Urban Transit: Transportation and Development

[stadsborgare]

Urban density in our city's core = less available parking/but more transit options - that is our city's future, if we are doing things right.

[skip]

I think people are forgetting that almost half of this building will be parking. There is only 5 floors of actual apartments/condos which is very normal.

[mcarch]

Urban density in our city's core = less available parking/but more transit options - that is our city's future, if we are doing things right.

You forget that Omaha isn't doing things right in terms of transportation (getting there yes, but it shoots its foot and causes harm to itself for future expansion). Half the city lives in West Omaha, as do I. I love to go to those areas, but Parking is starting to become an issue.

I'd elaborate more on the transportation issue, but that goes into the Streetcar and its ending point/route as well as the people I've talked to (not against it, but think its a waste of time since its not far enough for actual transportation).

[PWL73316]

Urban density in our city's core = less available parking/but more transit options - that is our city's future, if we are doing things right.

You forget that Omaha isn't doing things right in terms of transportation (getting there yes, but it shoots its foot and causes harm to itself for future expansion). Half the city lives in West Omaha, as do I. I love to go to those areas, but Parking is starting to become an issue.

I'd elaborate more on the transportation issue, but that goes into the Streetcar and its ending point/route as well as the people I've talked to (not against it, but think its a waste of time since its not far enough for actual transportation).

Unfortunately it often takes parking getting terrible before people will even consider investing in public transportation. Scarce parking is no reason to stop development. If it's truly bad, development will stop itself.

The Streetcar is going through all the densest and most pedestrianized parts of Omaha and still took 20 years to get off the ground at its current scope (hopefully). Calling it a waste of time because it's not the L is telling on yourself at this point.

[Louie]

Urban density in our city's core = less available parking/but more transit options - that is our city's future, if we are doing things right.

You forget that Omaha isn't doing things right in terms of transportation (getting there yes, but it shoots its foot and causes harm to itself for future expansion). Half the city lives in West Omaha, as do I. I love to go to those areas, but Parking is starting to become an issue.

I'd elaborate more on the transportation issue, but that goes into the Streetcar and its ending point/route as well as the people I've talked to (not against it, but think its a waste of time since its not far enough for actual transportation).

Unfortunately it often takes parking getting terrible before people will even consider investing in public transportation. Scarce parking is no reason to stop development. If it's truly bad, development will stop itself.

The Streetcar is going through all the densest and most pedestrianized parts of Omaha and still took 20 years to get off the ground at its current scope (hopefully). Calling it a waste of time because it's not the L is telling on yourself at this point.

Great point. If you can offer downtown to blackstone public transit, it’s going to get used. Lord knows I’ll be on it.

[Athomsfere]

Urban density in our city's core = less available parking/but more transit options - that is our city's future, if we are doing things right.

You forget that Omaha isn't doing things right in terms of transportation (getting there yes, but it shoots its foot and causes harm to itself for future expansion). Half the city lives in West Omaha, as do I. I love to go to those areas, but Parking is starting to become an issue.

I'd elaborate more on the transportation issue, but that goes into the Streetcar and its ending point/route as well as the people I've talked to (not against it, but think its a waste of time since its not far enough for actual transportation).

Unfortunately it often takes parking getting terrible before people will even consider investing in public transportation. Scarce parking is no reason to stop development. If it's truly bad, development will stop itself.

The Streetcar is going through all the densest and most pedestrianized parts of Omaha and still took 20 years to get off the ground at its current scope (hopefully). Calling it a waste of time because it's not the L is telling on yourself at this point.

Great point. If you can offer downtown to blackstone public transit, it’s going to get used. Lord knows I’ll be on it.

Me too! ORBT to blackstone, and then streetcar to get around from there.

[Louie]

Urban density in our city's core = less available parking/but more transit options - that is our city's future, if we are doing things right.

You forget that Omaha isn't doing things right in terms of transportation (getting there yes, but it shoots its foot and causes harm to itself for future expansion). Half the city lives in West Omaha, as do I. I love to go to those areas, but Parking is starting to become an issue.

I'd elaborate more on the transportation issue, but that goes into the Streetcar and its ending point/route as well as the people I've talked to (not against it, but think its a waste of time since its not far enough for actual transportation).

Don't forget, you chose to live out west.

[nebport5]

Urban density in our city's core = less available parking/but more transit options - that is our city's future, if we are doing things right.

You forget that Omaha isn't doing things right in terms of transportation (getting there yes, but it shoots its foot and causes harm to itself for future expansion). Half the city lives in West Omaha, as do I. I love to go to those areas, but Parking is starting to become an issue.

I'd elaborate more on the transportation issue, but that goes into the Streetcar and its ending point/route as well as the people I've talked to (not against it, but think its a waste of time since its not far enough for actual transportation).

True on Omaha not doing transportation right but don't forget the streetcar is meant to be a development catalyst, not a transportation solution for West O. Light rail would be the answer but we all know that isn't going to happen. And yes, people in downtown and midtown will use the streetcar for transportation, but as others have stated there's a reason people chose where they live.

[Louie]

Urban density in our city's core = less available parking/but more transit options - that is our city's future, if we are doing things right.

You forget that Omaha isn't doing things right in terms of transportation (getting there yes, but it shoots its foot and causes harm to itself for future expansion). Half the city lives in West Omaha, as do I. I love to go to those areas, but Parking is starting to become an issue.

I'd elaborate more on the transportation issue, but that goes into the Streetcar and its ending point/route as well as the people I've talked to (not against it, but think its a waste of time since its not far enough for actual transportation).

True on Omaha not doing transportation right but don't forget the streetcar is meant to be a development catalyst, not a transportation solution for West O. Light rail would be the answer but we all know that isn't going to happen. And yes, people in downtown and midtown will use the streetcar for transportation, but as others have stated there's a reason people chose where they live.

Bingo, I chose to live on the east side of town, in a smaller square foot house at a higher cost than out west for a myriad of reasons. Whether its walkability, future access to better public transit options, more diversity, more restaurant, bars, unique shops...the benefits far outweighed the higher cost of the home for my family.

[Athomsfere]

True on Omaha not doing transportation right but don't forget the streetcar is meant to be a development catalyst, not a transportation solution for West O.

Man, this is such a terrible take. It's meant to be a transportation solution for part of the core, the circulator for some last mile multi-transit options. Sure it benefits the core far more than some suburban hellscape in West O. Is there a problem with that?

Sure the short term benefits are for MoO, and other businesses like UNMC in the core, but that doesn't mean it isn't transit.

Light rail would be the answer but we all know that isn't going to happen. And yes, people in downtown and midtown will use the streetcar for transportation, but as others have stated there's a reason people chose where they live.

Light rail in the US (and Canada) is scary. I'm all for it, but not if we build it like the DRT or Vancouver's lines with massive single purpose park and rides.

[TransitOriented]

It's 100% a development catalyst

[OracleOfOmaha]

True on Omaha not doing transportation right but don't forget the streetcar is meant to be a development catalyst, not a transportation solution for West O.

Man, this is such a terrible take. It's meant to be a transportation solution for part of the core, the circulator for some last mile multi-transit options. Sure it benefits the core far more than some suburban hellscape in West O. Is there a problem with that?

Sure the short term benefits are for MoO, and other businesses like UNMC in the core, but that doesn't mean it isn't transit.

Light rail would be the answer but we all know that isn't going to happen. And yes, people in downtown and midtown will use the streetcar for transportation, but as others have stated there's a reason people chose where they live.

Light rail in the US (and Canada) is scary. I'm all for it, but not if we build it like the DRT or Vancouver's lines with massive single purpose park and rides.

It's not a terrible take. Ridership numbers will never justify the cost to build it. The associated development and tax generation that comes with it, is how this project gets the green light. Of course, transportation around the core is a major benefit to the city, but that alone is not a financial winner.

Even in Denver, every light rail stop has new development all around it. If that development didn't occur, there would be a lot less stops on the lines.

And light rail outside of the core is inherently park and ride. There isn't enough density in countless cities to not do park and rides. The rails extending outside of a city core and built for park and ride basically (with the hope that denser development comes around those stops, as mentioned previously in Denver)

[Garrett]

True on Omaha not doing transportation right but don't forget the streetcar is meant to be a development catalyst, not a transportation solution for West O.

Man, this is such a terrible take. It's meant to be a transportation solution for part of the core, the circulator for some last mile multi-transit options. Sure it benefits the core far more than some suburban hellscape in West O. Is there a problem with that?

Sure the short term benefits are for MoO, and other businesses like UNMC in the core, but that doesn't mean it isn't transit.

Light rail would be the answer but we all know that isn't going to happen. And yes, people in downtown and midtown will use the streetcar for transportation, but as others have stated there's a reason people chose where they live.

Light rail in the US (and Canada) is scary. I'm all for it, but not if we build it like the DRT or Vancouver's lines with massive single purpose park and rides.

It's not a terrible take. Ridership numbers will never justify the cost to build it. The associated development and tax generation that comes with it, is how this project gets the green light. Of course, transportation around the core is a major benefit to the city, but that alone is not a financial winner.

Even in Denver, every light rail stop has new development all around it. If that development didn't occur, there would be a lot less stops on the lines.

And light rail outside of the core is inherently park and ride. There isn't enough density in countless cities to not do park and rides. The rails extending outside of a city core and built for park and ride basically (with the hope that denser development comes around those stops, as mentioned previously in Denver)

Park and Ride is the least efficient way to build transit though. In a world where Omaha gets try LRT it needs to come with good dense development around stations, or there's really no point to building it.

This youtube video gives a good general overview of why Park & Rides are just bad.

[Athomsfere]

True on Omaha not doing transportation right but don't forget the streetcar is meant to be a development catalyst, not a transportation solution for West O.

Man, this is such a terrible take. It's meant to be a transportation solution for part of the core, the circulator for some last mile multi-transit options. Sure it benefits the core far more than some suburban hellscape in West O. Is there a problem with that?

Sure the short term benefits are for MoO, and other businesses like UNMC in the core, but that doesn't mean it isn't transit.

Light rail would be the answer but we all know that isn't going to happen. And yes, people in downtown and midtown will use the streetcar for transportation, but as others have stated there's a reason people chose where they live.

Light rail in the US (and Canada) is scary. I'm all for it, but not if we build it like the DRT or Vancouver's lines with massive single purpose park and rides.

It's not a terrible take. Ridership numbers will never justify the cost to build it. The associated development and tax generation that comes with it, is how this project gets the green light. Of course, transportation around the core is a major benefit to the city, but that alone is not a financial winner.

Even in Denver, every light rail stop has new development all around it. If that development didn't occur, there would be a lot less stops on the lines.

And light rail outside of the core is inherently park and ride. There isn't enough density in countless cities to not do park and rides. The rails extending outside of a city core and built for park and ride basically (with the hope that denser development comes around those stops, as mentioned previously in Denver)

Park and Ride is the least efficient way to build transit though. In a world where Omaha gets try LRT it needs to come with good dense development around stations, or there's really no point to building it.

This youtube video gives a good general overview of why Park & Rides are just bad.

Thanks for that! And exactly my point. If we go LRT I want it to be useful, and not the American style.

[Athomsfere]

True on Omaha not doing transportation right but don't forget the streetcar is meant to be a development catalyst, not a transportation solution for West O.

Man, this is such a terrible take. It's meant to be a transportation solution for part of the core, the circulator for some last mile multi-transit options. Sure it benefits the core far more than some suburban hellscape in West O. Is there a problem with that?

Sure the short term benefits are for MoO, and other businesses like UNMC in the core, but that doesn't mean it isn't transit.

Light rail would be the answer but we all know that isn't going to happen. And yes, people in downtown and midtown will use the streetcar for transportation, but as others have stated there's a reason people chose where they live.

Light rail in the US (and Canada) is scary. I'm all for it, but not if we build it like the DRT or Vancouver's lines with massive single purpose park and rides.

It's not a terrible take. Ridership numbers will never justify the cost to build it. The associated development and tax generation that comes with it, is how this project gets the green light. Of course, transportation around the core is a major benefit to the city, but that alone is not a financial winner.

Even in Denver, every light rail stop has new development all around it. If that development didn't occur, there would be a lot less stops on the lines.

And light rail outside of the core is inherently park and ride. There isn't enough density in countless cities to not do park and rides. The rails extending outside of a city core and built for park and ride basically (with the hope that denser development comes around those stops, as mentioned previously in Denver)

We don't build transit to turn a huge profit, just like we lose money on every street on some cul-de-sac. At least with the street car we get decent transit for that part of the core, with less of the financial strain of a suburb.

[Louie]

Every suburban subdivision is eventually a net financial negative on the ledger for a city due to disproportionate upkeep costs.

[Garrett]

Every suburban subdivision is eventually a net financial negative on the ledger for a city due to disproportionate upkeep costs.

Today is just YouTube link day for me

[Louie]

Every suburban subdivision is eventually a net financial negative on the ledger for a city due to disproportionate upkeep costs.

Today is just YouTube link day for me

I watched that one already lol. But yeah, it's a pretty straightforward fact at this point. I even remember learning about this in Urban Geo back at UNL.

[Louie]

As they say, socialism for the rich, rugged individualism for the poor.

[Athomsfere]

Every suburban subdivision is eventually a net financial negative on the ledger for a city due to disproportionate upkeep costs.

Today is just YouTube link day for me

Not a problem here! You are preaching exactly what I want Omaha to take to heart and build towards.

[nebport5]

True on Omaha not doing transportation right but don't forget the streetcar is meant to be a development catalyst, not a transportation solution for West O.

Man, this is such a terrible take. It's meant to be a transportation solution for part of the core, the circulator for some last mile multi-transit options. Sure it benefits the core far more than some suburban hellscape in West O. Is there a problem with that?

Sure the short term benefits are for MoO, and other businesses like UNMC in the core, but that doesn't mean it isn't transit.

Light rail would be the answer but we all know that isn't going to happen. And yes, people in downtown and midtown will use the streetcar for transportation, but as others have stated there's a reason people chose where they live.

Light rail in the US (and Canada) is scary. I'm all for it, but not if we build it like the DRT or Vancouver's lines with massive single purpose park and rides.

I think you're misunderstanding. Of course the streetcar is transportation and will be used as such. I wasn't suggesting otherwise. However, it has nothing to do with West O nor should it. I'm refuting the argument that it's a waste of money because it doesn't directly benefit people who live out west. The same way the West Dodge Expressway doesn't directly benefit downtown or midtown. That doesn't make it a waste either. My point further was to squash the talk of people who think the streetcar should extend to West O. Light rail would be the answer to a city wide transportation system which, of course, the streetcar is not. And I'd love light rail for Omaha too..........maybe in 30-50 years.

[Garrett]

True on Omaha not doing transportation right but don't forget the streetcar is meant to be a development catalyst, not a transportation solution for West O.

Man, this is such a terrible take. It's meant to be a transportation solution for part of the core, the circulator for some last mile multi-transit options. Sure it benefits the core far more than some suburban hellscape in West O. Is there a problem with that?

Sure the short term benefits are for MoO, and other businesses like UNMC in the core, but that doesn't mean it isn't transit.

Light rail would be the answer but we all know that isn't going to happen. And yes, people in downtown and midtown will use the streetcar for transportation, but as others have stated there's a reason people chose where they live.

Light rail in the US (and Canada) is scary. I'm all for it, but not if we build it like the DRT or Vancouver's lines with massive single purpose park and rides.

I think you're misunderstanding. Of course the streetcar is transportation and will be used as such. I wasn't suggesting otherwise. However, it has nothing to do with West O nor should it. I'm refuting the argument that it's a waste of money because it doesn't directly benefit people who live out west. The same way the West Dodge Expressway doesn't directly benefit downtown or midtown. That doesn't make it a waste either. My point further was to squash the talk of people who think the streetcar should extend to West O. Light rail would be the answer to a city wide transportation system which, of course, the streetcar is not. And I'd love light rail for Omaha too..........maybe in 30-50 years.

Cities grow based on the transit and zoning choices they make. Portland wasn’t that much bigger than Omaha when they started their light rail system. Another 30-50 years without a good transit network is just another 30-50 years of more car centric development at the fringes that will make it harder to build a good transit system.

[Louie]

True on Omaha not doing transportation right but don't forget the streetcar is meant to be a development catalyst, not a transportation solution for West O.

Man, this is such a terrible take. It's meant to be a transportation solution for part of the core, the circulator for some last mile multi-transit options. Sure it benefits the core far more than some suburban hellscape in West O. Is there a problem with that?

Sure the short term benefits are for MoO, and other businesses like UNMC in the core, but that doesn't mean it isn't transit.

Light rail would be the answer but we all know that isn't going to happen. And yes, people in downtown and midtown will use the streetcar for transportation, but as others have stated there's a reason people chose where they live.

Light rail in the US (and Canada) is scary. I'm all for it, but not if we build it like the DRT or Vancouver's lines with massive single purpose park and rides.

I think you're misunderstanding. Of course the streetcar is transportation and will be used as such. I wasn't suggesting otherwise. However, it has nothing to do with West O nor should it. I'm refuting the argument that it's a waste of money because it doesn't directly benefit people who live out west. The same way the West Dodge Expressway doesn't directly benefit downtown or midtown. That doesn't make it a waste either. My point further was to squash the talk of people who think the streetcar should extend to West O. Light rail would be the answer to a city wide transportation system which, of course, the streetcar is not. And I'd love light rail for Omaha too..........maybe in 30-50 years.

Cities grow based on the transit and zoning choices they make. Portland wasn’t that much bigger than Omaha when they started their light rail system. Another 30-50 years without a good transit network is just another 30-50 years of more car centric development at the fringes that will make it harder to build a good transit system.

30-50 more years of unmitigated sprawl would be a nightmare both fiscally and ecologically.

[Athomsfere]

True on Omaha not doing transportation right but don't forget the streetcar is meant to be a development catalyst, not a transportation solution for West O.

Man, this is such a terrible take. It's meant to be a transportation solution for part of the core, the circulator for some last mile multi-transit options. Sure it benefits the core far more than some suburban hellscape in West O. Is there a problem with that?

Sure the short term benefits are for MoO, and other businesses like UNMC in the core, but that doesn't mean it isn't transit.

Light rail would be the answer but we all know that isn't going to happen. And yes, people in downtown and midtown will use the streetcar for transportation, but as others have stated there's a reason people chose where they live.

Light rail in the US (and Canada) is scary. I'm all for it, but not if we build it like the DRT or Vancouver's lines with massive single purpose park and rides.

I think you're misunderstanding. Of course the streetcar is transportation and will be used as such. I wasn't suggesting otherwise. However, it has nothing to do with West O nor should it. I'm refuting the argument that it's a waste of money because it doesn't directly benefit people who live out west. The same way the West Dodge Expressway doesn't directly benefit downtown or midtown. That doesn't make it a waste either. My point further was to squash the talk of people who think the streetcar should extend to West O. Light rail would be the answer to a city wide transportation system which, of course, the streetcar is not. And I'd love light rail for Omaha too..........maybe in 30-50 years.

I absolutely misunderstood your points then.

But, I'm also in agreement with Garrett and Louie. I think we are overdue for starting good transit for the entire metro. I'd love it if we started LRT to North O, South O, and West O.

[nebport5]

For such a substantial project, I can't find anything online, outside of news articles, about this project. Clarity doesn't even list it as a project on their website. I was trying to find out if the architect has any more information regarding this project and there is nothing listed on Alley Poyner's website. I am really excited about this one, and I hope that scale doesn't shrink with the inflation and interest increases since the project was approved.

Back on topic:

It does seem odd at this point. The closest thing to a name I can find from the Douglas CO Assessor's site is "Blackstone East".

[OracleOfOmaha]

True on Omaha not doing transportation right but don't forget the streetcar is meant to be a development catalyst, not a transportation solution for West O.

Man, this is such a terrible take. It's meant to be a transportation solution for part of the core, the circulator for some last mile multi-transit options. Sure it benefits the core far more than some suburban hellscape in West O. Is there a problem with that?

Sure the short term benefits are for MoO, and other businesses like UNMC in the core, but that doesn't mean it isn't transit.

Light rail would be the answer but we all know that isn't going to happen. And yes, people in downtown and midtown will use the streetcar for transportation, but as others have stated there's a reason people chose where they live.

Light rail in the US (and Canada) is scary. I'm all for it, but not if we build it like the DRT or Vancouver's lines with massive single purpose park and rides.

It's not a terrible take. Ridership numbers will never justify the cost to build it. The associated development and tax generation that comes with it, is how this project gets the green light. Of course, transportation around the core is a major benefit to the city, but that alone is not a financial winner.

Even in Denver, every light rail stop has new development all around it. If that development didn't occur, there would be a lot less stops on the lines.

And light rail outside of the core is inherently park and ride. There isn't enough density in countless cities to not do park and rides. The rails extending outside of a city core and built for park and ride basically (with the hope that denser development comes around those stops, as mentioned previously in Denver)

Park and Ride is the least efficient way to build transit though. In a world where Omaha gets try LRT it needs to come with good dense development around stations, or there's really no point to building it.

This youtube video gives a good general overview of why Park & Rides are just bad.

Yeah, agree with all of that, but we also have to deal with reality

[Louie]

True on Omaha not doing transportation right but don't forget the streetcar is meant to be a development catalyst, not a transportation solution for West O.

Man, this is such a terrible take. It's meant to be a transportation solution for part of the core, the circulator for some last mile multi-transit options. Sure it benefits the core far more than some suburban hellscape in West O. Is there a problem with that?

Sure the short term benefits are for MoO, and other businesses like UNMC in the core, but that doesn't mean it isn't transit.

Light rail would be the answer but we all know that isn't going to happen. And yes, people in downtown and midtown will use the streetcar for transportation, but as others have stated there's a reason people chose where they live.

Light rail in the US (and Canada) is scary. I'm all for it, but not if we build it like the DRT or Vancouver's lines with massive single purpose park and rides.

It's not a terrible take. Ridership numbers will never justify the cost to build it. The associated development and tax generation that comes with it, is how this project gets the green light. Of course, transportation around the core is a major benefit to the city, but that alone is not a financial winner.

Even in Denver, every light rail stop has new development all around it. If that development didn't occur, there would be a lot less stops on the lines.

And light rail outside of the core is inherently park and ride. There isn't enough density in countless cities to not do park and rides. The rails extending outside of a city core and built for park and ride basically (with the hope that denser development comes around those stops, as mentioned previously in Denver)

Park and Ride is the least efficient way to build transit though. In a world where Omaha gets try LRT it needs to come with good dense development around stations, or there's really no point to building it.

This youtube video gives a good general overview of why Park & Rides are just bad.

Yeah, agree with all of that, but we also have to deal with reality

The reality of now, yes, but if people don't start demanding it, then we'll never see a change. So that's why some people here are so very vocal about it.

[Garrett]

True on Omaha not doing transportation right but don't forget the streetcar is meant to be a development catalyst, not a transportation solution for West O.

Man, this is such a terrible take. It's meant to be a transportation solution for part of the core, the circulator for some last mile multi-transit options. Sure it benefits the core far more than some suburban hellscape in West O. Is there a problem with that?

Sure the short term benefits are for MoO, and other businesses like UNMC in the core, but that doesn't mean it isn't transit.

Light rail would be the answer but we all know that isn't going to happen. And yes, people in downtown and midtown will use the streetcar for transportation, but as others have stated there's a reason people chose where they live.

Light rail in the US (and Canada) is scary. I'm all for it, but not if we build it like the DRT or Vancouver's lines with massive single purpose park and rides.

It's not a terrible take. Ridership numbers will never justify the cost to build it. The associated development and tax generation that comes with it, is how this project gets the green light. Of course, transportation around the core is a major benefit to the city, but that alone is not a financial winner.

Even in Denver, every light rail stop has new development all around it. If that development didn't occur, there would be a lot less stops on the lines.

And light rail outside of the core is inherently park and ride. There isn't enough density in countless cities to not do park and rides. The rails extending outside of a city core and built for park and ride basically (with the hope that denser development comes around those stops, as mentioned previously in Denver)

Park and Ride is the least efficient way to build transit though. In a world where Omaha gets try LRT it needs to come with good dense development around stations, or there's really no point to building it.

This youtube video gives a good general overview of why Park & Rides are just bad.

Yeah, agree with all of that, but we also have to deal with reality

Reality is policy choices. You cannot build effective transit in the suburbs by just giving away vast expanses for people to drive to it, otherwise you’re just subsidizing car use.

[legato9]

Every suburban subdivision is eventually a net financial negative on the ledger for a city due to disproportionate upkeep costs.

Today is just YouTube link day for me

Dude! That video was super, super interesting. Thanks a bunch for posting!

[Garrett]

Every suburban subdivision is eventually a net financial negative on the ledger for a city due to disproportionate upkeep costs.

Today is just YouTube link day for me

Dude! That video was super, super interesting. Thanks a bunch for posting!

He's extremely good at explaining urbanist concepts. Great humor and production quality that makes it super accessible.

[OracleOfOmaha]

True on Omaha not doing transportation right but don't forget the streetcar is meant to be a development catalyst, not a transportation solution for West O.

Man, this is such a terrible take. It's meant to be a transportation solution for part of the core, the circulator for some last mile multi-transit options. Sure it benefits the core far more than some suburban hellscape in West O. Is there a problem with that?

Sure the short term benefits are for MoO, and other businesses like UNMC in the core, but that doesn't mean it isn't transit.

Light rail would be the answer but we all know that isn't going to happen. And yes, people in downtown and midtown will use the streetcar for transportation, but as others have stated there's a reason people chose where they live.

Light rail in the US (and Canada) is scary. I'm all for it, but not if we build it like the DRT or Vancouver's lines with massive single purpose park and rides.

It's not a terrible take. Ridership numbers will never justify the cost to build it. The associated development and tax generation that comes with it, is how this project gets the green light. Of course, transportation around the core is a major benefit to the city, but that alone is not a financial winner.

Even in Denver, every light rail stop has new development all around it. If that development didn't occur, there would be a lot less stops on the lines.

And light rail outside of the core is inherently park and ride. There isn't enough density in countless cities to not do park and rides. The rails extending outside of a city core and built for park and ride basically (with the hope that denser development comes around those stops, as mentioned previously in Denver)

Park and Ride is the least efficient way to build transit though. In a world where Omaha gets try LRT it needs to come with good dense development around stations, or there's really no point to building it.

This youtube video gives a good general overview of why Park & Rides are just bad.

Yeah, agree with all of that, but we also have to deal with reality

Reality is policy choices. You cannot build effective transit in the suburbs by just giving away vast expanses for people to drive to it, otherwise you’re just subsidizing car use.

lol

[PWL73316]

Poor 9 story building in Blackstone hosting this conversation.

The argument about suburbs all being money-sucks is fundamentally misleading, sometimes intentionally so. Of course a downtown core or a business district has more economic activity on paper, and a residential district has basically none. But those people all have to live somewhere. If you push them into tenements the math only changes a little bit, because suburban upkeep is generally not *that* net-negative, if at all, particularly when discussing affluent suburbs. I really doubt the city and county are spending on me what I'm paying them in taxes, to be blunt about it. If this is a real concern, then the worst offenders would be the SFH in North and South O which have much higher costs to the city due to blight, and are much more lightly taxed due to low property value. And you can't tell me that the property taxes in Linden Estates aren't paying for more than their share of the city's resources, not to mention that the residents there are running the businesses generating all the economic activity used to 'prove' that only the urban core matters.

From the same perspective, a single parking lot downtown is a worse offender than all the suburbs put together in terms of economic cost. It pays almost nothing in property taxes, with only the land value, and is costing millions or even billions in economic opportunity cost.

I am fully in favor of upzoning and an 'all of the above' strategy for housing and urban renewal, but it doesn't ultimately help the cause when you ask people to pretend that $800,000 houses paying the city $20,000+ in property taxes alone every year are somehow actually the ones getting welfare. That's just not true. And with our heavily property-tax focused funding model, it's even less true here.

[Louie]

I am fully in favor of upzoning and an 'all of the above' strategy for housing and urban renewal, but it doesn't ultimately help the cause when you ask people to pretend that $800,000 houses paying the city $20,000+ in property taxes alone every year are somehow actually the ones getting welfare. That's just not true. And with our heavily property-tax focused funding model, it's even less true here.

There's maybe a couple thousand houses of that size paying those property taxes (if they haven't fought them down) against the almost 200,000 homes in the city. It's such a small sliver that it's a non-factor. Besides, those homes are typically on larger lots, which make infrastructure more expensive per capita (longer streets, sewers, etc).

[Athomsfere]

I really doubt the city and county are spending on me what I'm paying them in taxes, to be blunt about it. If this is a real concern, then the worst offenders would be the SFH in North and South O which have much higher costs to the city due to blight,

but it doesn't ultimately help the cause when you ask people to pretend that $800,000 houses paying the city $20,000+ in property taxes alone every year are somehow actually the ones getting welfare. That's just not true. And with our heavily property-tax focused funding model, it's even less true here.

I mean, that doesn't seem nearly high enough to cover their costs TBH. I mean look at this:
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/41.3459 ... m2!4m1!3e1

The density is so low, that I don't think $20k annually would break even for the roads plus anything. 8 people on 2 lanes and 0.7 miles.

Compared to here in South O with hundreds of SFH on the distance. And that's still low density, but each house would need to pay what, 1/10 the taxes to cover the same costs.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/41.2369 ... m2!4m1!3e1

But then that's just streets. You need water, sewer, electricity, internet, police, fire etc. etc.
I have little doubt the average homeowner in South Omaha is closer to paying their fair share than the average McMansion owner out west.

[NEDodger]

I mean, that doesn't seem nearly high enough to cover their costs TBH. I mean look at this:
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/41.3459 ... m2!4m1!3e1

The density is so low, that I don't think $20k annually would break even for the roads plus anything. 8 people on 2 lanes and 0.7 miles.

I know you despise everyone living west of about 45th Street, but that’s a dishonest outlier of an example. Try the math at about 162nd and Blondo and it’s a much different calculus.

[Athomsfere]

I mean, that doesn't seem nearly high enough to cover their costs TBH. I mean look at this:
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/41.3459 ... m2!4m1!3e1

The density is so low, that I don't think $20k annually would break even for the roads plus anything. 8 people on 2 lanes and 0.7 miles.

I know you despise everyone living west of about 45th Street, but that’s a dishonest outlier of an example. Try the math at about 162nd and Blondo and it’s a much different calculus.

He said Linden Estates. I Googled that and picked the first thing I saw there that wasn't one house on a street.

[NEDodger]

I mean, that doesn't seem nearly high enough to cover their costs TBH. I mean look at this:
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/41.3459 ... m2!4m1!3e1

The density is so low, that I don't think $20k annually would break even for the roads plus anything. 8 people on 2 lanes and 0.7 miles.

I know you despise everyone living west of about 45th Street, but that’s a dishonest outlier of an example. Try the math at about 162nd and Blondo and it’s a much different calculus.

He said Linden Estates. I Googled that and picked the first thing I saw there that wasn't one house on a street.

The area you selected is not Linden Estates. It’s Cunningham Lake. If that was an honest mistake, cool. But it initially comes off as eye-rolling.

[Athomsfere]

The area you selected is not Linden Estates. It’s Cunningham Lake. If that was an honest mistake, cool. But it initially comes off as eye-rolling.

I honestly have no idea where Linden Estates is. Usually if I google a subdivision Google gives me a nice red outline but:

Linden Estates:


Vs say Fair Acres

[PWL73316]

Assuming positive intent here for everyone I think Google found some address associated with their HOA. I picked Linden because it’s a well-known affluent neighborhood that a lot of people drive through for Christmas lights. I don’t expect everybody to know all the neighborhoods, I absolute don’t.

I think pulling in Cunningham Lake stuff, even inadvertently, is actually a fair supporting argument for the “suburbs are all money pits” point of view.

But that’s kind of my point, all these suburbs are not the same. At one time Dundee was an exurb. The Cathedral neighborhood was the suburbs. It’s not accurate to paint with a broad brush and act like the neighborhoods in the middle of nowhere are the same as the ones that are just natural extensions of the city.

[Athomsfere]

That last post from me was post 1,234 no joke. I really hope that in over 1 thousand posts here I've built enough good will and trust that I would try to be fair.

Even when I looked for it, and saw those houses... I was like "Wow, this is really out there, but it is what was said".

All that said, I'm really not a fan of miles and miles of large lot, detached SFH areas. For all the reasons I've stated here over the years.

I'd be at least a larger defender of them, if we didn't build them in such a way where they were so hard to undo later. Or if the zoning wasn't so exclusionary. ADUs are a good step. But we also need to get back to multi0use being the default. Let that old carriage house become a bicycle repair shop. Or the old mansion become a duplex / quad. Or house on the Field Club become a little bar with burgers people who want to commute via bike grab a snack on the way home.

Next up, is more townhomes / row houses with the option of bringing back "third places". 1 house on ~0.4 acres became 6 3 bed units in Blackstone (similar to my townhome too). Each of those is now, literally 10x the density. (The lots are about 0.04 acres). A few blocks away, the detached SFH smaller (1500 sft) and on twice as much land. If only we could have a larger percentage of these rowhomes with a few barber shops in basements with a door to the sidewalk.