That's hard to imagine but I hope it turns out to be the case.
Not 100% sure, but that is often the coy type of question Steve asks when he knows something we don't about the matter at hand.

There is definitely a deal afoot for the Century Center being sold to some local developers/investors.

I've been hearing about it for months but the particulars are vague.

Tear THAT down, not Stage Center.

Can someone post the rendering for the addition to the parking garage just south of the first national tower

But what if it is transformed into something you won't mind being stuck with?

It'll be interesting to see how it can be made attractive. Steve has been dropping hints left and right lately (e.g. see Kevin Durant restaurant thread about the design) so I suspect there's a plan to make this happen.

Can someone post the rendering for the addition to the parking garage just south of the first national tower

None exist

I guess this should go in the new thread now.

Not 100% sure, but that is often the coy type of question Steve asks when he knows something we don't about the matter at hand.
beat me to it...


While this subject is not really related to downtown parking, here is Steve's update.

http://newsok.com/renderings-are-unveiled-for-downtown-oklahoma-citys-santa-fe-garage-retail-plaza-renovation/article/3667896

It's not a huge makeover but it's an improvement.

I moved a bunch of posts to a new thread specifically about the Santa Fe garage:

http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=29622

None exist
Excuse me, I was thinking of the Sante Fe parking rendering

The new parking garage next to the Civic Center is moving forward and it sounds like they have some good ideas.


Architects will be tasked with creating a garage that fits into the historic context of the area. Discussions are ongoing as to whether to add additional residential floors above the garage.


“This project represents an excellent opportunity to provide spaces on the street level that create an active street,” McDermid said. “And the context is somewhat historic. You have the old Harbour Longmire building at 420 W Main, the Hightower building and some traditional early retail store buildings on Main. I'm sure we'll use some of that context for inspiration. … This is a fantastic project. We will be changing the streetscape — dramatically.


http://newsok.com/architect-hired-to-design-new-700-space-downtown-garage-in-oklahoma-city/article/3686163

It be awesome if there was residential on top and some street level retail...

Awesome!!

Kudos to the City. My hopes are especially spiked by McDermid, possibly my favorite OKC architect and a super nice guy, referring to the importance of the historic context. I don't think he would do that if he knew it was politically DOA to be saving those buildings.

I think Devon raised the profile and opportunities for the western side of downtown, ie., "would Film Row be where it is today if not for the shadow cast by Devon?" I think we're about to see another development that once again causes a rise in the tide for downtown's west side, in conjunction with Preftakes' plans.

In 1995 everybody was pointing east. In 2005 everybody was pointing south. I can't say enough, in 2015, everybody could be pointing west in addition to all of those directions. Downtown's west side is going to come up huge.

Especially if we can get the Market Circle proposal..

Especially if we can get the Market Circle proposal..

Let's don't turn this into another traffic circle debate, Spartan. Pretty please?

Nice, 7 story garage, and if they add 5 floors of residential would be even better, good deal.

They could almost make this a significantly tall building. The floorplates won't be very large, so if they want to get a few hundred apartment units or whatever, they will have to go way up.

Awesome!!

Kudos to the City. My hopes are especially spiked by McDermid, possibly my favorite OKC architect and a super nice guy, referring to the importance of the historic context. I don't think he would do that if he knew it was politically DOA to be saving those buildings.

I think Devon raised the profile and opportunities for the western side of downtown, ie., "would Film Row be where it is today if not for the shadow cast by Devon?" I think we're about to see another development that once again causes a rise in the tide for downtown's west side, in conjunction with Preftakes' plans.

In 1995 everybody was pointing east. In 2005 everybody was pointing south. I can't say enough, in 2015, everybody could be pointing west in addition to all of those directions. Downtown's west side is going to come up huge.

Especially if we can get the Market Circle proposal..
Careful Spartan...that could almost be read as a positive post or certainly an "enthusiastic" one...

And here's the garage sites being recommended for consideration.

"Future Development" shown in purple also includes vacant space they expect to fill, such as the Century Center.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/parkinggarages41712.jpg

I'm fascinated that the Alliance has sites shaded for "future development" such as the thermal energy plant on EKG, the whole Century Center block, and the whole FNC block including the Main Street Garage.

In a good way?

How would it work with residential if the city owns the building? Would they use a property management firm; is there a precedent for this in other cities?

I'm fascinated that the Alliance has sites shaded for "future development" such as the thermal energy plant on EKG, the whole Century Center block, and the whole FNC block including the Main Street Garage.

I wouldn't read too much into that.

I remember looking through the document from which this graphic was extracted and they were basically talking about absorption of office space, such as Continental moving into the old Devon Tower, all the vacancy at FNC and the Century Center, etc.

If you look closely, they weren't very accurate with their purple shading.

Also the Century Center is already slated for some renovation work if I recall the article correctly.

As to residential on top of the 7 story garage, how many units could be added before they either need to add additional parking for the units or end up with only 5 floors of replacement parking with a floor or so for the new residents?

Also the Century Center is already slated for some renovation work if I recall the article correctly.

As to residential on top of the 7 story garage, how many units could be added before they either need to add additional parking for the units or end up with only 5 floors of replacement parking with a floor or so for the new residents?

If you compare it to Level, they have about 300 parking spaces for 228 apartments. Adding a similar number of apartments would provide a net gain of about 400 parking spaces. Of course there is always the possibility that people who might live in those apartments currently drive in from the suburbs and are already taking up parking spaces so that number might not be completely accurate in gaging the gain in numbers.

LEVEL's floorplates are enormous, as that building sprawls the entire block. This structure will have considerably smaller floorplates, so 5 floors of apartments here would not be equivalent to 5 floors of LEVEL apartments for example. Although I'm unsure how you'd adjust for the parking structure that those units are wrapped around.

It may end up being that the housing is wrapped around the parking structure similarly as that would make some sense; it would make a lot of sense if the site were larger.

There are some illustrations of parking structures along the "boulevard" we were promised that were in the SkylineInk animation of C2S that I think could serve as really cool inspiration for this project, although they certainly weren't historically sensitive (as if that had a place in C2S).

LEVEL's floorplates are enormous, as that building sprawls the entire block. This structure will have considerably smaller floorplates, so 5 floors of apartments here would not be equivalent to 5 floors of LEVEL apartments for example. Although I'm unsure how you'd adjust for the parking structure that those units are wrapped around.

It may end up being that the housing is wrapped around the parking structure similarly as that would make some sense; it would make a lot of sense if the site were larger.

There are some illustrations of parking structures along the "boulevard" we were promised that were in the SkylineInk animation of C2S that I think could serve as really cool inspiration for this project, although they certainly weren't historically sensitive (as if that had a place in C2S).

The area covered by the Level apartments probably only takes up about half of that land area.

http://www.levelokc.com/phases

Oh noooo.... the mol space may be comparable if you take out the garage in the middle, but I still think the LEVEL apartments take up more land. We're talking about a quarter block (the deviation from the grid is due to the Bicentennial Park oval) without frontage on either Walker or Hudson.

Oh noooo.... the mol space may be comparable if you take out the garage in the middle, but I still think the LEVEL apartments take up more land. We're talking about a quarter block (the deviation from the grid is due to the Bicentennial Park oval) without frontage on either Walker or Hudson.

You're misunderstanding me, Spartan. I meant that the apartment area of the Level takes up only about half of the land area allotted for that development.

Ohh, right now I'm with you. Sorry lj.

nm

When are city leaders going to wise up and put a public garage underground maybe under the new park it would double up as a storm shelter for the immeadiate area. Sooner or later downtown will be hit with a tornado and all them people at the park on the streets and the river will have nowhere to go

They were going to put parking under the Park but decided it would be cost prohibitive (but that was also at a time when they insisted we didn't have a parking problem)

I don't see why they should deviate from that idea even if it costs more upfront that is less land owned by the city thus more land in the most expensive area of OKC can be assessed property taxes not to mention its the ideal location for a garage being close to event centers, businesses, and the streetcar plan would have access to the boulavard thus slowing traffic where it would need to be slowed the most and at the times when the traffic would NEED to be slowed. maybe we could get ODOT to fund it since slowing traffic on it is part of the mission lol.

1972, if it costs more upfront where would you suggest that they get that extra money?

New parking meters going in with an interesting concept.


“Users either choose coins or credit to enter their time, print a receipt and put the receipt on the front driver’s side windshield of their car. The receipt must be visible to avoid a parking violation.”

If the purchaser of parking returns to their vehicle before their chosen time has expired, they will be able to leave the receipt on the dashboard and move their vehicle to any other curbside parking space with the “pay and display” meters without having to pay again.

The pay and display receipts will not be valid for spaces in Bricktown and elsewhere downtown with older meters.

“You’re now paying for time, not for a specific space,” Holtzclaw said of the new system. “Users of curbside parking downtown will no longer have to leave unused time for the next driver; they can take it with them.”

Now they need to figure out a way that you could use the unused time on another day.


http://newsok.com/pay-and-display-parking-meter-installation-is-under-way-in-downtown-oklahoma-city/article/3686970

I know where 1.3 million of it could come from lol

IF the city collects any of the property taxes they could in theory use "creative accounting" allocating a certain property's taxes to the garage indefinatly or take a bond against future garage revenues

I know where 1.3 million of it could come from lol

IF the city collects any of the property taxes they could in theory use "creative accounting" allocating a certain property's taxes to the garage indefinatly or take a bond against future garage revenues

I suspect they have many more urgent priorities.

How is parking not a priority? Its a much needed thing in OKC and to place it on land the city already is planning on owning would open up more property downtown to the property tax rolls in the long run it would be of great benefit to the city and the city could probably get state and federal grants to help fund it if the city were to designate it a storm shelter as well. I couldn't imagine the city's cost(after any federal and state funds) being more than $10 million over an above ground parking lot the city would need to buy the land for an above ground lot which lowers the gap further.

Downtown will need shelters from tornadoes that can accomidate thousands of people there is no reason we should not plan ahead and hide the ugly garages underground while providing safty and piece of mind during tonadoes would also provide cover in the event of hail as well for people that are stuck in the open park. its not like they would need a 5 story garage underground at a site that large just 2 or 3 levels would do it

How is parking not a priority? Its a much needed thing in OKC and to place it on land the city already is planning on owning would open up more property downtown to the property tax rolls in the long run it would be of great benefit to the city and the city could probably get state and federal grants to help fund it if the city were to designate it a storm shelter as well. I couldn't imagine the city's cost(after any federal and state funds) being more than $10 million over an above ground parking lot the city would need to buy the land for an above ground lot which lowers the gap further.

Downtown will need shelters from tornadoes that can accomidate thousands of people there is no reason we should not plan ahead and hide the ugly garages underground while providing safty and piece of mind during tonadoes would also provide cover in the event of hail as well for people that are stuck in the open park. its not like they would need a 5 story garage underground at a site that large just 2 or 3 levels would do it

Because the kind of parking you are suggesting is not a much needed thing in OKC and things like public safety and transit are more urgent. You don't seem to understand that an underground parking area would be more expensive than above ground and above ground parking does not have to be ugly. Please note the proposal for the new parking near the Civic Center. If OKC had unlimited money your idea would be fine but that's just not the case. As for tornado shelters, most downtown buildings already have basements. That just isn't a major issue. The underground parking area below the Cox Center could already accommodate thousands.

maybe some of that 1.3 million in surplus should go towards signage downtown directing people to 24 hour public access storm shelters

maybe some of that 1.3 million in surplus should go towards signage downtown directing people to 24 hour public access storm shelters

I"m thinking you need a "LOL" after that statement because I've never heard of people downtown being confused about what to do if storms approach.

Yeah I'm not sure there's an urgent need for storm shelters downtown.


They were going to put parking under the Park but decided it would be cost prohibitive (but that was also at a time when they insisted we didn't have a parking problem)

Since they ended up gutting Bicentennial Park, trees and all, it's too bad they didn't put an underground garage there a la Pershing Square in LA or Union Square in SFO.

Not to mention basements in most downtown buildings, there is also tens of thousands of square feet of underground shelter in the tunnels of the Underground.

I thought that the $1.3 million was supposed to go toward Sunday bus service?

As for underground parking, there are other considerations. Putting a parking deck beneath the park will significantly limit landscaping in the park, apparently other parks with underground parking have limited landscaping directly above the underground parking structures - essentially about what you'd see on a rooftop garden or something like that (you can't do anything with extensive root systems, like a tree).

I thought that the $1.3 million was supposed to go toward Sunday bus service?...


One of several options under consideration. Another is adding an extra 20 policia beyond an already programmed increase. There's another option or three out there as well.

New parking meters going in with an interesting concept.



Now they need to figure out a way that you could use the unused time on another day.


http://newsok.com/pay-and-display-parking-meter-installation-is-under-way-in-downtown-oklahoma-city/article/3686970
That article brought several unanswered questions to mind (that one included).
1) How does it know that you have time left? When you leave, does the meter issue a time stamped receipt or something (like the gate does when you leave a parking garage)?
2) Do you have to find another space before your 30 minutes to 2 hours is up?
3) The article started out with a lady being thrilled with the advent of these new meters because the construction folks take up the spaces all day. What about these meters change that?
4) it said that parking rates are going up. Think the minimum amount now is 25 cents for 15 minutes(?) and now it will be 75 cents for 30. Why the cost increase? Thought they said when this was proposed that there wouldn't be a cost increase, that increased efficiency, usage would make them self-supporting???

I"m thinking you need a "LOL" after that statement because I've never heard of people downtown being confused about what to do if storms approach.
For those working downtown you are probably right, but for those visiting the area, and especially the Park area, it is probably a good idea.



I thought that the $1.3 million was supposed to go toward Sunday bus service?

As for underground parking, there are other considerations. Putting a parking deck beneath the park will significantly limit landscaping in the park, apparently other parks with underground parking have limited landscaping directly above the underground parking structures - essentially about what you'd see on a rooftop garden or something like that (you can't do anything with extensive root systems, like a tree).
I'm not sure why it would. Depends on how far below ground it was (remember there are supposed to be lakes/large ponds on top too) and the type of trees chosen. Trees are used on rooftop gardens etc. Supposedly there are gong to be trees and other landscaping ON new Countyline Road overpass out there by the truck stops

I think it's like the ones in Chicago. With those meters, you buy a certain amount of parking time. So, if you buy 2 hours of parking at 1 p.m., you can park at any meter in the city until 3p.m. You simply display your receipt on your dashboard. But, once your time has expired, it's unusable. I think you can rebuy time for the same space, as long as you aren't staying longer than the maximum because the pay and display receipts aren't specific to a specific space. It's just for a specific amount of time.

As for underground parking, there are other considerations. Putting a parking deck beneath the park will significantly limit landscaping in the park, apparently other parks with underground parking have limited landscaping directly above the underground parking structures - essentially about what you'd see on a rooftop garden or something like that (you can't do anything with extensive root systems, like a tree).



I'm not sure why it would. Depends on how far below ground it was (remember there are supposed to be lakes/large ponds on top too) and the type of trees chosen. Trees are used on rooftop gardens etc. Supposedly there are gong to be trees and other landscaping ON new Countyline Road overpass out there by the truck stops

It wouldn't. There are any number of underground parking garages around the country with trees planted on top of them (not to mention underground convention centers with trees planted on top of them, e.g., Cleveland's)

you just can't use trees whose roots go really deep... but there are plenty of trees that have fairly shallow root systems that it isn't a major problem... but yes, it does stop you from planting some types of trees but i don't really see it as a big limit to landscaping capabilities

It doesn't matter either way what I write and then click post. Hargreaves already advised on the matter, which I think rcjunkie pointed out in another thread, with regards to the MAPS3 Central Park.

It doesn't matter either way what I write and then click post. Hargreaves already advised on the matter, which I think rcjunkie pointed out in another thread, with regards to the MAPS3 Central Park.

Are you seriously trying to leave the impression that Hargreaves advised that underground parking would preclude trees in the park above the parking? I am quite confident they did no such thing, because they know that is simply false.

Thanks Oil Capitol. You can put almost anything you want on top of an underground parking garage. In fact, Discovery Channel had an episode a while back showing not only the parking under New York's Central Park, but the 7 stories of archive storage as well. It is not like there is 3 feet of dirt on top of the roof.

Are you seriously trying to leave the impression that Hargreaves advised that underground parking would preclude trees in the park above the parking? I am quite confident they did no such thing, because they know that is simply false.

What kind of argument is this? "Pfft, obviously Hargreaves did not do that because surely, they know exactly what I know, nothing more and nothing less." Perhaps you're actually being modest for once, I mean, how can they even know as much as you do about OKC, since nobody knows more even though you live in Tulsa?

I'm not in a position either way on this underground parking thing, so if you're wanting to troll me you're going to have to wait for another opportunity. The simple fact is that, while there isn't any public record on MAPS3-related things obviously, underground parking was planned for the MAPS3 Central Park and now it is not.

Considering E.D. is actually my field, (ie., how organic and built material inter-relate) I can say the environmental logistics of planting on top of structures is a lot more simple than people would suspect. All you have to do is account for 50 and 100-year root systems, and you'd be surprised how extensive some root systems can be - you may not even have to accommodate soil horizons. However, some trees' root networks grow much faster than the actual tree.

Whether you guys think it's a good idea, and because it is possible albeit expensive I'd argue it just comes down to the need for the parking there that can't be met by a nearby parking garage, the point is just that somebody at the city doesn't think so. Instead of revving up to troll me as you always do, why don't you troll Couch and Wenger instead if you think we need underground parking.

What is being done however is a new parking garage with housing on top of it, and I for one am extremely excited about this development opportunity, and think we should be talking about that.

What kind of argument is this? "Pfft, obviously Hargreaves did not do that because surely, they know exactly what I know, nothing more and nothing less." Perhaps you're actually being modest for once, I mean, how can they even know as much as you do about OKC, since nobody knows more even though you live in Tulsa?

I'm not in a position either way on this underground parking thing, so if you're wanting to troll me you're going to have to wait for another opportunity. The simple fact is that, while there isn't any public record on MAPS3-related things obviously, underground parking was planned for the MAPS3 Central Park and now it is not.

Considering E.D. is actually my field, (ie., how organic and built material inter-relate) I can say the environmental logistics of planting on top of structures is a lot more simple than people would suspect. All you have to do is account for 50 and 100-year root systems, and you'd be surprised how extensive some root systems can be - you may not even have to accommodate soil horizons. However, some trees' root networks grow much faster than the actual tree.

Whether you guys think it's a good idea, and because it is possible albeit expensive I'd argue it just comes down to the need for the parking there that can't be met by a nearby parking garage, the point is just that somebody at the city doesn't think so. Instead of revving up to troll me as you always do, why don't you troll Couch and Wenger instead if you think we need underground parking.

What is being done however is a new parking garage with housing on top of it, and I for one am extremely excited about this development opportunity, and think we should be talking about that.

Once again, Spartan has been caught spinning tales, and when exposed, whines about trolls, waves his claimed academic credentials, tries to change the subject . . .all of his usual tactics.

Simple facts: Contrary to the claim made by Spartan, trees can be planted on top of parking garages. Hargreaves know this and would not advise anyone otherwise. We know Hargreaves know this because they have designed projects with trees on top of parking garages.

Huh?

That article brought several unanswered questions to mind (that one included).
1) How does it know that you have time left? When you leave, does the meter issue a time stamped receipt or something (like the gate does when you leave a parking garage)?
2) Do you have to find another space before your 30 minutes to 2 hours is up?
3) The article started out with a lady being thrilled with the advent of these new meters because the construction folks take up the spaces all day. What about these meters change that?
4) it said that parking rates are going up. Think the minimum amount now is 25 cents for 15 minutes(?) and now it will be 75 cents for 30. Why the cost increase? Thought they said when this was proposed that there wouldn't be a cost increase, that increased efficiency, usage would make them self-supporting???

1) you get a receipt that states the time remaining, which will be on your dashboard.
2) they are zoned for a max of either one hour or two, then you would have to move or be risk being fined.
3) If they are willing to get fined every day it may not but it would become much cheaper to just pay for longer term parking after the meters are in.
4) part of it is credit card fees, the minimum transactions fees are something around 30 cents.

Reportedly, according to City Manager Couch, there is more than the $1.3 million for the Council to spend. IIRC, they have several million in extra funds (like they did last year) that they can use without it effecting some rating or another)...IIRC, it is around $8 million???

Suddenly my car is just a soft drink bottle in one of those mega-vending machines - LOL

Let's face it - parking garage spaces are expensive. Figure the square footage of both the parking space and the access, you're looking at $30-40,000 to provide parking for one person's personal vehicle. That doesn't even consider the cost of the interstates and streets to allow that vehicle to get from the owner's driveway to the parking garage. But in a city that simply refuses to make a significant investment in commuter rail, that's the tax that's forced on everyone. There's a significant segment of the population that just has no desire to come downtown if their only means of doing so is driving their car and parking it. It's much easier to drive to the local Wal-Mart and park for free.

But the reality is that, for downtown Oklahoma City to continue to grow, there has to be a better way to get people into and out of downtown. High population density simply does not coexist with an additional $30-40,000 cost of providing a parking space for each downtown resident - in addition to comparable spaces for visitors/shoppers/guests. In a metropolitan area where it's much less expensive to buy raw land on the edge of the metro and build, what's the incentive to move downtown? The only thing the city can do is spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build infrastructure in the hopes of luring people to a downtown park, near the Thunder, near Bricktown, near the Olympic rowing venue - near something they like enough to tip that decision.

The city really needs to get serious about commuter rail. I'm much more likely to come downtown if I can get where I want to go - a Thunder game, the courthouse, the civic center, etc. - and back at a nominal cost without having to drag my vehicle along with me.

I've never heard anyone anywhere assert that building in a downtown area should be cheaper. That said, I also think people would be surprised just how much parking exists downtown, especially free parking, both in lots and on the street. There are dozens of thousands of free spaces everywhere you look. Too much.

The current parking crunch is limited to spots for office workers to park all-day in, because most of the free spots have time limits on them, to make sure that they are available when you want to come downtown to eat or see a movie, etc.