That's a good point, Larry. I wouldn't worry too much on that, though. It comes down to design talent, and there is no local talent whatsoever when it comes to park design.

We brought in a design firm, Hargreaves, that has a good national repertoire, and has designed all of the parks that have inspired us to build this one. In fact this firm has pretty much designed ALL of the new major downtown parks in the last 10 years, from Millennium Park in Chicago to the Discovery Green in Houston. Consider them a modern day Frederic Law Olmsted or W.H. Dunn.

Here is a link to their website:
Hargreaves Associates - Firm (http://www.hargreaves.com/firm/index.php)

Here is a blog post that I wrote a year ago taking a closer look at a handful of their better public space projects.
A Downtown ontheRange: A look at Hargreaves Associates (http://downtownontherange.blogspot.com/2009/08/look-at-hargreaves-associates.html)

It's for shame that the images of the South Waterfront Neighborhood Park are blank because that was one of the ones I liked best.

What it comes down to, and this is what we don't realize with our parks in Oklahoma, is two things: parks are not destinations (typically) that can compete for "draw factor" with shopping malls and restaurants, so people really aren't going to get in a car and drive to one. Secondly, the crappy parks we usually build in Oklahoma lack the formality they need to feel right. This goes with everything else, our crappy boulevards lack formality, our crappy downtown streetscapes lack formality, etc etc.

And for those who don't get what I'm talking about, consider a college campus--OU or OSU, there you have great formality. You have clearly defined public spaces. OCU even to some extent.

Now if only we did as great a job with our parks as we have our college campuses, we would be set. And it's not so much Oklahoma as a whole, because there are some good examples of decent public spaces here in Oklahoma, especially in Tulsa, and a few in older portions of OKC.

In OKC I think the best parks are the ones that don't even have a parking lot, like Edgemere Park..that's a quality public space. It feeds off of the neighborhood around it. If a park has to have a parking lot, you know something is wrong with it..and having parking made available for THIS park is another mistake I feel we're about to make with C2S. Having to drive to a park defeats the purpose entirely. If you live in such a sprawly area that you have to drive to a suitable public space for recreation all I have to say is maybe you should buy a gardening book.

Spartan,

I don't disagree, my concern isn't so much with the initial landscaping (although with the Canal, they used plants that weren't native to Oklahoman and most died out, fortunately the landscaper was responsible for the cost of replacing everything), but my greater concern is maintenance afterwords (the land run monument is an example).

Multi-millions spent on the monument and the canal area and the landscaping has been allowed to die. Apparently the underground irrigation system is broken and this summer the top soil was eroded away with exposed pipes everywhere. My guess is 1/2 to 2/3 of the "prairie grass" around the monuments had been allowed to die.

The City is pretty good at building new things but then they don't take care of them.

Spartan,

I don't disagree, my concern isn't so much with the initial landscaping (although with the Canal, they used plants that weren't native to Oklahoman and most died out, fortunately the landscaper was responsible for the cost of replacing everything), but my greater concern is maintenance afterwords (the land run monument is an example).

Multi-millions spent on the monument and the canal area and the landscaping has been allowed to die. Apparently the underground irrigation system is broken and this summer the top soil was eroded away with exposed pipes everywhere. My guess is 1/2 to 2/3 of the "prairie grass" around the monuments had been allowed to die.

The City is pretty good at building new things but then they don't take care of them.

The exposed pipes may actually be on purpose. Many landscape architects/designers are using drip irrigation systems, but the pipes are usually on top of the ground to allow the drip mechanism to work. Some would argue its not worth the environmental (less water use) benefit when it compromises the aesthetic and maintenance benefit of in-ground, spray irrigation.

First of all, the tennis courts charge about $5 an hour. The picnic pavilions are eyesores. The YMCA and kiddie water park are nice. The trails would be nicer if they were landscaped.

My biggest problem with all of OKC's parks, especially Earlywine, and even more so other parks, is the lack of serious landscaping. How the hell do you have a park without landscaping? It's beyond me. It's a joke. It's preposterous.

There is better landscaping to the entrance of our neighborhood than there is anywhere in all of Earlywine Park.

Are you seriously comparing the landscaping/maintenance of your neighborhood entrance (maybe 1/2 acre) to Earlywine Park (100 plus acres)

I have looked at the site plan as I mentioned in a previous post and am quite aware that no residential is in that plan. That doesn't preclude other developers from residential development in nearby areas. OKC is going to build the Core to Shore park in hopes that a lot of residential development will follow nearby. While they do have that shown in the site plans it is up to private investors to follow through. Sometimes the cart does need to come before the horse.

Not remotely the same thing.

It's safe to assume that the C2S park will spur development and because OKC knows this and has a vision for what that development will look like it will probably end up looking like a true urban neighborhood. Complete with mixed uses, mixed residential, decreased parking, and extreme walkability. Think Central Platte Valley in Denver:

http://denverinfill.com/images/neighborhood_aerials/cpv_2008-04.jpg

Pretty much all the buildings you see are residential. However, nearly all of them have ground floor retail/office. Mixed Use. Residential and Retail/Office. What every good little sustainable planner strives for.



Now, UNP...

There is no residential, and based on the master plan there is no plans for residential in phase 1. Another problem, there are physical and psycological barriers isolating that entire area along 24th. Where could developers even build residential?

First, the Interstate, until Rock Creek is finished the only crossings to the west neighborhoods are at Robinson and Tecumseh, not exactly all-inviting for the pedestrian (although Robinson will be getting a makeover). Not to mention they have their own parks.

Second, the airport blocks any potential residential to be built on the east.

Third, Phase 1 is a huge strip mall with acres upon acres of surface parking. Anyone coming from the south is forced to walk across most of that parking (about 1/4 mile). Pretty pedestrian friendly. No additional residential there.

Now, finally we are left with the possibility of building residential on the north. Fine, say that happens, but now look, you've built your park between a bunch of big boxes at the center of acres of parking. Those people too, will have to walk about 1/4 mile+ to get to it. That is if they don't have their own park in their neighborhood. Pedestrian utopia.

http://9.forumer.com/uploads/urbanok/post-44-1153766218.jpg

i totally support urban renewal and even tried living downtown for awhile but could not deal with the noise of apartment living.

however, maps 4 has to be Maps for the Hoods. It would be nice to have nearby neighborhoods (not the suberbs or outlying communities) but the neighborhoods have sidewalks, streetlights, decent puplic transportation and bike lanes. These are places where people can live and easily get to downtown via public transportation if we play our cards right.

it can also work in reverse. one of the big knocks about downtown living is no grocery store. a decent public transportation system would allow downtown residents to use a grocery store in a nearby neighborhood.

it will take time but city planners need to look at the big picture while figuring in very expensive gasoline over the long term into the equation.

Spartan / Larry OKC:

As a retired City of OKC Parks Department Employee, I can't help but respond to your recent posting's. Maybe a little education re: the Grounds Management side of the Parks Department will help you understand.

There are 114 Full Time Grounds Management Employees, plus they hire app. 100 Seasonal/Part Time Employees. They are responsible for the maintenance of 113 Parks, the Grounds at City Hall, Civic Center, Martin Nature Center, Bricktown Canal, Down Town Police Station, Police Station @ 89th and Santa Fe, Fire Training Center, open areas at Lake Hefner, Lake Overholser, Lake Draper, and along the Oklahoma River. They also maintain numerous Center Medians, Right-of-Ways, Highways and Flood Control Detention Ponds throughout the City.
This maintenance includes, litter control, mowing, line trimming, chemical spraying, shrub/flower bed installation and maintenance, irrigation installation and maintenance, tree trimming and removal, playground installation and maintenance, not to mention the daily calls to correct safety hazards and view obstructions throughout the City.
In total, they maintain 6,900 acres.

I encourage to contact your Council Member and Mayor and encourage them to adequately fund the Parks Department, or better yet, why don't you start a grass roots campaign to pass a sales tax dedicated for the Parks Department.

Spartan / Larry OKC:

As a retired City of OKC Parks Department Employee, I can't help but respond to your recent posting's. Maybe a little education re: the Grounds Management side of the Parks Department will help you understand.

There are 114 Full Time Grounds Management Employees, plus they hire app. 100 Seasonal/Part Time Employees. They are responsible for the maintenance of 113 Parks, the Grounds at City Hall, Civic Center, Martin Nature Center, Bricktown Canal, Down Town Police Station, Police Station @ 89th and Santa Fe, Fire Training Center, open areas at Lake Hefner, Lake Overholser, Lake Draper, and along the Oklahoma River. They also maintain numerous Center Medians, Right-of-Ways, Highways and Flood Control Detention Ponds throughout the City.
This maintenance includes, litter control, mowing, line trimming, chemical spraying, shrub/flower bed installation and maintenance, irrigation installation and maintenance, tree trimming and removal, playground installation and maintenance, not to mention the daily calls to correct safety hazards and view obstructions throughout the City.
In total, they maintain 6,900 acres.

I encourage to contact your Council Member and Mayor and encourage them to adequately fund the Parks Department, or better yet, why don't you start a grass roots campaign to pass a sales tax dedicated for the Parks Department.

Thanks for the info. I did contact the Mayor, City Manager and my Council person about the condition of the Land Run monument when I discovered it's condition this summer. The response back? Nothing. Not even a generic thank-you-for-writing form letter.

As I said, one of my biggest concerns with MAPS projects is no one seems to think about what it is going to cost to keep them going once they are built. Just this past summer they were having a hard time keeping public swimming pools open and then they want to build new indoor restricted (seniors only) public pools?

I am sure emphasis will be placed on the Park when it is first opened and maybe for a few years after that (but with tight budgets etc, they are going to be shifting money from other areas to do it). Then we will build something else and the money will shift again. Not opposed to dedicated taxes per se, but shortly you will have numerous dedicated taxes (probably on top of the existing "general funds" tax). Where does it end?

Reminds me of someone looking at getting a new car. They ask themselves, "Can I afford the monthly payment?" Not giving any thought about associated costs (insurance, gas, oil changes, tires, scheduled maintenance, unscheduled maint. etc). Then they wonder why ends don't meet.

The City readily admits that there isn't any money budgeted in MAPS 3 for operations and/or upkeep (it never was designed to). That unknown amount will come from someplace else at some future time. Maybe.

Thanks for the info. I did contact the Mayor, City Manager and my Council person about the condition of the Land Run monument when I discovered it's condition this summer. The response back? Nothing. Not even a generic thank-you-for-writing form letter.

As I said, one of my biggest concerns with MAPS projects is no one seems to think about what it is going to cost to keep them going once they are built. Just this past summer they were having a hard time keeping public swimming pools open and then they want to build new indoor restricted (seniors only) public pools?

I am sure emphasis will be placed on the Park when it is first opened and maybe for a few years after that (but with tight budgets etc, they are going to be shifting money from other areas to do it). Then we will build something else and the money will shift again. Not opposed to dedicated taxes per se, but shortly you will have numerous dedicated taxes (probably on top of the existing "general funds" tax). Where does it end?

Reminds me of someone looking at getting a new car. They ask themselves, "Can I afford the monthly payment?" Not giving any thought about associated costs (insurance, gas, oil changes, tires, scheduled maintenance, unscheduled maint. etc). Then they wonder why ends don't meet.

The City readily admits that there isn't any money budgeted in MAPS 3 for operations and/or upkeep (it never was designed to). That unknown amount will come from someplace else at some future time. Maybe.

I spent 27 plus years n the Parks Department, the last 22 in Mid-Management, believe me, I share the publics frustration. (one of the reasons I retired)

Well part of the problem with maintenance along the Canal or the Land Run monument is that potential sponsor businesses don't really exist, but the Canal is staging a comeback. The Land Run monument is surrounded by nothingness for the most part. I have no problem with the idea of a development formula that the city build these parks and the community maintain them.

I believe that a surrounding community does have a responsibility of basic upkeep and making an area look right, and there should be as many opportunities for the city and these communities to form partnerships to this end as possible. The problem with that in the current state is that we still expect the city to do it. Ultimately, all rhetoric aside, whoever is expected to do the maintenance should just do it. If we can change the expectation to the community to do park maintenance then more would probably get done honestly.

Another great example is the Myriad Gardens, which a private group does basic maintenance work for. That means they just trim bushes, mow grass, etc etc. Anytime something major and expensive has to be done outside routine park maintenance then the city should definitely chip in, which it has. The city redid the water stage, then in the bond approved money for new panes (LED preferably) for Crystal Bridge, and now the Devon TIF is going to renovate the park completely.

The new C2S park will be maintained under a similar approach. The goal is to have an urban park conservatory set up similar to the one that oversees the Myriad Gardens and have private citizens who take pride in the park responsible for its upkeep. The problem with that is how to fund it..the Myriad group (I think) is funded by admission to the Crystal Bridge. I don't know what revenue generating opportunities the C2S park will have, I doubt very many, so it will be interesting. Perhaps the group could be the landlord for the restaurant space that will be available and could use rent from that space and perhaps rent from park vendors for funding? Just an idea.

Not remotely the same thing.

It's safe to assume that the C2S park will spur development and because OKC knows this and has a vision for what that development will look like it will probably end up looking like a true urban neighborhood. Complete with mixed uses, mixed residential, decreased parking, and extreme walkability. Think Central Platte Valley in Denver:

http://denverinfill.com/images/neighborhood_aerials/cpv_2008-04.jpg

Pretty much all the buildings you see are residential. However, nearly all of them have ground floor retail/office. Mixed Use. Residential and Retail/Office. What every good little sustainable planner strives for.



IMG]

I was responding to Plansit's suggestion that no park should be built because no housing was planned. Of course it's not going to be an urban area like "Core to Shore" and I wasn't meaning that it was. The basic idea is the same though and just because it's not high density doesn't mean that no park area should be included because people might have to walk a little. As I mentioned before, I'm not defending this as an ideal development and use for the area but it's just not going to be a high density area for many years and if you're waiting for that the land would just have to sit undeveloped. Some people might think that would be good but it's just not going to happen.

Not to get into too much detail, but it's basically a suburban McOffice park plopped right in the middle of one of the more urban parts of OKC. No street frontage, no acknowledgment of surrounding buildings/neighborhood, and same crap McArchitecture in every blah building. They should spend more time researching land-use/site layout/architecture.

actually, instead of "researching" land-use/site layout blah blah blah, they can continue researching cures. don't you think its a better use of time and money if its spent on science and not brick and mortar?

The exposed pipes may actually be on purpose. Many landscape architects/designers are using drip irrigation systems, but the pipes are usually on top of the ground to allow the drip mechanism to work. Some would argue its not worth the environmental (less water use) benefit when it compromises the aesthetic and maintenance benefit of in-ground, spray irrigation.

That could be but in this case they were completely underground, then the erosion happened, exposed the pipes and at some point became nonfunctioning, like I said a good portion of the landscaping had been allowed to die. Lot of wasted money for the landscaping, the irrigation system and the cost of replacing the plants and eventually fixing the problem.

Well part of the problem with maintenance along the Canal or the Land Run monument is that potential sponsor businesses don't really exist, but the Canal is staging a comeback. The Land Run monument is surrounded by nothingness for the most part. I have no problem with the idea of a development formula that the city build these parks and the community maintain them.

I believe that a surrounding community does have a responsibility of basic upkeep and making an area look right, and there should be as many opportunities for the city and these communities to form partnerships to this end as possible. The problem with that in the current state is that we still expect the city to do it. Ultimately, all rhetoric aside, whoever is expected to do the maintenance should just do it. If we can change the expectation to the community to do park maintenance then more would probably get done honestly.

Another great example is the Myriad Gardens, which a private group does basic maintenance work for. That means they just trim bushes, mow grass, etc etc. Anytime something major and expensive has to be done outside routine park maintenance then the city should definitely chip in, which it has. The city redid the water stage, then in the bond approved money for new panes (LED preferably) for Crystal Bridge, and now the Devon TIF is going to renovate the park completely.

The new C2S park will be maintained under a similar approach. The goal is to have an urban park conservatory set up similar to the one that oversees the Myriad Gardens and have private citizens who take pride in the park responsible for its upkeep. The problem with that is how to fund it..the Myriad group (I think) is funded by admission to the Crystal Bridge. I don't know what revenue generating opportunities the C2S park will have, I doubt very many, so it will be interesting. Perhaps the group could be the landlord for the restaurant space that will be available and could use rent from that space and perhaps rent from park vendors for funding? Just an idea.

Not sure where you got your information, but you need to find a new source. The Myriad Gardens has 17 Full-Time OKC Parks Department Employees, they also rely on Seasonal (Part Time) and they use workers from the local First Step Program. The Park employees do the majority of the grounds maintenance work (mowing, trimming, litter pick up, shrub/flower bed maintenance, minor tree work, etc;) any major tree work is done by the OKC Parks Forestry Section. There is a very active volunteer group thats helps with some of the outside maintenance issues, but for the most part, it's done by Park Employees.

actually, instead of "researching" land-use/site layout blah blah blah, they can continue researching cures. don't you think its a better use of time and money if its spent on science and not brick and mortar?

Well, I really meant the speculative developer, not the companies who lease the space.