Design Standards

[garyomaha]

Someday all these new 4-6 story apartments they are building in Omaha will be old as well.

Old isn't always unwanted in apartments just like with homes. Some older buildings are sought after, particularly ones with style. We have some classics right here in Omaha. I wonder if any of the current crop of apartments being built have style that might be desired in the future, or are they all about cost-savings?

[nativeomahan]

Someday all these new 4-6 story apartments they are building in Omaha will be old as well.

Old isn't always unwanted in apartments just like with homes. Some older buildings are sought after, particularly ones with style. We have some classics right here in Omaha. I wonder if any of the current crop of apartments being built have style that might be desired in the future, or are they all about cost-savings?

I think you have answered your own question.

[bldgengineer2015]

Here are the tif documents for the project.

https://planning.cityofomaha.org/images ... rch/10.pdf

[Cermak]

We are reaching overkill with these 4-6 story apartments. Pretty monotonous stuff. I would of rather of had the Village Inn restaurant there.

[ita]

I like the glut in these builds, from certain aspects. While I would like to move away from design homogeneity, residential projects of these nature can be helpful to the overall market. If we are looking at it from a supply and demand side, the continual building of midrises will help quell a shortage of housing and rocketing increases in rent.

From the perspective of having only 4-5 story residential buildings, we are building code restricted. Developers and investors looking to maximize their dime are building up to the maximum number of stories allowed for stick building. I hope the City moves quickly to adopt the 2021 IBC that increases heavy timber building heights and maximum stories and to promote higher midrise apartments.

[Garrett]

Most of NYC and Chicago is 3/4/5 story buildings.

[Athomsfere]

Most of NYC and Chicago is 3/4/5 story buildings.

I think most of the gripe isn't that it's 4 story buildings.

It's that it is miles and miles of them being built at the same time, and in the same style. No one is taking even the slightest risk with architectural style.

[Garrett]

Most of NYC and Chicago is 3/4/5 story buildings.

I think most of the gripe isn't that it's 4 story buildings.

It's that it is miles and miles of them being built at the same time, and in the same style. No one is taking even the slightest risk with architectural style.

Well let me tell you about NYC and Chicago then haha

[Louie]

Most of NYC and Chicago is 3/4/5 story buildings.

I think most of the gripe isn't that it's 4 story buildings.

It's that it is miles and miles of them being built at the same time, and in the same style. No one is taking even the slightest risk with architectural style.

Well let me tell you about NYC and Chicago then haha

I mean those at least have character and charm. Straight lines on standard issue 4 story complexes don't usually elicit that 'ooh neat' feeling.

[Garrett]

Most of NYC and Chicago is 3/4/5 story buildings.

I think most of the gripe isn't that it's 4 story buildings.

It's that it is miles and miles of them being built at the same time, and in the same style. No one is taking even the slightest risk with architectural style.

Well let me tell you about NYC and Chicago then haha

I mean those at least have character and charm. Straight lines on standard issue 4 story complexes don't usually elicit that 'ooh neat' feeling.

They have character because they're old. Things gain character as they age and new architecture styles supplant the old. Jobbers Canyon was referred to as a bunch of old ugly red brick buildings, and back when they were demolished most of Omaha shared the sentiment.

[Busguy2010]

They have character because they're old. Things gain character as they age and new architecture styles supplant the old. Jobbers Canyon was referred to as a bunch of old ugly red brick buildings, and back when they were demolished most of Omaha shared the sentiment.

I'd argue its more because they have details that they just don't seem to try and make an effort to have anymore. I'll give architects of the last who knows how long, that they have to capability to incorporate depth, and thus some texture, but so much of what you see anymore is a sum of straight lines. I don't mean everything, just so much of new construction is this way. You never see anything ornate or anything with remote character anymore.

[Louie]

They have character because they're old. Things gain character as they age and new architecture styles supplant the old. Jobbers Canyon was referred to as a bunch of old ugly red brick buildings, and back when they were demolished most of Omaha shared the sentiment.

I'd argue its more because they have details that they just don't seem to try and make an effort to have anymore. I'll give architects of the last who knows how long, that they have to capability to incorporate depth, and thus some texture, but so much of what you see anymore is a sum of straight lines. I don't mean everything, just so much of new construction is this way. You never see anything ornate or anything with remote character anymore.

This was my thought ^

[garyomaha]

So, are we looking for something more like this?



(Vancouver House, 49-story residential Tower on Granville Street, Canada)

[FirebirdEngineer]

They have character because they're old. Things gain character as they age and new architecture styles supplant the old. Jobbers Canyon was referred to as a bunch of old ugly red brick buildings, and back when they were demolished most of Omaha shared the sentiment.

I'd argue its more because they have details that they just don't seem to try and make an effort to have anymore. I'll give architects of the last who knows how long, that they have to capability to incorporate depth, and thus some texture, but so much of what you see anymore is a sum of straight lines. I don't mean everything, just so much of new construction is this way. You never see anything ornate or anything with remote character anymore.

A lot, and I mean a lot of apartment complexes lately look like they all come from the same design template package in Revit. It's lazy, and no amount of years and weathering will give that look of digital sameness any appreciable "character" that couldn't be sprayed off with a power washer.

[Athomsfere]

They have character because they're old. Things gain character as they age and new architecture styles supplant the old. Jobbers Canyon was referred to as a bunch of old ugly red brick buildings, and back when they were demolished most of Omaha shared the sentiment.

I'd argue its more because they have details that they just don't seem to try and make an effort to have anymore. I'll give architects of the last who knows how long, that they have to capability to incorporate depth, and thus some texture, but so much of what you see anymore is a sum of straight lines. I don't mean everything, just so much of new construction is this way. You never see anything ornate or anything with remote character anymore.

A lot, and I mean a lot of apartment complexes lately look like they all come from the same design template package in Revit. It's lazy, and no amount of years and weathering will give that look of digital sameness any appreciable "character" that couldn't be sprayed off with a power washer.

This is my thought too.

I mean we have decades of styles, that we can see a building and say: "Thats X style from around the 19yys, notice the ______ which is perfect for the era but also the _________ which was a stark departure".

Maybe I'll be wrong, but I fear in 100 years, any of these buildings still standing will just be "look another 2020's box".

[Busguy2010]

The fact that I can't think of anything positive to fill in your blanks tells me your fears will probably be realized.

Anybody else come up with something?

[nebport5]

I think a significant cause for the lack of character in modern design and architecture comes down to cost. The old saying, "they don't make 'em like they used to" is true because of cheaper materials being used. Remember developers are primarily motivated by money rather than aesthetics. Those flats in NYC and Chicago are beautiful. I wish that were the design for the 38th and Dewey project. Meanwhile, I can't imagine wanting to live right off of Dodge St surrounding by a sea of cement.

[Busguy2010]

Where are the cost savings going though? If cost of living is such a big issue, then how did they have buildings with character 100+ years ago when it was not only way more time consuming, more difficult, and respectively just as costly if not more costly than what is being built today? I think I have a few answers, but would like to read everybody's take on that.

[garyomaha]

One thing that comes to mind for me is, for an intricate building design, it requires craftspeople of a higher degree up and down the line, from architects with an eye for a certain style to project managers who can order the proper materials to fulfill that vision, to masons who can sculpt intricate designs, and on and on. Not merely a sheetrock installer who can do straight walls -- very professionally, and very carefully -- but still, rather standard things. It might require paying more to bring someone in from out of town for a special task. Or, perhaps we already have all these highly-skilled people in the city but they would still command a higher price than a "standard journeyman" would.

[ricko]

Design is something I care about, but I don't know a lot about construction costs. I know it might not be high on the list for some developers, but I wonder sometimes how much effort goes into design. I guess architects have their own aesthetic, and that might not align with what I like, but I guess it's their money and their client's business/subdivision. That being said, my favorite new-ish building in North Downtown is still the one that houses Blatt Beer & Table. The new Cambria Hotel looks cheap compared to Cambrias in other cities. They were probably working within that particular hotel group's financial parameters, dunno-----and don't get me started on the Hilton (at least it's next to the arena and convention center, which I think is a classic modern design).

[ricko]

One thing that comes to mind for me is, for an intricate building design, it requires craftspeople of a higher degree up and down the line, from architects with an eye for a certain style to project managers who can order the proper materials to fulfill that vision, to masons who can sculpt intricate designs, and on and on. Not merely a sheetrock installer who can do straight walls -- very professionally, and very carefully -- but still, rather standard things. It might require paying more to bring someone in from out of town for a special task. Or, perhaps we already have all these highly-skilled people in the city but they would still command a higher price than a "standard journeyman" would.

There are very few stonecutters left in the U.S.. When the National Cathedral was finishing up in the 1990's, they had to import them from Italy. Sad.

[nebport5]

Not to veer into a potentially touchy topic but I'd argue overpopulation is a factor too. I'm not saying Omaha particularly is such, but the more of us humans there are the less resources there are to go around. Higher demand equals higher prices and that extends well beyond development/construction. Meat prices for example will only continue to rise. Maybe we don't care to think of it everyday but commodities and consumption are not infinite.

[Arch]

Design is something I care about, but I don't know a lot about construction costs. I know it might not be high on the list for some developers, but I wonder sometimes how much effort goes into design. I guess architects have their own aesthetic, and that might not align with what I like, but I guess it's their money and their client's business/subdivision. That being said, my favorite new-ish building in North Downtown is still the one that houses Blatt Beer & Table. The new Cambria Hotel looks cheap compared to Cambrias in other cities. They were probably working within that particular hotel group's financial parameters, dunno-----and don't get me started on the Hilton (at least it's next to the arena and convention center, which I think is a classic modern design).

Just take a look at who the architect is on this project, not exactly holding to any "design standards" in any of their projects. This one is rather hideous....

[bigredmed1]

Was at the Hilton for a Make a Wish fundraiser Saturday. It is quite compact. Reminded me a lot of hotels in London and Amsterdam that I have been in for meetings. Neither were city center. Both were kind of packed in (by Heathrow or by Shiphol airports). The interior is generic, but efficient.

[GetUrban]

Design is something I care about, but I don't know a lot about construction costs. I know it might not be high on the list for some developers, but I wonder sometimes how much effort goes into design. I guess architects have their own aesthetic, and that might not align with what I like, but I guess it's their money and their client's business/subdivision. That being said, my favorite new-ish building in North Downtown is still the one that houses Blatt Beer & Table. The new Cambria Hotel looks cheap compared to Cambrias in other cities. They were probably working within that particular hotel group's financial parameters, dunno-----and don't get me started on the Hilton (at least it's next to the arena and convention center, which I think is a classic modern design).

Just take a look at who the architect is on this project, not exactly holding to any "design standards" in any of their projects. This one is rather hideous....

So, what specific “Design Standards” do you propose should be followed and still have a feasible, affordable project on this site? Do you think a specific “style” of architecture should be dictated somehow? If so, by whom? I think you can look at any era of apartment building design and find a lot of similarities between any number of buildings built in that era.

[nativeomahan]

In my travels (9 states this year, plus México) I see lots of new construction projects. IMO the aesthetic quality of new construction in Omaha remains mired at the very bottom of the pack.

[legato9]

In my travels (9 states this year, plus México) I see lots of new construction projects. IMO the aesthetic quality of new construction in Omaha remains mired at the very bottom of the pack.

Completely agree. And comparing Omaha to other places in the US isn’t saying much. It’s so sad that Americans simply do not care about aesthetics anymore. Boring buildings, boring cars, boring furniture, boring clothing, awful art…

I really hate saying that.

When I go to other countries, I look at the buildings going up and always think, “That could never get built in the US.” Sigh.

But you’re right, Omaha is particularly bland-looking (but a great place to live overall). I have no clue why that is.

[Bomaha]

I would LOVE for the Midwest to start incorporating mass timber into the aesthetics of new buildings. Yes, I know there are the few "test" cases now, but I hope it could become much more mainstream in the near future.

[GetUrban]

In my travels (9 states this year, plus México) I see lots of new construction projects. IMO the aesthetic quality of new construction in Omaha remains mired at the very bottom of the pack.

Completely agree. And comparing Omaha to other places in the US isn’t saying much. It’s so sad that Americans simply do not care about aesthetics anymore. Boring buildings, boring cars, boring furniture, boring clothing, awful art…

I really hate saying that.

When I go to other countries, I look at the buildings going up and always think, “That could never get built in the US.” Sigh.

But you’re right, Omaha is particularly bland-looking (but a great place to live overall). I have no clue why that is.

The main problem in Omaha is most of the time the powers that be that hold all of the purse strings do not demand cutting edge “high design” from the local firms they hire, or in most cases they aren’t willing to pay the higher design fees international firms demand. Overall, I think the majority of people don’t care or don’t realize what it takes to make cutting edge design come to fruition. 90% of the time people are content with, and are consumers of run-of-the-mail plane jane design. Most people don’t realize that great design can happen here too, not just in LA, NYC, Chicago, Paris, London, Beijing, Dubai, etc. People need to ask for it first before they can get it, or demand it if they are willing to pay for it.

[PWL73316]

Cars are boring because boring looking cars are aerodynamically efficient and use less fuel. The same boring designs are used all over the world for that reason.

[ita]

In my travels (9 states this year, plus México) I see lots of new construction projects. IMO the aesthetic quality of new construction in Omaha remains mired at the very bottom of the pack.

Completely agree. And comparing Omaha to other places in the US isn’t saying much. It’s so sad that Americans simply do not care about aesthetics anymore. Boring buildings, boring cars, boring furniture, boring clothing, awful art…

I really hate saying that.

When I go to other countries, I look at the buildings going up and always think, “That could never get built in the US.” Sigh.

But you’re right, Omaha is particularly bland-looking (but a great place to live overall). I have no clue why that is.

The main problem in Omaha is most of the time the powers that be that hold all of the purse strings do not demand cutting edge “high design” from the local firms they hire, or in most cases they aren’t willing to pay the higher design fees international firms demand. Overall, I think the majority of people don’t care or don’t realize what it takes to make cutting edge design come to fruition. 90% of the time people are content with, and are consumers of run-of-the-mail plane jane design. Most people don’t realize that great design can happen here too, not just in LA, NYC, Chicago, Paris, London, Beijing, Dubai, etc. People need to ask for it first before they can get it, or demand it if they are willing to pay for it.

I love the Joslyn modern art extension rendering because they went with something out of the ordinary for Omaha. It might not suit everyone's taste, but darn it, it doesn't look like anything else in the City. It's not totally out there in architectural design, but enough that I think it will be a standout.

[NEDodger]

Agreed on that. I'm excited to see the Joslyn extension completed.

[Athomsfere]

In my travels (9 states this year, plus México) I see lots of new construction projects. IMO the aesthetic quality of new construction in Omaha remains mired at the very bottom of the pack.

Completely agree. And comparing Omaha to other places in the US isn’t saying much. It’s so sad that Americans simply do not care about aesthetics anymore. Boring buildings, boring cars, boring furniture, boring clothing, awful art…

I really hate saying that.

When I go to other countries, I look at the buildings going up and always think, “That could never get built in the US.” Sigh.

But you’re right, Omaha is particularly bland-looking (but a great place to live overall). I have no clue why that is.

I do think at least some of the things mentioned here are also because Omaha been built around the car.

I tend to feel we don't build interesting facades, because they don't matter as you drive by. And we don't walk by these things. Maybe we wouldn't cut the cost of basic styling if it meant people who walked by it would see intricate details and think "That would be a nice place to live".

[GetUrban]

In my travels (9 states this year, plus México) I see lots of new construction projects. IMO the aesthetic quality of new construction in Omaha remains mired at the very bottom of the pack.

Completely agree. And comparing Omaha to other places in the US isn’t saying much. It’s so sad that Americans simply do not care about aesthetics anymore. Boring buildings, boring cars, boring furniture, boring clothing, awful art…

I really hate saying that.

When I go to other countries, I look at the buildings going up and always think, “That could never get built in the US.” Sigh.

But you’re right, Omaha is particularly bland-looking (but a great place to live overall). I have no clue why that is.

I do think at least some of the things mentioned here are also because Omaha been built around the car.

I tend to feel we don't build interesting facades, because they don't matter as you drive by. And we don't walk by these things. Maybe we wouldn't cut the cost of basic styling if it meant people who walked by it would see intricate details and think "That would be a nice place to live".

You bring up a good point about people not really being able to see much of the fine details in the architecture as they move quickly past most of the buildings on their way to a destination. To be noticeable from a car, the buildings need to have larger bolder features to catch the eye. But, I think what you see when you finally arrive is equally important. You have a good opportunity to look at finer details of a building facade as you enter a building on foot as a pedestrian, unless you enter from a parking garage adjacent to or under the building. Most of us spend the majority of our time inside buildings with views to the outside, hopefully. The interior details are very important too. In my opinion, the new Joslyn addition makes a bold design statement on a larger scale from the outside, but once you’re inside you can catch glimpses of the finely-detailed original building as well as the unusual detailing of the new addition. So the point is details are important at many different scales, not only what you see from a moving car. Just some thoughts to ponder.

[Athomsfere]

You bring up a good point about people not really being able to see much of the fine details in the architecture as they move quickly past most of the buildings on their way to a destination. To be noticeable from a car, the buildings need to have larger bolder features to catch the eye. But, I think what you see when you finally arrive is equally important. You have a good opportunity to look at finer details of a building facade as you enter a building on foot as a pedestrian, unless you enter from a parking garage adjacent to or under the building. Most of us spend the majority of our time inside buildings with views to the outside, hopefully. The interior details are very important too. In my opinion, the new Joslyn addition makes a bold design statement on a larger scale from the outside, but once you’re inside you can catch glimpses of the finely-detailed original building as well as the unusual detailing of the new addition. So the point is details are important at many different scales, not only what you see from a moving car. Just some thoughts to ponder.

On that note, I do hope Omaha starts to incorporate human scale architecture in it's design standards.

Random interesting article though: https://www.archdaily.com/877602/jan-ge ... n-scale-is

I have studied this topic for a long time and I believe that in the last 50 years, architects and planners have forgotten what a good human scale is. In the old days, they knew very well what it was.

[Louie]

You bring up a good point about people not really being able to see much of the fine details in the architecture as they move quickly past most of the buildings on their way to a destination. To be noticeable from a car, the buildings need to have larger bolder features to catch the eye. But, I think what you see when you finally arrive is equally important. You have a good opportunity to look at finer details of a building facade as you enter a building on foot as a pedestrian, unless you enter from a parking garage adjacent to or under the building. Most of us spend the majority of our time inside buildings with views to the outside, hopefully. The interior details are very important too. In my opinion, the new Joslyn addition makes a bold design statement on a larger scale from the outside, but once you’re inside you can catch glimpses of the finely-detailed original building as well as the unusual detailing of the new addition. So the point is details are important at many different scales, not only what you see from a moving car. Just some thoughts to ponder.

On that note, I do hope Omaha starts to incorporate human scale architecture in it's design standards.

Random interesting article though: https://www.archdaily.com/877602/jan-ge ... n-scale-is

I have studied this topic for a long time and I believe that in the last 50 years, architects and planners have forgotten what a good human scale is. In the old days, they knew very well what it was.

Excellent read

[Erik]

So, are we looking for something more like this?



(Vancouver House, 49-story residential Tower on Granville Street, Canada)

Id much rather take a bunch of 5 to 7 story buildings.. that design is a |expletive| nightmare

[TitosBuritoBarn]

I agree that the lack of great design is a national problem more than an Omaha one. Even the cities that were previously mentioned as pumping out great architecture - Chicago, NYC, San Francisco, Seattle, etc. - most of it is few and far between a lot of |expletive| with uninspired designs and no thought for urban design or street life.

Every other western nation and at least the capital cities of non-western nations are blowing us out of the water with architectural design and streetscaping. When international cities go to redevelop unutilized or underutilized sections of town as we have attempted to do locally with Aksarben or north Downtown, they produce districts, for example, like La Confluence in Lyon France:




...or Bispevika in Oslo, Norway:


I can think of similar large scale redevelopment projects in the US that are fine - Mission Bay in San Francisco, South Lake Union in Seattle, - but not spectacular. Only Hudson Yards in New York in my opinion has been as bold, innovative, and utilizes comprehensive planning and design as what you'd find elsewhere.

[GetUrban]

I agree that the lack of great design is a national problem more than an Omaha one. Even the cities that were previously mentioned as pumping out great architecture - Chicago, NYC, San Francisco, Seattle, etc. - most of it is few and far between a lot of |expletive| with uninspired designs and no thought for urban design or street life.

Every other western nation and at least the capital cities of non-western nations are blowing us out of the water with architectural design and streetscaping. When international cities go to redevelop unutilized or underutilized sections of town as we have attempted to do locally with Aksarben or north Downtown, they produce districts, for example, like La Confluence in Lyon France:




...or Bispevika in Oslo, Norway:


I can think of similar large scale redevelopment projects in the US that are fine - Mission Bay in San Francisco, South Lake Union in Seattle, - but not spectacular. Only Hudson Yards in New York in my opinion has been as bold, innovative, and utilizes comprehensive planning and design as what you'd find elsewhere.

Thanks for showing us and mentioning some great examples. Speaking for myself, I really need to get out of Omaha and especially the U.S. more often! I haven’t been to Europe since the late 70’s, which makes me sad. You really have to experience great cities with all of your senses in person to realize the full effect. But it’s up to us to spread the word and demand better from our architects, planners, and ourselves, as some of you are doing here,

[SwedishChef]

In my travels (9 states this year, plus México) I see lots of new construction projects. IMO the aesthetic quality of new construction in Omaha remains mired at the very bottom of the pack.

Completely agree. And comparing Omaha to other places in the US isn’t saying much. It’s so sad that Americans simply do not care about aesthetics anymore. Boring buildings, boring cars, boring furniture, boring clothing, awful art…

I really hate saying that.

When I go to other countries, I look at the buildings going up and always think, “That could never get built in the US.” Sigh.

But you’re right, Omaha is particularly bland-looking (but a great place to live overall). I have no clue why that is.

This is a topic I'm fascinated by and kinda fires me up. What happened to beautiful spaces and cityscapes? Is it the dynamism of a city that inspires great design (hence why NYC, Chicago, San Francisco had eras of fantastic design?), the geographic features of the region, or something deliberate on the part of the residents, and thus the type of residents that live in these places? And why now the general design and art malaise overall? I think it's plaguing most industrialized countries. I've traveled pretty widely, and for all the insane wealth we have now (relative to human history), I haven't seen one new "beautiful" space pop up anywhere. Maybe a couple small examples in Western Europe and Singapore, but that's about it.

I've been of the mind that cities like Omaha who lack inspiring topographies (no mountains, lakes, oceanfronts, etc.) should make up for their relative lack of natural beauty by creating their own beauty. More emphasis was placed on this in earlier eras when aesthetics and appearances were more highly valued (I mean, look at how people dressed day-to-day versus now). But instead cities like Omaha have resigned themselves to blandness. It's like we feel we don't deserve to surround ourselves with beauty; or, even worse, we don't know how to create beauty.

So there's this malaise, and then you throw in all the other things working against good design and infrastructure building: construction and material costs, regulation, the lack of skilled craftsmen, and the dominant trends in architectural design. My best friend is an architect, and we've had a lot of discussions about this. She does believe architecture as both an academic and professional field is very much stuck, with the only innovation coming in just how much more complex math you can squeeze out of Revit to make the most unconventional design (which is why most high-profile designs now are just wild shapes - it's essentially just a computer telling you what you can get away with from an engineering and strength of materials perspective). She has some hope that 3D printing can help lower the costs around adding ornamentation and other elements that have been poo-poo'd by modern architects.

Definitely a nut that won't be cracked any time soon.