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

The Film Exchange building is a separate issue from the design flaws. I really could care less either way about the Film Exchange building. What I was hoping to see is an urban park and not something that could be built in Edmond. Tulsa's design hits the nail on the head.

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

...can we add Cuatrodemayo, Andrew Stewart ?

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

I did not know. Excellent. So great to see a college standout and former NBA player take pride in our city.

The Film Exchange building is a separate issue from the design flaws. I really could care less either way about the Film Exchange building. What I was hoping to see is an urban park and not something that could be built in Edmond. Tulsa's design hits the nail on the head.

How else do you plan to make Hargreaves design a more contextually appropriate park than by refusing to let them white wash the site of its urban context?

How else do you plan to make Hargreaves design a more contextually appropriate park than by refusing to let them white wash the site of its urban context?

Good point. All who oppose the park design needs to jump on board the Film Exchange bandwagon. The only way the park design is getting changed is if it has to be to incorporate the Film Exchange building.

I've been told by those closest to the campaign to save the Film Exchange Building at Central Park that they've pretty much given up hope of saving it.

Too little time, too little funding interest or too many contusions from banging their head against the don't you know the decision is already in the bag wall.

(Guessing the latter is a huge part of it)

I really could care less either way about the..,

Point of order. The phrase is 'couldn't care less'. If you could care less it means you have some level of caring above zero, but I think you meant that you care as little as possible and thus couldn't care less.

That is all and I know return you to regular programming. :).

I've been told by those closest to the campaign to save the Film Exchange Building at Central Park that they've pretty much given up hope of saving it.

Why is that?

I've been told by those closest to the campaign to save the Film Exchange Building at Central Park that they've pretty much given up hope of saving it.

I heard basically the same thing at the Film Row Association meeting last week. What I heard was that it was a foregone conclusion.

Well, everything in OKC is a foregone conclusion...

Who the hell can respond to a 30 day RFP? Nick Preftakes can't even propose anything in 6 years when he owns the whole block. The city even used administrative approval to knock down the bldg across the street.

So am I the only one who read this post 10 days ago?

Film Exchange at Central Park - OKCTalk (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Film%20Exchange%20at%20Central% 20Park&page=2#post731100)


I guess I will chime in again, after taking this recent image of a quote that shares what those who built these buildings wanted to say about their future.


But when it comes to the FEB's future - I was told yesterday morning that a very prominent person stated to my colleague: "I can't believe that no one told you that this decision was made five years ago." Referring to the demolition of the Film Exchange building.


Folks, YOUR city has an amazing history and if not for the historic tax credits and some very forward thinking preservationist and developers, the history that we still have would not be standing today. There will be at least two major sacrifices of historic structures in the very near future and there is nothing that can be done about it. Trust me - I have tried. So, let their loss become a battle cry for "no more!" in the decades ahead. I have a plan to help bring awareness to such plight and hope to garner your support in the coming months, upon it being revealed.


Thanks for all of the discussion about saving the FEB, along with others. Be part of your City's future - VOTE and become involved. Be a voice on a citizen committee. At the very least be informed - do diligent research! Apathy from voters will kill this town's forward momentum.


That is my two cents for now.

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.

From this post it is very clear that you have never been to a maps 3 park committe meeting and that you are out of touch with okc in general

From this post it is very clear that you have never been to a maps 3 park committe meeting and that you are out of touch with okc in general

Do you care to substantiate that? Go on?

I agree with Spartan on the park design. I believe it is wholly uninspired. We have incredibly talented landscape designers locally that would have taken this park much farther. What we got was a very average greenspace. Perhaps it will develop over the next hundred years into something attractive, but we'll all be long dead.

I am not only disillusioned with the park design, but I am beginning to become disillusioned with the entire Maps 3 program. It seems OKC has lost its visionary leadership and has turned back to typical politics, or worse. It is particularly upsetting because OKC will now never support another tax initiative aimed at civic improvements. The loss will be felt on a much greater scale than just the below-average park.

I agree with Spartan on the park design. I believe it is wholly uninspired. We have incredibly talented landscape designers locally that would have taken this park much farther. What we got was a very average greenspace. Perhaps it will develop over the next hundred years into something attractive, but we'll all be long dead.

I am not only disillusioned with the park design, but I am beginning to become disillusioned with the entire Maps 3 program. It seems OKC has lost its visionary leadership and has turned back to typical politics, or worse. It is particularly upsetting because OKC will now never support another tax initiative aimed at civic improvements. The loss will be felt on a much greater scale than just the below-average park.

Not so fast my friend, ...MAPS3 is a tremendous success, we just need to make sure Hargreaves is "on point". We all need to provide that Push / Pull approach with them and let them know what our expectations are! If they have a Clearly defined set of goals for objectives, then let's make sure they are hitting that mark.

One thing that may be a conversation pieces is this: Too much time in between and not enough scheduled ( goals / benchmarks ) for Hargreaves to hit. They need to be inspired too, so don't let them have 6 months for (1) objective, but make them hit this every 20 days. Internally, Hargreaves has put this on the side burners, and is working on "other" projects. ...until the "have to" respond.

If the park is amazing, then all the developments surrounding it will be of the same level. If the park is average, then the developments in C2S will be expected to equal...average.

This is why I always want the Highest in Design / Function / Scale. ..in the Park. ...in the Blvd. ...Convention Center. They set the tone for all the other developments.

http://youtu.be/P3V1nUPtmpQ

I'm certain it's been posted on this site before (likley more than once), but there are a lot of new people of late. If you haven't watched this very short video about the Film Exchange building, please do. I hope it will change your minds.

I just dont get how there wont be a need for a building like the film exchange, whether it be park operations, eatery/bar/beer garden, storage, or some kind of community center. There really isnt a reason that a building that has good bones/structurally sound on the edge of the park cant be re-purposed. I really didnt care about Stage Center because it is not very functionable. The film exchange is and would not be that expensive to rehab. As I said earlier, not everything has to be new at this park. A little character and charm go a long way in making it a cool urban park.

I just dont get how there wont be a need for a building like the film exchange, whether it be park operations, eatery/bar/beer garden, storage, or some kind of community center. There really isnt a reason that a building that has good bones/structurally sound on the edge of the park cant be re-purposed. I really didnt care about Stage Center because it is not very functionable. The film exchange is and would not be that expensive to rehab. As I said earlier, not everything has to be new at this park. A little character and charm go a long way in making it a cool urban park.

It might make a good MAPS history museum or even an OKC Institute for Urban Redevelopment starting with the Pei plan up to current time. They could even put the Pei model on permanent display.

It might make a good MAPS history museum or even an OKC Institute for Urban Redevelopment starting with the Pei plan up to current time. They could even put the Pei model on permanent display.

Or maybe even just an Oklahoma City history museum in general. We might soon need such a museum to convince new visitors and residents that the city has been around for more than 50 years.

Is there anything that can be done to alter the design of the park at this point or is it pretty much set in stone?

I was under the impression that the "Master Plan" was approved, which implies some amount of flexibility in the final design...

With the approval of the Master Plan (which has already happened) they will immediately start the design phase for Phase I.

Even though Phase II design doesn't start until 2016, Phase I will have set the bigger pieces in place.

This plan has been presented and talked about for a couple of years now, with scores of public meetings. The Master Plan is similar to what has been proposed all along.

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


http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/5495d1387379902-central-park-central2.jpg

All I'm really asking for at this point in time is for HA to be forced (by the council -- and I emailed my councilor this request) to at least create a design alternative that includes the FEB. Maybe they do so and we find that it really doesn't work. But then at least we know we looked at such an option with due consideration.

Incidentally if you look at how the FEB lines up to the great lawn (at SW 5th and Robinson), it fits almost perfectly, and would be the perfect place for event concessions and such when those events occur on the great lawn. And with the timeline shown, I feel it could be rehabed in time for use in Phase 1.

The Tulsa park clearly has a better layout in terms of various sectors of the park and encourages more diverse visitors. But the dedicated parking lots throughout Tulsa's design is a turn off. I know it probably has to do with the location of Tulsa's park..

With how bad the OKC park is, I am really surprised the OKC park wasn't designed with parking lots; the street-side parking is the better choice.

It might make a good MAPS history museum or even an OKC Institute for Urban Redevelopment starting with the Pei plan up to current time. They could even put the Pei model on permanent display.

I am tired of this thinking that everything has to be a museum. Not everything has to be a museum. Do we plan on having a restaurant or at least a concession stand in this park? Then it could go in this building. It could be artfully incorporated into the "active edge" along Robinson that we elected to go with.

Just to fuel the outrage over this park, here are renderings of Tulsa's park. Speak up if any of you think that our park should be inferior to Tulsa. Otherwise, I hope you'll join us in putting the pressure on council and the subcommittee to speak up for the citizen's interest.

http://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/r620-1969bcd9dbd1a041e08e2b6fb8b77b64.jpg
http://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/r620-87cb308ee4a865b623897a14f7ce5009.jpg
http://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/r620-7e69336fd9d0ad78de5280b55b90532c.jpg
http://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/r620-025cdaebc20ce00958426c92b6e15cd5.jpg
http://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/r620-9cf36a8f24a07022a56f344916a96b3b.jpg
http://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/r620-60e5dbba7e934d0b5b98a418422c9c27.jpg
http://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/r620-8d6f03749732eba4d19b984a70632494.jpg
http://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/r620-dfcb554819171f04d016582fd10cee52.jpg

What you just saw are as follows: an adventure playground, moderne beer garden, LOTR-esque pedestrian bridges over new pond, a rock ledge garden, a turtle island, a mist mountain, and the last two are of the lodge. Non of which exists in the Myriad Gardens. As for the new MAPS3 Central Park, it's difficult to identify a single feature that doesn't already exist two blocks up Robinson.

I doubt there will be a restaurant IN the park. Maybe some seasonal sidewalk food vendors but that will probably be it. Spartan is correct that the MAPS III park won't have anything that isn't already available in spades around downtown; for example - how many more amphitheaters do we need? There is one at MBG, one on the canal outside the Sonic building, one at the airpark, one in Bicentennial Park, and one planned for Sandridge Commons (and those are just the ones off the top of my head).

We have big amount of open grass in downtown right now ?

We have a outdoor spot for a huge concert?

We have big amount of open grass in downtown right now ?

Define 'big'.

We have a outdoor spot for a huge concert?

Yes - at the Airpark and the baseball stadium.

I know the Tulsa park meanders along the river. How does it compare in size and budget to the OKC park?

Yes - at the Airpark and the baseball stadium.

Those hold less than 15k people (maybe 20 at the baseball field if you packed the field)

Just how many people do you think the green at the Central Park can hold?

The poster who first used the term "uninspired" for the park certainly nailed it. That's the word that keeps coming back to me.

I am tired of this thinking that everything has to be a museum. Not everything has to be a museum. Do we plan on having a restaurant or at least a concession stand in this park? Then it could go in this building. It could be artfully incorporated into the "active edge" along Robinson that we elected to go with.

Just to fuel the outrage over this park, here are renderings of Tulsa's park. Speak up if any of you think that our park should be inferior to Tulsa. Otherwise, I hope you'll join us in putting the pressure on council and the subcommittee to speak up for the citizen's interest.


What you just saw are as follows: an adventure playground, moderne beer garden, LOTR-esque pedestrian bridges over new pond, a rock ledge garden, a turtle island, a mist mountain, and the last two are of the lodge. Non of which exists in the Myriad Gardens. As for the new MAPS3 Central Park, it's difficult to identify a single feature that doesn't already exist two blocks up Robinson.

I've been mute on this subject, but that Tulsa park is stunning and puts our concept to shame. Night and day. Maybe the best course of action is to send those Tulsa renderings to the Park subcommittee members, the Council, City Manager, and Mayor, and politely ask how our park compares. A little sibling rivalry can be a good thing and there's no reason to let Tulsa take our lunch money.

If you are familiar with Tulsa, you know that the native contour and layout, as well as diversity of vegetation, makes it a little easier to be creative as opposed to a big flat rectangle piece of lawn. That in no way excuses the lack of creativity or appropriate design on our park. Just sayin though.

Tulsa had this incredible stretch of river front available for all these years and have totally ignored it. Glad to see them finally taking some action. Also might mentioned that the river it sits next to has been totally mismanaged as an asset. You have to give OKC credit for maximizing what they have been naturally given for a river.

We have big amount of open grass in downtown right now ?

In soviet Russia big grass open you

If you are familiar with Tulsa, you know that the native contour and layout, as well as diversity of vegetation, makes it a little easier to be creative as opposed to a big flat rectangle piece of lawn. That in no way excuses the lack of creativity or appropriate design on our park. Just sayin though.

Tulsa had this incredible stretch of river front available for all these years and have totally ignored it. Glad to see them finally taking some action. Also might mentioned that the river it sits next to has been totally mismanaged as an asset. You have to give OKC credit for maximizing what they have been naturally given for a river.

I wouldn't say it's totally mismanaged as an asset; Tulsa's river trails are a national model and have been for a long time. That's an amazing asset.

As for the topography and such, I'm honestly not seeing that in Tulsa's park, which by the way, they call the "Gathering Place" for now. We call ours Downtown Park. That influences the philosophy from the beginning. But back to what I don't see...what I do see us a modern beer garden, a rock lodge (okay we have the Union Station so that cancels that out, not that Hargreaves put that there or probably wants it there). I see fountains, gardens tucked between rock ledges, LOTR-like bridges, and so on. Those are design features (ie, what we PAY HARGREAVES TO DO) not Tulsa being blessed with better topography an hour and a half east of us.

In soviet Russia big grass open you
"Like"

I am not only disillusioned with the park design, but I am beginning to become disillusioned with the entire Maps 3 program. It seems OKC has lost its visionary leadership and has turned back to typical politics, or worse. It is particularly upsetting because OKC will now never support another tax initiative aimed at civic improvements. The loss will be felt on a much greater scale than just the below-average park.

I disagree. And... this all sounds strangely familar.

double post

This plan has been presented and talked about for a couple of years now, with scores of public meetings. The Master Plan is similar to what has been proposed all along.

Exactly. Where were you guys?

I was down there today. To be frank, I would love to see a giant bean like Millennium Park in Chicago has, or some other major statement piece. But that's just an opinion.

The reality is that this area is a vast wasteland and what is proposed meets and probably exceeds voters' expectations. We can add more stuff to the canvass over time.

If you are familiar with Tulsa, you know that the native contour and layout, as well as diversity of vegetation, makes it a little easier to be creative as opposed to a big flat rectangle piece of lawn. That in no way excuses the lack of creativity or appropriate design on our park. Just sayin though.

Tulsa had this incredible stretch of river front available for all these years and have totally ignored it. Glad to see them finally taking some action. Also might mentioned that the river it sits next to has been totally mismanaged as an asset. You have to give OKC credit for maximizing what they have been naturally given for a river.

Yes, I think OKC leadership in the past and present has done an EXCELLENT job in turning a giant flat prairie field into what it is we have today. Tulsa is blessed with beautiful topographies, OKC was a flat, treeless waist land when we started, you just can not compare. Leadership and vision is what drives cities forward. Although I do like everybody else believes that some people in leadership has had a lacked vision over the years, OKC has come a long ways.....and the future looks great.

By the way Pete, is there a reason this got folded back into the Central Park thread? I'm not saying you'd stymie discussion, but that's the effect. People just don't care about this Central Park and this thread doesn't get much activity compared to any thread w mystery tower potential... Can we not have a thread title that speaks to the negligence of Hargreaves? That's a civic issue more than a development issue.

And Urban Pioneer - meetings at 10 am at some room inside the Cox Crnter don't count. Has the Park Subcommittee EVER had a public forum like the Streetcar Subcommittee? Are they particularly responsive on social media? Do they interact on this forum? I don't know how you can back up the openness of the park planning process after all the special meetings, forums, and evening events that the streetcar planning process has done. Comparing the two is an insult to how open the Streetcar Subcommittee has been.

The first rule of MAPS3 is not all subcommittees are created equal. The 2nd and 3rd rules also speak to that.

There were downtown park public meetings on 9/13/12 and 1/24/13. Probably others, but these I attended. Not sure if these are the kinds of meetings you meant, but meetings did happen...

Those hold less than 15k people (maybe 20 at the baseball field if you packed the field)

Outside of a major concert fest Im not sure there are many outdoor/amphitheater type acts that will need space for more than 15k. Do we want 30 acres of open space for the one concert event that might sell 20k tickets that only comes once every 3 years?

I wouldn't say it's totally mismanaged as an asset; Tulsa's river trails are a national model and have been for a long time. That's an amazing asset.

As for the topography and such, I'm honestly not seeing that in Tulsa's park, which by the way, they call the "Gathering Place" for now. We call ours Downtown Park. That influences the philosophy from the beginning. But back to what I don't see...what I do see us a modern beer garden, a rock lodge (okay we have the Union Station so that cancels that out, not that Hargreaves put that there or probably wants it there). I see fountains, gardens tucked between rock ledges, LOTR-like bridges, and so on. Those are design features (ie, what we PAY HARGREAVES TO DO) not Tulsa being blessed with better topography an hour and a half east of us.

When I lived in Tulsa, near this area, I drove, walked and biked it regularly. To compare the meandering natural parkland adjacent to the river to the flat barren parcel we are making our park out of is to deny the obvious. I don't know about the national accolades for the trails part, but I do know that the trails at Lake Hefner seem to get as much or more use. As to the river, it has not been mismanaged as much as it just hasn't been developed as an asset.

That said, I wholeheartedly agree that Hargreaves has done a woeful job and absolutely done the minimum to earn their money. And, I agree the city has done a woeful job of managing the process. And it all starts with not having the proper expectations in the first place. The first expectation was to clear a totally run down area that was envisioned to be a gateway to a revitalized downtown. That is a very low bar. But, just like the war in Iraq, the most critical piece is mismanaged...which is what you do AFTER the siege. The vision wasn't about creating a great park, but rather cleaning up an area. Two very different objectives. Truthfully, this is the piece of Maps I am most disappointed with. I think others will be too....much more than the CC.

In conclusion, I think Hargreaves did exactly what was expected of them. The fault is in the original purpose and vision which gave no real expectations of quality.

And Urban Pioneer - meetings at 10 am at some room inside the Cox Crnter don't count. Has the Park Subcommittee EVER had a public forum like the Streetcar Subcommittee? Are they particularly responsive on social media? Do they interact on this forum? I don't know how you can back up the openness of the park planning process after all the special meetings, forums, and evening events that the streetcar planning process has done. Comparing the two is an insult to how open the Streetcar Subcommittee has been.

Well first, thanks for recognizing the transparency and inclusiveness of the streetcar committee.

2nd, The Parks Subcommittee has had multiple night time public meetings at the downtown public library. The meetings I went to at the library were well attended (several hundred people).

Reading back and such, it seems that most people are forming their opinions about the park based on renderings. Undoubtedly, the Tulsa renderings are better. Having dealt with the streetcar rendering project and observed city staff, I would hazard a guess that the Tulsa renderings are better because the base information is more flushed out. Plus, I think the Tulsa renderer simply put more effort into it and probably had a finer level of information to work with.

Conceptual master plans are often vague and hazy. Now that city staff and the designers official approval to move forward, expect better details with finer detail as the park is actually designed rather than simply conceptualized.

The Tulsa plans are likely more complete because real construction is imminent.

As for some of the questions and comments about the Tulsa park:

I don’t know the full size of the park, I can’t find that anywhere. George Kaiser bought the Blair Mansion property and two nearby apartment complexes that have a total 55 acres of land for Phase I. That land is combined with an existing section of Riverparks that includes a large parking lot. The total is probably something like 75-100 acres. The land cost was $50 million with the total cost of Phase I going in at $300 million. Most of that is private money with the city paying $35 million to move and partially bury Riverside Drive and paying for improvements to the existing pedestrian bridge. The Kaiser Foundation has pledged $200 million with another $50 million from other companies and foundations so funding is almost complete. Phase I has $2.5 million in utility work going on now being paid for by PSO, once that is done more general construction and street work can begin. Completion is slated for late 2016 or early 2017. I don’t know the size or cost of the park in Oklahoma City, so I can’t make a comparison.

Phase II is much smaller, and will have as its focus a new home for the Tulsa Children’s Museum. Further phases would likely line Joe Creek to directly connect the park to the commercial area of Brookside. Joe Creek comes out at the river at 33rd and is the reason for the name “Brookside”.

The park will be connected to Riverparks but managed separately with an private endowment for park funding and programming to be shared with The Guthrie Green park downtown. The endowment is part of the initial $300 million. Riverparks overall is huge has something like 20 miles of riverfront land with 40 miles of trails with a festival area on the west bank and a large urban wilderness area at Turkey Mountain. It’s already an excellent park system, it’s just the most of the river is low most of the year.

As for the Arkansas River. The section of the river next to the park for the most part already has a low water dam, but a dam that is at the end of its lifespan. Permits should be issued in the next couple of weeks that will allow construction to rebuild the dam and for changes to the shoreline that are part of the park plan. The current cost estimate is about $40 million to rebuild and increase the height (and safety) of the existing dam. The plan for the river also includes dams in Sand Springs and between Tulsa and Jenks at 106th and Riverside. Total cost was estimated at $160 million in 2010. The state promised the city $25 million for the dams as part of a past deal for funds for Indian Cultural Center, the feds have approved but not allocated another $100 million, the city of Tulsa has passed some funding for dams in 3rd Penny tax bonds, Tulsa county has allocated money from Vision 2025, the Creek Nation has pledged some money (The $335 million Jimmy Buffett Casino expansion is in an impacted part of the river at 86th and Riverside) and the city of Jenks is willing to provide funds. Surplus money from Vision 2025 is also a likely funding source. If the funding all comes together, which looks very possible, all the dams could be done by 2021. The current dam should be replaced by 2016.

Yes, I think OKC leadership in the past and present has done an EXCELLENT job in turning a giant flat prairie field into what it is we have today. Tulsa is blessed with beautiful topographies, OKC was a flat, treeless waist land when we started, you just can not compare. Leadership and vision is what drives cities forward. Although I do like everybody else believes that some people in leadership has had a lacked vision over the years, OKC has come a long ways.....and the future looks great.


When I lived in Tulsa, near this area, I drove, walked and biked it regularly. To compare the meandering natural parkland adjacent to the river to the flat barren parcel we are making our park out of is to deny the obvious. I don't know about the national accolades for the trails part, but I do know that the trails at Lake Hefner seem to get as much or more use. As to the river, it has not been mismanaged as much as it just hasn't been developed as an asset.

You do realize dirt can be moved? And with a budget of $120 mil for this park, I imagine there is plenty of dirt moving and topography changes that were planned. They just dont really show on the renderings. And if there isnt a bunch of dirt work planned, why the hell is the cost so damn high?

If you just read the post above, the Tulsa park is over TWICE the budget (FOR PHASE ONE!) of this park. Maybe that has something to do with it being better.

And, we don't have a benefactor willing to start with a down payment bigger than our entire budget.

If you just read the post above, the Tulsa park is over TWICE the budget (FOR PHASE ONE!) of this park. Maybe that has something to do with it being better.

And, we don't have a benefactor willing to start with a down payment bigger than our entire budget.

Rover,

Surely you're financially savvy enough to understand what an endowment is? (Hargreaves is telling us we can fund $6 million in annual operations with income from parking, basically)

I doubt there will be a restaurant IN the park.

Why not?

If we're gonna call it Central Park, then let's steal some of the best ideas from NYC's Central Park. They've got Tavern On The Green and the Boathouse. And a Boathouse type place with a (tastefully) glassed in banquet room and lush foliage all around would stay booked all summer long with weddings and receptions because OKC doesn't really have anything like that.

Also, we need retail. Maybe not in the park but certainly on the outskirts. I know, I know, dead horse, meet stick. But seriously. We build things like the canal and this central park or housing downtown and expect people just to show up. You've gotta give them something to do other than just eat.

OKC needs to stop pretending that we know what we're doing when it comes to development and design. We need to just steal the best designs and ideas from other places and put the best of the best together in downtown OKC.

I doubt there will be a restaurant IN the park. Maybe some seasonal sidewalk food vendors but that will probably be it.


See the paragraph about Phase I improvements in post #713. "The food truck plaza could be replaced by a small cafe in Phase II if the market indicates".

It doesn't diminish your point, but Tavern on the Green has been dead for at least five years. NYC has been attempting to bring it back with a different operator, but to date it is still closed. Amazing to me but oh, well. That is a special location; you're right. So is the Boathouse.

OKC needs to stop pretending that we know what we're doing when it comes to development and design. We need to just steal the best designs and ideas from other places and put the best of the best together in downtown OKC.

I actually agree with this. We aren't going to be New York City. Even if we try to duplicate their Central Park as closely as possible, it will end up substantially different. It will grow into our own unique park.

While I'd love to save the Film Exchange, otherwise I'm not really disappointed with the park design. It's not amazing, but none of the MAPS projects have been amazing. The nicest one I've seen is the Bricktown Ballpark, which is just a gorgeous little minor league park. Everything else has provided just servicable amenities for a city that lacked much of anything. This will be a nice little park, because there's really not the money to make it more than that. It will be light years better than the den of crack houses that it replaces.

After the park has been there for 10 or 15 years, and development has surrounded it and people use it frequently, I think it would make sense to pour more money into it to transform it into something better that ties into its environment and the surrounding buildings really well.

I doubt there will be a restaurant IN the park.Why not?

Because for a business to survive there has to be time-diversity and OKC is building too much park space downtown to have any time-diversity. We only have X number of people throughout the day and we are simply going to spread them across too much park land.