Let's hope what actually gets built at least somewhat resembles that. This is the one kind of development OKC is really missing that other cities have. If this gets built as shown in the video, it could really thrust OKC onto the radar for in-migrating young professionals because this is the kind of environment many of them prefer.

The unfortunate reality is that C2S will never look anything like any of the master plans. Being a private development area, what you'll see is a few city projects that get built "relatively" quickly (in terms of the project's life even though they'll be 15 years away). Then the rest will slowly trickle in later, but be a hodge podge of whatever each random developer wants. So there's no way they're going to look anything like what we see here....they'll be far less imaginative and fare more "cost effective" for the investors...meaning boring....see Bricktown Hotels.

If we get the park in there and start some residential mid-rise next to it (that's not upscale only), you'll see something happen. If we follow our recent pattern of building only expensive stuff, then you won't see anything happen. Downtown's tapped on the upscale market. If it wasn't, you'd see a scramble to build it in the available space, which there is plenty of.

I don't think downtown has remotely tapped the upscale market. And I don't blame developers for waiting to see what the park and convention center, not to mention Boulevard, look like before they jump. Deep Deuce is a perfect example of how you can't think too far ahead of the crowd. City Place particularly, and the Maywood Brownstones perhaps, are the only truly upscale for sale developments downtown right now. I see cracks in the thinking of people about living downtown if you have upscale money in your wallet, but the huge shift hasn't occurred yet. What I predict is going to happen is that the single and young marrieds living in apartments downtown right now will not necessarily see moving out to the burbs as desirable, as they start families. There's going to be a school downtown, and Core to Shore will provide land for housing very close to it. Once they get more money in their pockets, their knee jerk response will not necessarily be to get a mini-ranch complete with lawn tractor. They may well see buying a house downtown as a good thing. I see that in my kids right now. They're either buying or thinking about buying right now, and the last thing they want is to tie themselves in to a big commute and live away from the action. They're looking for housing close in enough so they can primarily use mass transit, but with schools that are acceptable for the families they're planning in the not so distant future.

The biggest deterrent to development in Core to Shore is the 400' foot width of I-40. I-40 is as wide as the Oklahoma River. I had high hopes for C2S to actually develop from the core all the way to the shore but I don't think that is going to ever happen as one unified piece of urban fabric. I-40 is just too wide. This make the land between I-40 and downtown even more crucial because it is the only place left in C2S that has any chance of pedestrian oriented development.

The problem with the boulevard is that it funnels all traffic onto two roads, the boulevard and Western. Traffic will increase in number or speed which will deter people from walking across either of them. If the boulevard ever does achieve the 94,000 cars a day ODOT predicts no one will ever want to walk across it. If this boulevard is built C2S is dead - you can stop dreaming about it. OKCs next great urban neighborhood will have to be built somewhere else, at which point the traffic engineers will claim victory by saying, "See, we told you the traffic was coming and that no one would want to live here."

The boathouse district is a land of it own cut off from everything else. It is surrounded by I-40, I-35, a 400' river with an adjacent railroad yard, a canal, and a concrete railroad viaduct. Soon you can add an elevated boulevard to the list of obsticles. Getting anyone to live there will be a challenge.

ODOT is run by traffic engineers, who by very nature do not study or practice urban planning. They concentrate on the free flowing of automobile traffic. They just do not study or specialize in what "pedestrian friendly" means. They aren't out to purposely destroy walkability, they are just doing their jobs. Traffic engineers are hired to move car traffic, planners are hired to move people. Both have different goals and methods. Your traffic engineer will build whatever will move traffic, your planner will aim to move people.

So, ODOT does not "see" what we are seeing. They don't really give pedestrians any weight in this (or understand how pedestrian movement works and how fragile it can be). So they don't understand how a bridge hurts walkability, or how walkable development organizes around walkable streets. They have tried to make concessions to make it walkable, but they still do not understand how to build it walkable (because they are not planners).

My only gripe about this is that they're pedestrians too. Gotta crawl before you can walk--meaning walk before drive, lol.

My only gripe about this is that they're pedestrians too. Gotta crawl before you can walk--meaning walk before drive, lol.

You would like to think that but here are some photos of OKC traffic engieneers in their developmental years. Marketing cars to kids is pretty bad and wide spread.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_YwK33fZCfaE/SjROTbTWQmI/AAAAAAAADz8/Wp2gfIgr21I/s400/BabyCarBL.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-f0T7f7N8i9A/TwT5Ys9bLbI/AAAAAAAAAQ8/0sv1F8poVRE/s1600/ToddlerCarBed.jpg

http://image.made-in-china.com/2f0j00SesQaRwFrIkC/Electric-Hummer-Toy-Car.jpg

The boathouse district is a land of it own cut off from everything else. It is surrounded by I-40, I-35, a 400' river with an adjacent railroad yard, a canal, and a concrete railroad viaduct. Soon you can add an elevated boulevard to the list of obsticles. Getting anyone to live there will be a challenge.

The one thing that will make that less true is the walkway along the canal. Right now, living in Deep Deuce, the river seems far away and difficult to access. But, once the canal and path are complete, I'm sure most of our walks will end up at the river. I would guess it will feel the same coming from the river direction as well. It will be great for pedestrians and casual bike riders.

Even when the canal is completed that will be a long walk with nothing to protect people from the elements. At least with an urban street wall and buildings you can take cover from the wind and rain and walk in the shade or sunlight depending on the temp (not to mention the natural heat sink density generates). There will be no more development along the canal after KDs is done. Anyone living in that area will not have any daily necessities available to them on-site. They will need to drive to get them.

The one thing that will make that less true is the walkway along the canal. Right now, living in Deep Deuce, the river seems far away and difficult to access. But, once the canal and path are complete, I'm sure most of our walks will end up at the river. I would guess it will feel the same coming from the river direction as well. It will be great for pedestrians and casual bike riders.

Betts,

Is the path you mentioned part of the MAPS 3 trails or is this something separate? If it is part of the Trails, has it been determined that is going to be part that we actually get? Meaning the $40 million "mistake" (leaving about 60 miles undone) and the funding shortfall of the remaining 57 miles (think it was cut back to 32)??? Has the Trails subcommittee determined where the 32 miles are going yet?

The unfortunate reality is that C2S will never look anything like any of the master plans. Being a private development area, what you'll see is a few city projects that get built "relatively" quickly (in terms of the project's life even though they'll be 15 years away). Then the rest will slowly trickle in later, but be a hodge podge of whatever each random developer wants. So there's no way they're going to look anything like what we see here....they'll be far less imaginative and fare more "cost effective" for the investors...meaning boring....see Bricktown Hotels.

If we get the park in there and start some residential mid-rise next to it (that's not upscale only), you'll see something happen. If we follow our recent pattern of building only expensive stuff, then you won't see anything happen. Downtown's tapped on the upscale market. If it wasn't, you'd see a scramble to build it in the available space, which there is plenty of.

I definitely agree that C2S will not be as grand as the master plans. These projects are ALWAYS scaled down no matter what. My hopes is that what actually gets built at least somewhat resembles it. Something like Southend in Charlotte would be awesome (Google that to see some photos) and totally doable in OKC.

What we DON'T need are bland, suburban style apartment complexes being built down there. Yes, it may bring more middle-income people downtown but it would destroy the character that should separate downtown from anywhere Edmond or Moore.

Completely separate. This is the canal connection to Regatta Park/Oklahoma River.

Betts is right though. This will suddenly make the Oklahoma River accessible to Bricktown traffic (pedestrian and cycle) where right now, it is just about impossible to walk to it.

I'm really excited about it.

Thanks Sid,

Are the trails part of the Canal connection? To keep it within the 2007 G.O. Bond budget, they cut a few things out (Project 180esque..."to be built later")???

Larry,

They will extend the spur off the river (currently ends at the Regatta Park plaza) under I-40 and to near the existing end of the BT canal.
The river spur will have a turnaround basin just to the southeast of the south canal basin.
The new endpoint of the river spur will be a lower elevation than the canal basin.
There will be a paved switchback walkway trail constructed between the canal basin walkway and the the new river spur basin.
I believe there will also be a walkway along the extended river spur to the current regatta plaza at the CHK boathouse (may be mistaken)

If I am correct then one eventually could start at the west end of the canal on the west end and walk along water on pavement all the way to the river and then along the river spur and then along the river as well.

Even when the canal is completed that will be a long walk with nothing to protect people from the elements. At least with an urban street wall and buildings you can take cover from the wind and rain and walk in the shade or sunlight depending on the temp (not to mention the natural heat sink density generates). There will be no more development along the canal after KDs is done. Anyone living in that area will not have any daily necessities available to them on-site. They will need to drive to get them.

I don't know. We walk from 3rd St. along the canal down to the Land Run statues with our short-legged corgi all the time. It's just a wee bit further to the river. We carry water with us if it's hot, although I think water fountains with dog height fountains would be a very nice touch along the river trails. Trash cans too (is it really possible to comment on the lack of trash cans along the river trail too often?) Remember too, the weather in Oklahoma is very nice for all but 4 months of the year. January and February, July 15-September 15 can be miserable. The rest of the time, it's pretty pleasant. The canal bridges offer some protection from the weather, and there are places in Bricktown you can duck in, but really, how often do we get an unexpected shower? While I agree that it would be nice if lower Bricktown were something other than what it is, it is walkable.

Larry,

They will extend the spur off the river (currently ends at the Regatta Park plaza) under I-40 and to near the existing end of the BT canal.
The river spur will have a turnaround basin just to the southeast of the south canal basin.
The new endpoint of the river spur will be a lower elevation than the canal basin.
There will be a paved switchback walkway trail constructed between the canal basin walkway and the the new river spur basin.
I believe there will also be a walkway along the extended river spur to the current regatta plaza at the CHK boathouse (may be mistaken)

If I am correct then one eventually could start at the west end of the canal on the west end and walk along water on pavement all the way to the river and then along the river spur and then along the river as well.

You are correct.

Kevin, you are correct in every aspect except that the new river basin will actually be NORTHeast of the south canal basin rather than SOUTHeast.

As noted elsewhere, the extension is being incorrectly described as a canal extension when it is in reality an extension of the Regatta Park river channel/spur.

It has been described inaccurately as a canal extension for years, owing most likely to the fact that in the original MAPS the canal had "zones" (this river spur was originally described as "Canal Zone G"). These zones were once supposed to be grade separated, including grade separations that would have made the existing canal multiple pieces instead of the continuous stretch that now exists. So early on it was understandable that all zones were united under the one description of "Bricktown Canal."

This initial plan was fortunately changed by taking the north part of the canal enough below grade and the southern portion slightly ABOVE grade compared to the surrounding landscape, resulting in a continuous waterway. Zone G remained a relic of the original plan, however, as the river is IIRC 17' below the elevation of the canal.

So the reality is that what is now being extended underneath the new I-40 realignment would be more properly described as being RIVER-related. It will create a visual and hardscape connection with the Bricktown Canal, but the twain shall never truly meet. It's not THAT big of a difference, I suppose, but it is truly confusing to visitors and the public in general, who often believe the existing canal either HAS been extended or IS currently being extended, and that is just not the case.

"Steve Lackmeyer: I think the Core to Shore plan is garbage as it relates to suggested private development and irrelevant to what the market will dictate. I have seen and heard nothing that validates any of the suggested private development in that study by out-of-state consultants.
There will be no Nordstrums and definitely not a Borders Bookstore. We will likely see a lot of housing and just a few smaller retailers and service-oriented shops."

I think the Core 2 Shore concept with high-rises is a longshot for OKC, especially now that development is taking off north of downtown. The Core 2 Shore idea has its footings in the early 2000s in a very different OKC than the city we know today. I think something like Mud Island/Harbor Town in Memphis would be a cool way to do Core 2 Shore and also realistic for OKC.

HOME :: Harbor Town (http://harbortownmemphis.com)

Thoughts?

I think the Core 2 Shore concept with high-rises is a longshot for OKC, especially now that development is taking off north of downtown. The Core 2 Shore idea has its footings in the early 2000s in a very different OKC than the city we know today. I think something like Mud Island/Harbor Town in Memphis would be a cool way to do Core 2 Shore and also realistic for OKC.

HOME :: Harbor Town (http://harbortownmemphis.com)

Thoughts?

I agree wholeheartedly. For Core to Shore to come anywhere near its vision, it must be driven by new residential neighborhoods. A New Urbanist development with varied housing styles, both single and multifamily, at varying price points, would be perfect for the land west of the Central Park. Besides the airpark site, it would be a great opportunity for OKC to grow a wholly new, dense urban neighborhood with its own aesthetic. And it would boast a sense of place original to OKC, next to a massive downtown park along the Oklahoma River. Yes.

I think the city is under the impression that if they plant the central park then Core to Shore will come...like Field of Dreams or something.

I think the city is under the impression that if they plant the central park then Core to Shore will come...like Field of Dreams or something.

Agreed. The thing is, the concept was envisioned before all the development north of the CBD we are seeing today was even on the table. The master plan of Manhattan-style high-rises surrounding it is a pipe dream for OKC and simply isn't going to happen without an Austin or Charlotte style boom. However, a new urbanist community like the example I posted above is not, and would be a great way to get young families and others who might otherwise opt for the suburbs to consider downtown.

Agreed. The thing is, the concept was envisioned before all the development north of the CBD we are seeing today was even on the table. The master plan of Manhattan-style high-rises surrounding it is a pipe dream for OKC and simply isn't going to happen without an Austin or Charlotte style boom. However, a new urbanist community like the example I posted above is not, and would be a great way to get young families and others who might otherwise opt for the suburbs to consider downtown.

Very true. I wish I knew how to use a computer to produce the rendering in my head because it'd be a lot better than what the current vision for the Central Park is.

I think the area around the Central Park will be a lot more like around Forsyth Park in Savannah then Central Park in NYC. There will be more 3-5 story developments surrounding the park than anything else. There might be a few high/mid-rises but I think those will go more in the CBD than C2S.

Wouldn't logic suggest that, if people in the early 2000's didn't know what would eventually become of the Core-to-Shore area, the our best projections now might prove to be a tad off, as well? In other words, how do we know whether some major development (in addition to, but in part because of, the park) might not eventually cause the development complexion originally predicted? The future holds so many unknown minefields and gold mines, we really have no idea what C2S will look like in 2030.

And that's the great and scary thing about OKC right now--almost anything could happen.

And that's the great and scary thing about OKC right now--almost anything could happen.

I wish they would just build a Big 65k seat state of the art Football stadium there and go after the Oakland Raiders. Have a big Grand opening in 2017. That would spur development like never before in that whole area. I know,it's a dream but crazier things have heppened. Follow Indy's plan

The plan was never ment to be ridgedly followed or expected to be done soon. It was to consider what changes from upgrades to the highway and river could enable. It lays out concepts to guide the kind of development to strive for over the next fifty years or more in that area.

I think the city is under the impression that if they plant the central park then Core to Shore will come...like Field of Dreams or something.

There is a great deal of truth to the "Build it and they will come" approach. Where there's people, there will be developments. And the Park will certainly pull a great deal daily foot traffic for developers to look to.

Very true. I wish I knew how to use a computer to produce the rendering in my head because it'd be a lot better than what the current vision for the Central Park is.

Cuatrodemayo, maybe you could take the lead on the Central Park renderings, I'm sure they will be better than anything else out there. I would love to see what your vision is for Core to Shore / The River.

There is a great deal of truth to the "Build it and they will come" approach. Where there's people, there will be developments. And the Park will certainly pull a great deal daily foot traffic for developers to look to.

Yeah and while it (the park) sits early on after it is finished drawing the crowds, all the land surrounding the park will still look like crap. I'll give it 20 years after the park is done that all fronts of the park are 100% developed.

Any ideas on when the COOP area will be purchased? ...is anyone interested?

Yeah and while it (the park) sits early on after it is finished drawing the crowds, all the land surrounding the park will still look like crap. I'll give it 20 years after the park is done that all fronts of the park are 100% developed.

I would seriously consider buying there right now, if a developer were so bold as to start housing on the park now. Once the park is done, I would consider renting, if there were very nice rentals available. I love my house, but I might love living on the park more. Or even the promise of a park.

The area from Hudson over to Walker, and from the Interstate up to around 3rd where the new Boulevard should be, is almost the same size as Bricktown and Deep Deuce put together (especially if you take out the big railroad easement parking lot that separates them). I'm not sure what the best development would be for this area, but the city needs to work now to ensure that design standards for it are very very high. I don't care if pieces sit empty for 20 years, we should not have developments like the Legacy taking up parkfront land.

Zero EIFS. Minimum height requirement of 100 feet. Things like that. Developments on Hudson should be of the highest quality. Further back, on Dewey or Shartel or Classen, still strong design rules but eliminate the height requirement. We can create an Adams Morgan type environment in there.

The master plan of Manhattan-style high-rises surrounding it is a pipe dream for OKC and simply isn't going to happen without an Austin or Charlotte style boom

Did I miss something with Core to Shore? When did the city envision it with high rises around it? The last renditions I saw from the city showed it almost totally surrounded by one-store single family homes with a few low rise apartments.

The area from Hudson over to Walker, and from the Interstate up to around 3rd where the new Boulevard should be, is almost the same size as Bricktown and Deep Deuce put together (especially if you take out the big railroad easement parking lot that separates them). I'm not sure what the best development would be for this area, but the city needs to work now to ensure that design standards for it are very very high. I don't care if pieces sit empty for 20 years, we should not have developments like the Legacy taking up parkfront land.

Zero EIFS. Minimum height requirement of 100 feet. Things like that. Developments on Hudson should be of the highest quality. Further back, on Dewey or Shartel or Classen, still strong design rules but eliminate the height requirement. We can create an Adams Morgan type environment in there.

The one thing I agree with here is to not surround the park with developments like the Legacy. There needs to be design codes to ensure it's done right and not to the minimal standards so many developments here adhere to. However, the market must dictate the type of development that surrounds the park. This isn't Manhattan, SF, or Dallas. It isn't Charlotte, Denver, or Austin. I have a hard to believing there is going to be a rush to "manhattanize" the area surrounding the park, meaning we can't expect it to be all mid and high rises and if standards are set requiring it, the area surrounding the park could remain undeveloped for many, many years.

What about designating a uniform exterior and height that applies to every structure in Core to Shore?

Any ideas on when the COOP area will be purchased? ...is anyone interested?

Do you know anyone with an extra $120 million laying around to purchase the land?

What about designating a uniform exterior and height that applies to every structure in Core to Shore?

Personally, I think Core 2 Shore should be a true new urbanist community, comprised of single family homes, apartments, and low-rise mixed use developments. Quality and placemaking should be the focus.

Harbortown in Memphis is an example of what I envision. That development is amazing and there is currently nothing that comes close in OKC. Memphis isn't that far ahead of OKC in terms of urban development so if it works there it could definitely work here.

Here is the development from above.

http://www.riverinnmemphis.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/harbor-town-pictures-067-custom.jpg

The one thing I agree with here is to not surround the park with developments like the Legacy. There needs to be design codes to ensure it's done right and not to the minimal standards so many developments here adhere to. However, the market must dictate the type of development that surrounds the park. This isn't Manhattan, SF, or Dallas. It isn't Charlotte, Denver, or Austin. I have a hard to believing there is going to be a rush to "manhattanize" the area surrounding the park, meaning we can't expect it to be all mid and high rises and if standards are set requiring it, the area surrounding the park could remain undeveloped for many, many years.

I think you're severely underestimating what this city can do.

Did I miss something with Core to Shore? When did the city envision it with high rises around it? The last renditions I saw from the city showed it almost totally surrounded by one-store single family homes with a few low rise apartments.

Actually, what I saw last for the western side of the park were 4 story townhouses built similarly to some of the blocks in London (particularly Notting Hill) with the front of the house facing the street all around the block, and a central greenspace. But it was just a concept drawing. The single family houses were west of the park, with a school in their midst. Who knows what developers will think? But I would hate to see four story apartment buildings similar to what we have in Deep Deuce there. The park is the place to do something different. Developers should not downplay the appeal of the park, especially to families, and build cheap and safe.

Did I miss something with Core to Shore? When did the city envision it with high rises around it? The last renditions I saw from the city showed it almost totally surrounded by one-store single family homes with a few low rise apartments.

http://www.imaginativeamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/park3-640x369.jpg

I know this has been posted before, but I'll post it again. I would love to see these things here!

http://www.okc.gov/planning/coretoshore/images/redevconcept.jpg
http://www.okc.gov/planning/coretoshore/images/district-aerial-header.jpg


http://vimeo.com/1430974

Also would've been nice to see this

http://imaginativeamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/imagi_butzer_bridge_01.jpg

instead of this

http://0.tqn.com/d/okc/1/0/x/J/SkyDanceNew.jpg

I believe C2S can work if the right things are done to try and make it happen.

^^^ That is pretty cool. It's a little more ambitious than the Memphis example I used, especially with all the mid-rise structures west of the park, but also has many of the same elements.

http://www.imaginativeamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/park3-640x369.jpg

Those aren't high-rises. If anything, that looks like an attempt to portray the Back Bay area of Boston.

I was thinking that in the Core to Shore area the City could do something similar to what Paris did in the mid-1800's with the Haussmann façades. Not in style mind you , but in spirit. Define the vernacular Oklahoma City style and mandate that all facades in Core to Shore use it. It would save the developers a ton of money and create a very unique district.

For the record, I consider the Main Place Building to be the prototypical Oklahoma City façade.

Do you know anyone with an extra $120 million laying around to purchase the land?

With the COOP still blending in w/ our new skyline, it needs to have a new owner for sure. It makes it more difficult for the other developments to really take off. If this property were to have an anchor development as "Corp Plaza on the River", you would see the other areas take off. As is, its holding things back.

Does anyone have a feel for what price per SF the City paid to acquire land within the Maps 3 Park footprint? Also, does anyone have a good number for what the prime real estate surrounding the park (along Hudson, for example) is going for? I am sure there has been a lot of sales activity for the adjacent lots as the start date for park construction has drawn closer and closer.

With the COOP still blending in w/ our new skyline, it needs to have a new owner for sure. It makes it more difficult for the other developments to really take off. If this property were to have an anchor development as "Corp Plaza on the River", you would see the other areas take off. As is, its holding things back.

I have a feeling by 2020 (when is the Coop planning on moving to SOKC again?) there will be someone who will buy it then sell it off in chunks. I don't think one large development will go on that space. Not sure we want a Gaylord Oklahoman in that area or a casino development and that is the kind of development we are talking about taking up that much space.

The Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority (OCURA) has been working on acquiring properties around the proposed Central Park.

In their meeting this week, they will be amending their plan:


The Authority is carrying out the Core to Shore Urban Renewal Plan, approved by The City of Oklahoma City March 2, 2010, as amended November 27, 2012. To better facilitate the Urban Renewal Plan’s goals of creating infill neighborhoods surrounding the newly created park, it is appropriate and desirable to authorize the acquisition of the blocks surrounding the park. Additionally, in order to encourage property owners within the Urban Renewal Area with the means and desire to redevelop their property, it is appropriate and desirable to authorize owner participation agreements in accordance with the Oklahoma Urban Redevelopment Law.

The proposed Second Amendment to the Core to Shore Urban Renewal Plan amends Exhibits 4, 4A, and 4B to the Core to Shore Urban Renewal Plan to show the new areas where the Authority will be authorized to acquire real property. The proposed Second Amendment also grants the Authority the authorization to enter into owner participation agreements with landowners to redevelop or rehabilitate their properties consistent with the Urban Renewal Plan, provided the landowners meet criteria established by a policy adopted by the Authority.

OCURA may enter into agreements with the owners of record of property within the Urban Renewal Area if it determines it feasible and finds that the owner is financially and otherwise qualified to participate in the redevelopment of its property within the Urban Renewal Area. Wherever practicable, OCURA shall enter into agreements with the owners of record of properties receiving substantial benefit from public improvements and other public investments, such as infrastructure, parks or other public spaces, and transit. An owner participation agreement shall provide that the owner agrees to carry out the purposes of the Urban Renewal Plan and shall contain provisions deemed by OCURA to be necessary or desirable to assist in preventing the development or spread of future blight or to otherwise carry out the purposes of the Oklahoma Urban Redevelopment Law. An owner participation agreement shall be consistent with and make requirements similar to the conditions imposed in agreements for land dispostion, including the requirement to redevelop the property in accordance with this Urban Renewal Plan, as may be amended from time to time.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/c2s11314.jpg

Also, I had suggested that OCURA should have acquired the Stage Center site from the foundation then held a public process to determine it's highest and best use.

There was a counter-argument that the $4.275 million was beyond their means.

However, current financial statements show $10.1 million in assets; $4.9 in cash and $4.7 in investments.

And they certainly seem to have millions to spend on properties all over Core2Shore, which is still decades away from any real renaissance.

Also, I had suggested that OCURA should have acquired the Stage Center site from the foundation then held a public process to determine it's highest and best use.

There was a counter-argument that the $4.275 million was beyond their means.

However, current financial statements show $10.1 million in assets; $4.9 in cash and $4.7 in investments.

And they certainly seem to have millions to spend on properties all over Core2Shore, which is still decades away from any real renaissance.

Like. Or rather, dislike. Too bad they didn't purchase Stage Center.

The Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority (OCURA) has been working on acquiring properties around the proposed Central Park.

In their meeting this week, they will be amending their plan:

Man, that blue outline of the acquisition area is certainly an ambitious amount. Does OCURA have that much money to make all those acquisitions and if so, were do they get all their money?

Cuatrodemayo, maybe you could take the lead on the Central Park renderings, I'm sure they will be better than anything else out there. I would love to see what your vision is for Core to Shore / The River.

I've been considering taking a crack at redesigning the new park to show how it SHOULD be done, but 1) I have other projects that are getting priority right now and 2) I'm not sure there is enough grassroots support for an intervention ala FBB when it comes to the park.

Does anyone have a feel for what price per SF the City paid to acquire land within the Maps 3 Park footprint? Also, does anyone have a good number for what the prime real estate surrounding the park (along Hudson, for example) is going for? I am sure there has been a lot of sales activity for the adjacent lots as the start date for park construction has drawn closer and closer.

Got some land to unload? :D

Even if you don't re-design the whole park, redesigning the portion around both the film exchange and union station could at least give people some vision about the posibilties... :-)

Did I miss something with Core to Shore? When did the city envision it with high rises around it? The last renditions I saw from the city showed it almost totally surrounded by one-store single family homes with a few low rise apartments.

That is what I recall also - rows of brownstone/townhouses were fronting the west side park with several different types of residential to the west with some mixed use development on the east and north.

I've been considering taking a crack at redesigning the new park to show how it SHOULD be done, but 1) I have other projects that are getting priority right now and 2) I'm not sure there is enough grassroots support for an intervention ala FBB when it comes to the park.

I have no doubt you are busy as "the best" are always in high-demand. We just need A Design, that places the bar at the level you already invision in your designs. Some of the other attempts at ( Core to Shore / The River / Central Park ) just feels like we are settling for "the runner up". I don't know if we need a formal approach at the Central Parks plans, but they certainly need to have feel for what we all invision here.

What is the status of the park? I was looking online and it appears the main part of the park is north of I40 with just a smaller strip of park running down south of I40 to the river. However, I noticed that there are still properties that would be in the actual park part still being actively marketed for sale. Are they still planning on going all the way to the river on the west side of Robinson. I also notice some conceptual plans for Parkside developments but I am guessing that will be a long time off before we get any real development next to the park on the South side of I40.

CORE TO SHORE RIPPLES

http://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/w640-86f405c6847f560ea6b0c9abbcb4e444.jpg

http://oklahoman.com/core-to-shore-ripples/article/5363337

From the Journal Record commentary:

O’Connor: The future of Core to Shore

By: Cathy O'Connor Guest Columnist December 16, 2014

The conversation surrounding downtown development is ever evolving, consisting of a multitude of levels. Where do we develop? What type of development should go where? Would redevelopment of a district – or the creation of a new one – be detrimental to an established district? We work to answer these questions on a daily basis.

Since the Core to Shore district was conceptualized, there has been dialogue among city leaders and stakeholders as to whether it would compete with districts that are maturing downtown, such as Midtown, Bricktown and Deep Deuce, and even new developments like the Wheeler District planned for what is now known as the Downtown Airpark.

The answer is complicated. The Core to Shore district will be unlike any that we currently have, offering a very different type of development. It will be the blank slate that we need to develop a world-class neighborhood by providing much-needed community amenities, like added retail and commercial space, to the downtown area.

From what will be the new Crosstown Boulevard to the river, this project will add an estimated 500,000 square feet of office space, 2,500 residential units and 77,500 square feet of retail and commercial space. The rest of the development will contribute an additional million square feet of office space, 4,225 residential units and 156,200 square feet of retail and commercial space.

That being said, this development may be more complex and potentially more expensive than other districts around the city. Mayor Mick Cornett talks about the need for greater urban density, and that the idea of urban sprawl is one from the past. The new developmental paradigm of high-density, elevated design leads itself to a higher level of overall quality among all projects designed for the core of Oklahoma City.

The Core to Shore district will also be the long-awaited connection between the south site and the urban core. This will help move more investment into an area of Oklahoma City that has been longing for expansion and redevelopment for some time now.

It is important to keep in mind that development is not something that happens overnight. Remember the years it took Bricktown to transform into the entertainment district, and how long it has taken Midtown to run the course of its renaissance.

Cathy O’Connor is president of The Alliance for Economic Development of Oklahoma City.

When I was in Orlando for a couple hours today, I drove out to the former site of the Naval Training Center where I attended nuclear power school a long time ago. That base was closed during one of the BRAC rounds and has been redeveloped into what I think (hope) Core to Shore will become. It is called Baldwin Park and meets all the goals of the C2S studies and what many people hope that area will become. I thought about putting this in the Wheeler District thread, but Blair seems to have that one well in hand with a great vision and hopefully the means to achieve it. C2S seems to be a bit adrift now since the original "plan" is fairly old now, so maybe something like Baldwin Park should serve as an example of what could be. (This may have been mentioned in this thread at some point because Baldwin Park is similar to the opportunity OKC has to redevelop a large amount of land at one time.)

Baldwin Park | Orlando, FL (http://www.baldwinparkfl.com/)

With all the discussion of the Convention Center and how it could relate to Core to Shore, I thought it might be interesting and relevant to look at some concepts for C2S.