more foot traffic.

I've always felt that Dodge should've been 7 lanes (3 east, 3 west and a center turn lane) from downtown or midtown to 72nd. However, most folks on here disagreed with me.

[BRoss]

I've always felt that Dodge should've been 7 lanes (3 east, 3 west and a center turn lane) from downtown or midtown to 72nd. However, most folks on here disagreed with me.

I remember a proposal many years ago to widen this section to 6 or possibly even 8 lanes. The idea was to expand it to the south. I would have loved to see it, but since then they have really built up on the south side of Dodge to where it's no longer feasible (although it's arguable whether it was even back then).

[Renovator2559]

I've always felt that Dodge should've been 7 lanes (3 east, 3 west and a center turn lane) from downtown or midtown to 72nd. However, most folks on here disagreed with me.

While at first glance it may appear that making Dodge for the sake of adding more lanes would be the "sensible" thing to work. This would have handicapped the area further.

Adding yet another lane, is a bandaid solution that does not work.

Induced demand ends up reversing the so called benefits of adding more traffic bandwidth.

What we need is to expand and improve the public transit in the core so that there is much less traffic, which won't require or have the need of expensive lanes.
Wide streets end up making it difficult for pedestrians to cross.

I've always felt that Dodge should've been 7 lanes (3 east, 3 west and a center turn lane) from downtown or midtown to 72nd. However, most folks on here disagreed with me.

I remember a proposal many years ago to widen this section to 6 or possibly even 8 lanes. The idea was to expand it to the south. I would have loved to see it, but since then they have really built up on the south side of Dodge to where it's no longer feasible (although it's arguable whether it was even back then).

If the goal is to become as dead as Tulsa, then that would be ideal, Tulsa is littered with wide streets everywhere to the point that hardly anyone walks.

The time has come to make the pedestrian, public and car transit options in Omaha; symbiotic.

[Busguy2010]

I've always felt that Dodge should've been 7 lanes (3 east, 3 west and a center turn lane) from downtown or midtown to 72nd. However, most folks on here disagreed with me.

I remember a proposal many years ago to widen this section to 6 or possibly even 8 lanes. The idea was to expand it to the south. I would have loved to see it, but since then they have really built up on the south side of Dodge to where it's no longer feasible (although it's arguable whether it was even back then).

I really liked that idea too. I thought it was to make Dodge 3 lanes in each direction with a turn lane in the middle, which would have required adding 2 lanes. There was little to no room to even do that, so I think it was mostly a fantasy. The craziest part of it was to put in a West Dodge expressway style interchange at Saddle Creek. Though like mrsticka, I think it should have been done that way from the beginning, Dodge street was established well before car culture set in and I don't think it was ever anticipated to carry as much traffic as it does.

With the addition of ORBT, I actually prefer the idea of making the center lane a turn lane now. It's ridiculous to make a right turn loop just to take a left. That in itself puts more traffic onto side streets and the only other places you can "make a left" which are Happy Hollow and Saddle Creek. What percentage of traffic on that road even use the middle lane anywho? In my personal experience I'd guess maybe 20%? If that?

[Renovator2559]

It's no longer sustainable to think of building a city through the car culture lens. Other cities that built ugly, expensive, fast speed overpasses and have removed them. They have seen many more benefits and don't miss them.

It would have been traggic if Dodge Street would have been expanded just to appease suburbunites who have no regard of the pedestrian or walkable environments.

East Omaha does not want to turn into unwalkable islands that are not vibrant.
Many US cities in the past listened to what out of touch suburbanites had to say and they only ended up making their cities unwalkable, less economically viable and now we have messes to clean up from these progressive policies that went away from the traditional proper and urban ideas that have existed for millenia.

[mrsticka]

What then? Bus culture? Train culture?

Okay, all joking aside, cars aren't going anywhere anytime soon. The fact is we do need those roads like it or not.