8 More years? :(

8 more years? :(

huh?

huh?

8 more years until the parks is 100% completion. I am excited about that park just can't stand the wait! :)

Subcommittee meeting tomorrow (Aug 21st) at 1:30 on 10th floor in City building at 420 W Main.

Big model of Tulsa's new park:

http://ktul.images.worldnow.com/images/2735988_G.jpg

Source: Model of Tulsa's Newest Park on Display - KTUL.com - Tulsa, Oklahoma - News, Weather & Sports (http://www.ktul.com/story/23180735/model-of-tulsas-newest-park-on-display)


Would be neat to see a big scale model like that of our new park. But the design probably hasn't been nailed down enough to make it worth someone's effort.

If done properly, that park is going to be phenomenal for Tulsa.

Found a cool photo of people lawn bowling in Minneapolis:

http://screenwritingfromiowa.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/photo-18.jpg

Source: Postcard #38 (Brit's Pub) | Screenwriting from Iowa (http://screenwritingfromiowa.wordpress.com/2013/09/12/postcard-38-brits-pub)

This is actually on the rooftop of Brit's Pub at Nicollet Mall.

http://media.citypages.com/6913554.87.jpg

Source: Lawn Bowling at Brit's Pub - Minneapolis - Slideshows (http://www.citypages.com/slideshow/lawn-bowling-at-brits-pub-33745496/)

I was thinking this might be a cool activity for downtown OKC. But I don't think we have a rooftop quite up to the task of this.

But... it could be a feature built into the new park. Set aside a little area for a bowling green.

I was hoping for a Large Iconic "Energy Tower". Something a little larger than the Seatle Tower.

...it should be placed at the end of the lower park, next to the River. This way, it would provide and Icon - Icon "look" from the Devon tower to the "Energy Tower".

Has there been any new "updates" on the Park ? ...Why is the demo not complete? ...the sub-station? .... tick - tock - tick - tock. That is the Economic Impact Clock ticking....

Has there been any new "updates" on the Park ? ...Why is the demo not complete? ...the sub-station? .... tick - tock - tick - tock. That is the Economic Impact Clock ticking....I hope you don't smoke crack; because it very bad for you. ;)

j/k seriously, i can get excited when speaking of new towers and highways :)

OKVision4U: I think they are still working out the details of the Park's design...which may all be in limbo until the fate of the Film Exchange Building is determined.

May be an interesting idea for the Hub Cap District side of the lower park.

I'm probably late to the roast, but the bizarre footprint of the park is a real disappointment.

I'm probably late to the roast, but the bizarre footprint of the park is a real disappointment.
I agree.

Somebody should stage a boulevard-style intervention.

I'll do drawings!

Found a cool photo of people lawn bowling in Minneapolis:

http://screenwritingfromiowa.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/photo-18.jpg

Source: Postcard #38 (Brit's Pub) | Screenwriting from Iowa (http://screenwritingfromiowa.wordpress.com/2013/09/12/postcard-38-brits-pub)

This is actually on the rooftop of Brit's Pub at Nicollet Mall.

http://media.citypages.com/6913554.87.jpg

Source: Lawn Bowling at Brit's Pub - Minneapolis - Slideshows (http://www.citypages.com/slideshow/lawn-bowling-at-brits-pub-33745496/)

I was thinking this might be a cool activity for downtown OKC. But I don't think we have a rooftop quite up to the task of this.

But... it could be a feature built into the new park. Set aside a little area for a bowling green.

Why couldn't Fassler Hall have incorporated this in their design?

Why couldn't Fassler Hall have incorporated this in their design?

Possibly because there isn't enough land and it would be a big money loser for a private business if they had to have that much land. This is on the roof of a mall so it's hardly a good comparison.

I'm probably late to the roast, but the bizarre footprint of the park is a real disappointment.

What do you mean? Specifically...

Park Masterplan set to be approved by Park Subcommittee tomorrow, (1:30 pm, 10th Floor Conference Room, 420 W Main) and by the MAPS 3 Board on Thursday (3 pm, City Council Chamber - note different time).

Also there will be a presentation to the subcommitte on the original Film Exchange Building (not the one in Film Row which this site seems to want to link to).

SIRE Public Access (http://www.okc.gov/AgendaPub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=2620&doctype=AGENDA)

Park Masterplan set to be approved by Park Subcommittee tomorrow, (1:30 pm, 10th Floor Conference Room, 420 W Main) and by the MAPS 3 Board on Thursday (3 pm, City Council Chamber - note different time).

Also there will be a presentation to the subcommitte on the original Film Exchange Building (not the one in Film Row which this site seems to want to link to).

SIRE Public Access (http://www.okc.gov/AgendaPub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=2620&doctype=AGENDA)

No changes have been made to the design even though there has been a lot of public input about the lack of context and them destroying everything but Union Station in the design.

I hope they do not approve the design. It is a cookie cutter park that destroys our city's history and does not add anything to our city that we don't already have at the Myriad Gardens. Tulsa is getting a park that is 1000 times better and suits the site.

no changes have been made to the design even though there has been a lot of public input about the lack of context and them destroying everything but union station in the design.

I hope they do not approve the design. It is a cookie cutter park that destroys our city's history and does not add anything to our city that we don't already have at the myriad gardens. Tulsa is getting a park that is 1000 times better and suits the site.

this.

No changes have been made to the design even though there has been a lot of public input about the lack of context and them destroying everything but Union Station in the design.

I hope they do not approve the design. It is a cookie cutter park that destroys our city's history and does not add anything to our city that we don't already have at the Myriad Gardens. Tulsa is getting a park that is 1000 times better and suits the site.

this X2

Can the public comment at this meeting? Is anyone going to express these concerns?

Can the public comment at this meeting? Is anyone going to express these concerns?

Citizens can always speak at the committee meetings.

Very good design. I hope it passes

kinda off topic and not downtown, but Stewart's 9 hole course is a nice little hidden gem. easy walk for 9 holes any day
Yep. Nice little course. Good view of Devon tower too.
Even though I like my golf I really don't see the need for a course in the park. Stewart, Lincoln, and even Hefner aren't that far.

No changes have been made to the design even though there has been a lot of public input about the lack of context and them destroying everything but Union Station in the design.

I hope they do not approve the design. It is a cookie cutter park that destroys our city's history and does not add anything to our city that we don't already have at the Myriad Gardens. Tulsa is getting a park that is 1000 times better and suits the site.

Painfully obvious from her arrogant indifference to citizens concerns that the woman heading this up for Hargreaves Associates considers us Midwestern Hick Dummards that should feel blessed to receive even the half-assed efforts of a public Space Goddess from somewhere important. Not that our most recent local park designer has any more talent than ego either. Our engineer dominated city government must be reconstructed. They make really shortsighted numerical efficiency driven decisions. They hire accordingly. They are building for units, not people.

this X2

CuatrodeMayo, ...what would be your list of recommend changes / enhancements to the park?

This is the most detail I've seen on the first phase, which will be starting soon:

http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/5496d1387379903-central-park-central3.jpg

This is also the latest concept for the park/boulevard:

http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/5499d1387380548-central-park-central6.jpg

Another thing that was mentioned in Steve's latest article about the Rainey Williams tower:

Cathy O'Connor said OG&E's property at 420 S Broadway is also far more attractive for development than it was just a few years ago.

“The South Broadway property is one that is one block away from the future park and the arena,” O'Connor said. “It's prime for private investment related to the park development. With the city investing $130 million in a park a block away, and with the streetcar coming, and how close it is to Bricktown, it could be an important connection between Bricktown and the rest of downtown west of the BNSF tracks.”

Advisory panel approves plan for MAPS 3 downtown Oklahoma City park | News OK (http://newsok.com/advisory-panel-approves-plan-for-maps-3-downtown-oklahoma-city-park/article/3915814)

From the article -


Design director George Hargreaves said a decision to preserve the Film Exchange would increase costs for park design and delay construction.

How ? Why not leave it alone and let those interested in preservation be responsible. I think it would save them money as in less demo cost.

From the article -



How ? Why not leave it alone and let those interested in preservation be responsible. I think it would save them money as in less demo cost.

Demo cost are minimal for this type of structure.

How ? Why not leave it alone and let those interested in preservation be responsible. I think it would save them money as in less demo cost.

I'm guessing it would take at least a few rounds of revisions to the park plans, b/c I'm sure the tree that was planned to go there can't go anywhere else.

Demo cost are minimal for this type of structure.

Really? Do you even know what you are talking about? It is a solid 2' wide thick walled concrete building.

Demo cost are minimal for this type of structure.

It's a fortress. Demo would be more than a typical structure.

The master plan has been approved.

Oklahoma City Council approves MAPS 3 park master plan | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-council-approves-maps-3-park-master-plan/article/3921687)

The master plan has been approved.

Oklahoma City Council approves MAPS 3 park master plan | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-council-approves-maps-3-park-master-plan/article/3921687)

The master plan was approved with many concerns from citizens. There was not one change made to the park from their first presentation a year ago There is no funding source and they plan on utilizing Union Station that they don't own or have a plan to pay for it. They also don't have a clear plan to fund the operations of the park. They want to charge for parking next to the park on city streets. This park is basically a larger Myriad Gardens. Nothing new or different.

^This is an example of why I think MAPS as we know it will be done after this go-around. Future MAPS projects will each be on their own ballot. Back when MAPS I was first passed this city changed at a snails pace. You could make plans and 20 years the plan would still be valid because the assumptions that went into it rarely changed. In just a short time OKC has become much more dynamic. Plans have to be developed and executed quickly and the priority of the voters change even faster. Despite attempts by a very small minority to shut down the streetcar project you can see how many people want it by the cries of "we are being left out" from areas not on the initial route.

Hargreaves thinks of OKC as a bunch of red necks and hates being here. They have made millions off us from the American Indian Culture Center and now this park. And we have nothing to show for it. This park will probably be over budget like most of their projects and be underwhelming because of its poor design.

They have a pedestrian corridor by its kid park planned for the Boulevard that is supposed to have thousands of cars pass through it. How is this safe? It may look good in drawings but when we have people getting hit by cars the city will be liable not the landscape architecture firm. They will just say you reviewed the designs and approved them. Therefore all liability for the bad design is the city's.

How you don't put a formal fence with monumental entry ports in an urban park is beyond me. Olmstead would be rolling over in his grave.

This is a joke. What has anyone on the parks subcommittee done?

There isn't a single unique place marker in this park. I agree with lasomeday on how Hargreaves feels about this project. This is pretty bad for them. What's more is Council just rubber stamped the damn thing after the design head of Hargreaves antagonized us last month for wanting to save an important historic structure.

This design contract should be voided and go into arbitration to get our money back. Not rubber stamped and patted on the back. Council, including the urban chicken Ed Shadid himself, are all worthless spineless chumps who go on to the next week without ever digging and pressing to hold people to a standard.

Better than crappy doesn't make me happy.

This is another example of OKC thinking small-time. It could be worse, but for crying out loud Tulsa's proposed riverfront park is much better than this. The saving grace of this project will be development surrounding the park, which may or may not come to fruition. Otherwise it's pretty much a larger Myriad Gardens which has already been stated.

I feel like we are at a point where the negligence and oversight of Hargreaves & Associates, the San Francisco landscape architecture firm that we paid $1.25 million for the MAPS3 Central Park design work, needs a critical look into gross incompetence, refusing to work with the public, and potentially worse accusations that may naturally arise by investigating this issue further. By the way, $1.25 is an abnormally huge retainer fee for schematic design services.

Steve Lackmeyer makes several salient points in this blog post:
Who is Excited About the Future Core to Shore Park? | News OK (http://newsok.com/who-is-excited-about-the-future-core-to-shore-park/article/3924209)

1. Nobody is excited about this park.
2. Tulsa got much better design work out of a landscape architect we rejected.
3. Tulsa's park vision was strong and compelling enough to raise major private and philanthropic contributions.
4. Moore is building pretty much the same park for cheaper.
5. The work submitted by Hargreaves is essentially the same park proposed in campaign illustrations.
6. This is after supposedly $1.25 million in work was done on "park design"

So those are six important takeaways from Steve.

Add to this picture, in a post I made in the Central Park thread, that Hargreaves is clearly capable of doing excellent work. They aren't incompetent or bad designers, we just aren't getting their best.
Central Park - OKCTalk (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Central%20Park&page=12#post667618)

Additionally, the principal designer at Hargreaves thinks its his place, as a San Francisco native who is plundering MAPS3, to give the City Council marching orders when it comes to preserving historic buildings like the Film Exchange Building on S. Robinson. They don't want it worked into their McMasterplan, so they've concocted this 30-day RFP period which will squeeze and stress potentially interested parties into not really being able to submit a decent plan.

Film Exchange at Central Park - OKCTalk (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Film+Exchange+at+Central+Park#v w-comments)

The worst aspect of all of this is that our City Council said nothing critical and in no way suggested to them that they should do better. They could have said that here in OKC we have a higher standard, we have local design professionals who would do better and to whom this is an insult, and that their retainer fee should have moved this park plan further along than the campaign illustration we already had in 2009. But instead they didn't because our City Council has never backed up a high standard and wouldn't know where to begin.

I am beginning to wonder why Hargreaves is getting such a free pass? Why were they given the contract in the first place? The work that they did for us before MAPS3 in producing irrelevant visionary images of Core2Shore wasn't particularly inspiring work. Lackmeyer has criticized that again as essentially an out of state firm that has no local knowledge or understanding producing images of pipe dreams.

Pretty much 100% disagree. It will be a great park and there is no reason to keep a non descript building

I really like what Tulsa has planned. It is truly better than what is currently planned for OKC. Is the OKC design final or is there any chance it can be modified?

Why does it seem that OKC usually picks the wrong architects/developers to do these defining urban projects? Randy Hogan, Rainey Williams, Hargreaves, etc.. Anybody see a pattern here?

I feel like we are at a point where the negligence and oversight of Hargreaves & Associates, the San Francisco landscape architecture firm that we paid $1.25 million for the MAPS3 Central Park design work, needs a critical look into gross incompetence, refusing to work with the public, and potentially worse accusations that may naturally arise by investigating this issue further. By the way, $1.25 is an abnormally huge retainer fee for schematic design services.

Steve Lackmeyer makes several salient points in this blog post:
Who is Excited About the Future Core to Shore Park? | News OK (http://newsok.com/who-is-excited-about-the-future-core-to-shore-park/article/3924209)

1. Nobody is excited about this park.
2. Tulsa got much better design work out of a landscape architect we rejected.
3. Tulsa's park vision was strong and compelling enough to raise major private and philanthropic contributions.
4. Moore is building pretty much the same park for cheaper.
5. The work submitted by Hargreaves is essentially the same park proposed in campaign illustrations.
6. This is after supposedly $1.25 million in work was done on "park design"

So those are six important takeaways from Steve.

Add to this picture, in a post I made in the Central Park thread, that Hargreaves is clearly capable of doing excellent work. They aren't incompetent or bad designers, we just aren't getting their best.
Central Park - OKCTalk (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Central%20Park&page=12#post667618)

Additionally, the principal designer at Hargreaves thinks its his place, as a San Francisco native who is plundering MAPS3, to give the City Council marching orders when it comes to preserving historic buildings like the Film Exchange Building on S. Robinson. They don't want it worked into their McMasterplan, so they've concocted this 30-day RFP period which will squeeze and stress potentially interested parties into not really being able to submit a decent plan.

Film Exchange at Central Park - OKCTalk (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Film+Exchange+at+Central+Park#v w-comments)

The worst aspect of all of this is that our City Council said nothing critical and in no way suggested to them that they should do better. They could have said that here in OKC we have a higher standard, we have local design professionals who would do better and to whom this is an insult, and that their retainer fee should have moved this park plan further along than the campaign illustration we already had in 2009. But instead they didn't because our City Council has never backed up a high standard and wouldn't know where to begin.

I am beginning to wonder why Hargreaves is getting such a free pass? Why were they given the contract in the first place? The work that they did for us before MAPS3 in producing irrelevant visionary images of Core2Shore wasn't particularly inspiring work. Lackmeyer has criticized that again as essentially an out of state firm that has no local knowledge or understanding producing images of pipe dreams.

I honestly don't care that much about the film exchange building but would obviously prefer a more elaborate park design. Who is on the park subcommittee?

The problem I see with the Central Park is that they are building a suburban style regional park where they should be building an urban park. The design criteria for each are totally different and it appears Hargreaves & Associates has never heard of the rural to urban transect and the unique design features that occur across the spectrum. The park should be designed based on the T-zone it is in. I don't know if it is their own incompetence or if that is the direction they are getting from the subcommittee. Either way I see this park as something that the next generation is going to have to fix because this group seems in capable of doing it right the first time.

I honestly don't care that much about the film exchange building but would obviously prefer a more elaborate park design. Who is on the park subcommittee?

Subcommittee Members:

Kimberly Lowe, Chair
Michael Dover, Vice Chair
Bill Cameron
Kari Watkins
Anthony McDermid
Teresa Rose
Miles Tolbert
Desmond Mason
Fred Hall
Debi Bocar
Rusty LaForge

The problem I see with the Central Park is that they are building a suburban style regional park where they should be building an urban park. The design criteria for each are totally different and it appears Hargreaves & Associates has never heard of the rural to urban transect and the unique design features that occur across the spectrum. The park should be designed based on the T-zone it is in. I don't know if it is their own incompetence or if that is the direction they are getting from the subcommittee. Either way I see this park as something that the next generation is going to have to fix because this group seems in capable of doing it right the first time.

I agree. The Central Park needs to be something special, not a transplant of Mitch Park in Edmond to downtown. OKC seems to have trouble grasping urban design concepts until something gets built that's an absolutely failure from a design standpoint. For instance, OKC didn't start getting serious about urban design principles in new development until after the squandered opportunity that was Lower Bricktown. The private market stepped in and started building the kind of development that should have been built along the canal in other areas. It looks like this park, if built in its current form, will be the same kind of missed opportunity Lower Bricktown was while at the same time Tulsa is going to get it right.

Let's hope something can be done about this before it is built. I have my doubts at this point.

Let's hope something can be done about this before it is built. I have my doubts at this point.

I have already chalked it up to 'opportunity missed' exactly like Lower Bricktown and Sandridge Commons. It will be up to people 10 to 15 years from now to fix it. If they just missed the target by a little bit it might be worth the effort to fight it but these guys missed it by miles.

Pretty much 100% disagree. It will be a great park and there is no reason to keep a non descript building

Why wouldnt we keep an easily rehabbed buidling that takes up so little space. It could serve a multitude of functions and would also be a source of income for the city. I think integrating a historic structure would also add quite a bit to the aesthetic of the park. Not everything has to be new.

The problem I see with the Central Park is that they are building a suburban style regional park where they should be building an urban park. The design criteria for each are totally different and it appears Hargreaves & Associates has never heard of the rural to urban transect and the unique design features that occur across the spectrum. The park should be designed based on the T-zone it is in. I don't know if it is their own incompetence or if that is the direction they are getting from the subcommittee. Either way I see this park as something that the next generation is going to have to fix because this group seems in capable of doing it right the first time.

Te problem isn't that we are incapable. We are very capable if we just cared. The people on council and these committees are people pleasers, not sharp-minded visionaries who want to hold Hargreaves to a standard. I don't know why Hargreaves hasn't put in the work they were paid to, but I suspect they sensed we don't really care and are taking advantage of that.

I know it isn't very Oklahoman to be anything but nice, but when all you are is nice even when you should be pissed, this park is what happens.

Te problem isn't that we are incapable. We are very capable if we just cared. The people on council and these committees are people pleasers, not sharp-minded visionaries who want to hold Hargreaves to a standard. I don't know why Hargreaves hasn't put in the work they were paid to, but I suspect they sensed we don't really care and are taking advantage of that.

I know it isn't very Oklahoman to be anything but nice, but when all you are is nice even when you should be pissed, this park is what happens.

Well, the OKC way is "anything better than crappy makes us happy." As long as that is the attitude here, crap is what we will continue to get. It's frustrating because every time it seems like OKC might have turned a corner and learned its lesson from past mistakes, projects like this and the Stage Center Tower prove otherwise. Also, the poor park design sounds like it was more of a good ole boy thing than it was a simple people-pleasing episode.

Well I don't know, it would make sense, but who is Hargreaves' good ole boy connection? Their behavior exhibits strong signs of that but I just don't know enough to make that claim.

Well I don't know, it would make sense, but who is Hargreaves' good ole boy connection? Their behavior exhibits strong signs of that but I just don't know enough to make that claim.

Hanz Butzer.......

How is Hans Butzer connected to Hargreaves?

He paired up with them for this project and presents his cafe concept of a chimney looking structure as the focal point for the north part of the park. He is why they go the project and no one opposes it.

Pretty much 100% disagree. It will be a great park and there is no reason to keep a non descript building

100% agreement here. Could it be the naysayers are just sour graping the design???

He paired up with them for this project and presents his cafe concept of a chimney looking structure as the focal point for the north part of the park. He is why they go the project and no one opposes it.

Right but it is the subcommittee's responsibility to enforce a standard and approve work.