I don't consider Deep Deuce or Maywood Park to be divided from each other at all. I would love to see retail down Walnut, but regardless, there's plenty of traffic between the two already. People in Maywood go to Deep Deuce to eat at Sage, the Deep Deuce Grill and the Wedge very frequently. I walk my dog every day and usually it involves a stroll though Deep Deuce. As I've said, Walnut is incredibly easy to cross, because of the lights that can be triggered, and it happens almost instantaneously, so crossing Walnut is as simple as pushing a button. In addition, there's not going to be any room for retail on Oklahoma, unless you go north of 4th St. There's almost none at the Maywood Lofts, there will be none at LEVEL, save Native Roots, which is on Walnut, the Brownstones only have the photography studio and the new apartments on Oklahoma and 4th have no plans for retail. North of 4th, Oklahoma is going to be less attractive for cars because of what will take place at the at-grade railroad crossings on the east-west streets in order to create a quiet zone. Traffic will be funneled over to Broadway primarily, because it's going to be slow crossing over the tracks. I don't really see Oklahoma being a retail hot spot in the near future anywhere, unless it's local foot traffic. Maybe the Triangle will be developed, but we've seen no evidence of that, and it's going to be most easily accessible via Walnut or Harrison/6th St.

Most of the current traffic jam-up on Walnut is because of the fact that there are frequently construction vehicles in one lane, or one lane is blocked off completely. There are a few rubberneckers too who slow down to watch what's going on. Traffic moves very smoothly on Walnut, including onto the Broadway Extension. In addition, almost all of that traffic comes across on Second or Third Sts. from the CBD. Very little of it comes from Bricktown, so making Oklahoma a through street into Bricktown wouldn't even significantly affect Walnut traffic. Perhaps some day there will be more traffic on Walnut, but certainly right now there's no need for concern. As I've said, even post basketball games, traffic moves very quickly.

It is going to be at-grade?

It is likely. Otherwise, it would have to be a underpass. Also, you reference HSR. That's decades away. I'm more concerned about connections to the NE and Tinker AFB which are potentially much sooner.

Also, I don't think the traffic debate holds water (at least it may change). I lived at that intersection for 10 years. Walnut is a busy street, but it is not excessively wide and it is signalized with pedestrian crosswalk triggers. If your worried about highway traffic landing in Bricktown via the Harrison exit and further becoming worse, keep in mind that the northbound exit on I-235 moves to 10th street severing traffic volume at Harrison.

Also, the first, most convenient exit off the new Boulevard will be Oklahoma directly off of the new Crosstown. Bricktown will get it's own exit right next to the Harkins. I think that traffic volume will at least stabilize once these exits change/open.

Hey J. Pitman,

Have you seen the plan to re-do the parallel parking along North Broadway with new angled parking that will add about 500 new parking spots to A-Alley? How would you feel about redesigning all of the on-street parking, which could easily add hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of new spots while still being sensitive to the streetscapes... It seems like adding such a glut of free on-street parking spaces would really drive down the incentive to pave lots over. *ahem* particularly along Mickey Mantle where the on-street parking is mysteriously missing for a very long stretch, where the limos and taxis all line up during after hours.

I've always wondered if the relative disappearance of on-street parking was in some way, at any point in time, the city's part in helping out the Bricktown parking lot operators. Reno too needs to be redone, narrowed, and parking needs to be incorporated there especially. Changing it away from parallel parking to the angled parking would make an amazing difference too.

Simply put, Bricktown is not dense enough nor crowded enough, even on Friday nights, for the parking demands to be so far ahead of the street capacity that we're paving the entire district over for new parking. Especially considering that all the hotels have made parking arrangements one way or another.

After reading The Oklahoman's editorial on the issue, I decided to come over here and post my thoughts on parking, which mirror Spartan's expressed view here. Thankfully, I decided to go back and read the thread before posting.

Anyway, if we created angled parking on Reno, that would help reduce its highway-like speeds and make the area 100% more friendly to pedestrians. Same thing with Mickey Mantle's. At the same time, we make it far less profitable for surface lots, which is always a good thing in an (ostensibly) urban area.

I don't consider Deep Deuce or Maywood Park to be divided from each other at all. I would love to see retail down Walnut, but regardless, there's plenty of traffic between the two already. People in Maywood go to Deep Deuce to eat at Sage, the Deep Deuce Grill and the Wedge very frequently. I walk my dog every day and usually it involves a stroll though Deep Deuce. As I've said, Walnut is incredibly easy to cross, because of the lights that can be triggered, and it happens almost instantaneously, so crossing Walnut is as simple as pushing a button. In addition, there's not going to be any room for retail on Oklahoma, unless you go north of 4th St. There's almost none at the Maywood Lofts, there will be none at LEVEL, save Native Roots, which is on Walnut, the Brownstones only have the photography studio and the new apartments on Oklahoma and 4th have no plans for retail. North of 4th, Oklahoma is going to be less attractive for cars because of what will take place at the at-grade railroad crossings on the east-west streets in order to create a quiet zone. Traffic will be funneled over to Broadway primarily, because it's going to be slow crossing over the tracks. I don't really see Oklahoma being a retail hot spot in the near future anywhere, unless it's local foot traffic. Maybe the Triangle will be developed, but we've seen no evidence of that, and it's going to be most easily accessible via Walnut or Harrison/6th St.

Most of the current traffic jam-up on Walnut is because of the fact that there are frequently construction vehicles in one lane, or one lane is blocked off completely. There are a few rubberneckers too who slow down to watch what's going on. Traffic moves very smoothly on Walnut, including onto the Broadway Extension. In addition, almost all of that traffic comes across on Second or Third Sts. from the CBD. Very little of it comes from Bricktown, so making Oklahoma a through street into Bricktown wouldn't even significantly affect Walnut traffic. Perhaps some day there will be more traffic on Walnut, but certainly right now there's no need for concern. As I've said, even post basketball games, traffic moves very quickly.

LEVEL will have more than just Native Roots, right? And there will be some stuff on the ground-floor of the Aloft, too, such as a cafe and a coffee shop, etc.

As for Walnut, my experience is that it's mostly that right lane where people are trying to turn onto the 235 on-ramps that get really backed up at 5, and then the street is totally empty pretty much every other time. But I can't speak to how construction has affected the traffic...the recent downtown experience on that would have to be if you can still get through, even if there's a bottle-neck, that's an amazingly good thing.

It is likely. Otherwise, it would have to be a underpass. Also, you reference HSR. That's decades away. I'm more concerned about connections to the NE and Tinker AFB which are potentially much sooner.

Also, I don't think the traffic debate holds water (at least it may change). I lived at that intersection for 10 years. Walnut is a busy street, but it is not excessively wide and it is signalized with pedestrian crosswalk triggers. If your worried about highway traffic landing in Bricktown via the Harrison exit and further becoming worse, keep in mind that the northbound exit on I-235 moves to 10th street severing traffic volume at Harrison.

Also, the first, most convenient exit off the new Boulevard will be Oklahoma directly off of the new Crosstown. Bricktown will get it's own exit right next to the Harkins. I think that traffic volume will at least stabilize once these exits change/open.

So why are the railroad crossings going to be at-grade? Granted it would have been very expensive, but I thought that would be necessary to maintain a grade on that curve that HSR can use. Has reality set in that we "aint gettin" any Amtrak money any time soon?

I know you guys have been meeting a lot lately and talking about the commuter rail and other non-streetcar modes, so my apologies if I'm asking stuff in the open that's currently very much in-flux.

LEVEL will have more than just Native Roots, right? And there will be some stuff on the ground-floor of the Aloft, too, such as a cafe and a coffee shop, etc.

As for Walnut, my experience is that it's mostly that right lane where people are trying to turn onto the 235 on-ramps that get really backed up at 5, and then the street is totally empty pretty much every other time. But I can't speak to how construction has affected the traffic...the recent downtown experience on that would have to be if you can still get through, even if there's a bottle-neck, that's an amazingly good thing.

It is my understanding that everything that is not residential will be restaurant, with the exception of Native Roots. There's always some traffic on Walnut, but it's true, rush hour at 5 is when the traffic is significant, and really no other times. In the morning, for some reason, the traffic isn't nearly as bad. Again, too, the majority of the traffic was off 2nd or 4th St., although 2nd is difficult to negotiate right now. The only time significant traffic extends into Bricktown on Walnut is on Thunder game nights.

It is my understanding that everything that is not residential will be restaurant, with the exception of Native Roots. There's always some traffic on Walnut, but it's true, rush hour at 5 is when the traffic is significant, and really no other times. In the morning, for some reason, the traffic isn't nearly as bad. Again, too, the majority of the traffic was off 2nd or 4th St., although 2nd is difficult to negotiate right now. The only time significant traffic extends into Bricktown on Walnut is on Thunder game nights.

I think the reason traffic is smoother in the morning is because the bottlenecks are still caused by the volume of people using a few on-ramps, but that would back up 235 instead of Walnut in the morning.

That's going to be a LOT of restaurant space then.

Wanting it to be all restaurants and it actually winding up to be all restaurants may be two different things. I think the strategic plan even says that just being a restaurant/club district doesn't make it a real neighborhood. Maybe if they are calling bakeries, coffee houses, etc. restaurants then maybe that will be a little better. But a good neighborhood book store, drug store, barber/style shop, etc. make for a balanced neighborhood. Maybe they can get Nichols Hills drug store to move down to the Level or across the street. That is a great "neighborhood" drug store and a really good fit.

You are correct Rover. The district needs to move away from food service and more towards daily living needs. If Nichols Hill drug store isn't interested a CVS or Walgreens would be a huge addition. Of course, services like hair cuts (Flux Salon), dentist/doctor, financial planners, or a bank branch (no drive through) would be huge as well.

You are correct Rover.

I am going to print and frame this. It is a red letter day. :LolLolLol

I am going to print and frame this. It is a red letter day. :LolLolLol

LOL - I thought you would like that. It was weird though - I kept trying to type it in Word and the auto-correct kept changing it. I had to use notepad.

Rover, I couldn't agree more with the points you made.

And this is also the first time I recall seeing you two agree. This is gonna be a good day. :woowoo:

Just for fun I started keeping a log in my car of where I drive and how many miles I go. In the 2 weeks I have been doing it I have found that about 90% of my driving is taking kids to football, golf, and karate practice. By tracking where I go it gives me an idea of what I need to look for in a walkable neighborhood, as well as business ideas for what other people might be looking for in a walkable neighborhood.

If I lived near a karate school I could eliminate half of my driving.

And this is also the first time I recall seeing you two agree. This is gonna be a good day. :woowoo:

Either that or the start of the apocalypse. :tongue:

Either that or the start of the apocalypse. :tongue:

:omg: you're right!

Pre economic downturn, it was my understanding that CVS was looking at the Walnut corridor in Deep Deuce. However, when I contacted them, they said they needed a certain population within a short distance, and I believe that population was about 10,000. We're not going to be close to that for the forseeable future. While bakeries and book stores would be nice, I am not expecting them in Deep Deuce for a while either. I'd be happy to get non gift store retail in Bricktown, honestly. Bricktown is so close that most of us really consider it part of our neighborhood. Retail there would be a huge boon to our neighborhood. Coffee Slingers and Starbucks are close enough that I can walk to both. I think that most of us consider our neighborhood to be a much bigger area than Deep Deuce. When you can walk to restaurants on 9th St. or Coffee Slingers on Broadway, as well as easily get to anything in Bricktown or Lower Bricktown, in your mind it's part of your neighborhood.

Actually, I often agree with JTF often, except that he presents the ideal and I am the grumpy old pragmatist. The truth is somewhere between. I have lived long enough, seen a lot, been around the world (literally) a few times, and have seen how long it takes for cities, states, nations, and peoples to change their beliefs and habits. I think the ideal always has to be established as an ultimate end game, but, as they say, perfection is the enemy of progress. Smaller, shorter term projects that incrementally improve while still moving towards the ultimate goal are usually more productive. One problem with the Pei plan was it was overreaching and the citizens can't connect with those things. What they connect with are things like the MG make-over. BT, DD and MidTown have the greatest opportunity to change the way people think about downtown and living in a more urban environment. However, if it becomes all restaurants, bars, hotels, and apartments for 20 somethings, then it won't really appeal to the general citizenry as that is not what most people's lives are about. These areas need to be about everyday living the way most of us would like it to be. Those mundane daily living things are what will keep the citizens of OKC offering to pay for downtown improvements.

Pre economic downturn, it was my understanding that CVS was looking at the Walnut corridor in Deep Deuce. However, when I contacted them, they said they needed a certain population within a short distance, and I believe that population was about 10,000.

I understand the local population base requirment but I constantly see both CVS and Walgreens with their own stores just a mile apart. The nearest Walgreens to me is 3 miles away. Are they saying there are 10,000 people within 3 miles of Walnut and NE2? This is probably a situation where the City needs to step in with BID funding and get the ball rolling. If the City can spend $20 million to lure Bass Pro, I think a few hundred thousand to lure CVS/Walgreens would offer a better return on the investment.

In what I call the Urban Core of OKC there are only 6 Walgreens and 4 CVS's despite a population of several hundred thousand. If their threshold is 10,000 there should be about 20 of them.

If the city is going to put someone in business, I vote for Nichols Hills Drugs, not CVS or Walgreens.

I understand the local population base requirment but I constantly see both CVS and Walgreens with their own stores just a mile apart. The nearest Walgreens to me is 3 miles away. Are they saying there are 10,000 people within 3 miles of Walnut and NE2? This is probably a situation where the City needs to step in with BID funding and get the ball rolling. If the City can spend $20 million to lure Bass Pro, I think a few hundred thousand to lure CVS/Walgreens would offer a better return on the investment.

In what I call the Urban Core of OKC there are only 6 Walgreens and 4 CVS's despite a population of several hundred thousand. If their threshold is 10,000 there should be about 20 of them.

Minimum requirements do not mean that every place that meets it will get one, generally the reason you see ones almost next to each other is they are in areas that have the best metrics for income, population and traffic. Which for decades has not been a lot of places in the core, one or two decades of improvement will not fix all of over half a century of decline of the factors they choose location on. If they are subsidizing it it would be a lot better to go local since as Shadid points out local businesses spends more than double the percentage of revenue taken in within the city than national chains. However if they are subsidizing a decent grocery store in the future then a CVS/Walgreens would only duplicates most of the same things, granted which departments are the priority is slightly different.

If the city is going to put someone in business, I vote for Nichols Hills Drugs, not CVS or Walgreens.

I guess it would come down to who applies for the BID money. Of course, I am sure current zoning laws require 50 parking spaces for a drug store which might explain why many of them stay out of neighborhoods in the urban core. When 2/3 of your lot has to go to parking and landscaping it greatly reduces the sales/per foot. The CVS at 23rd and Classen has 89 parking spaces. The Walgreens across the street has 67 parking spaces. And as if 156 parking spaces isn't enough, they both have drive-thru lanes.

I guess it would come down to who applies for the BID money. Of course, I am sure current zoning laws require 50 parking spaces for a drug store which might explain why many of them stay out of neighborhoods in the urban core. When 2/3 of your lot has to go to parking and landscaping it greatly reduces the sales/per foot. The CVS at 23rd and Classen has 89 parking spaces. The Walgreens across the street has 67 parking spaces. And as if 156 parking spaces isn't enough, they both have drive-thru lanes.

I use the CVS at 23rd and Classen and I'm not sure I've ever seen more than a dozen cars in the parking lot at any given time. I used to use the Walgreens at Britton and Penn and they have far less parking, but I never had to leave because there wasn't a space. It sounds as if these stores need to make a more reasonable estimate of how many people are in the store at a given time.

Actually, I often agree with JTF often, except that he presents the ideal and I am the grumpy old pragmatist. The truth is somewhere between. I have lived long enough, seen a lot, been around the world (literally) a few times, and have seen how long it takes for cities, states, nations, and peoples to change their beliefs and habits. I think the ideal always has to be established as an ultimate end game, but, as they say, perfection is the enemy of progress. Smaller, shorter term projects that incrementally improve while still moving towards the ultimate goal are usually more productive. One problem with the Pei plan was it was overreaching and the citizens can't connect with those things. What they connect with are things like the MG make-over. BT, DD and MidTown have the greatest opportunity to change the way people think about downtown and living in a more urban environment. However, if it becomes all restaurants, bars, hotels, and apartments for 20 somethings, then it won't really appeal to the general citizenry as that is not what most people's lives are about. These areas need to be about everyday living the way most of us would like it to be. Those mundane daily living things are what will keep the citizens of OKC offering to pay for downtown improvements.

Great post. However, I read that OKC has one of the fastest growing populations of twentysomethings in the country, so this is an important demographic for OKC to consider in its present and future plans. Also, there's no guarantee that these twentysomethings will have the same lifestyle habits and interests when they are older as, say, today's Gen Xers. In fact, it's likely that they won't.

It sounds as if these stores need to make a more reasonable estimate of how many people are in the store at a given time.

It is not the stores, it is the City parking requirements. The City mandates how many parking spaces they are required have based on the sq footage of the store. I think the city should get out of the parking requirment business and let businesses do exactly what you think they are already doing; and that is calculate their own parking demands.

Here - you can see the parking requirements for yourself:
http://library.municode.com/HTML/17000/level3/OKMUCO2010_CH59ZOPLCO_ARTXOREPALOAC.html#OKMUCO201 0_CH59ZOPLCO_ARTXOREPALOAC_S59-10150GEREOREPAAR

For example, a bowling alley must have 5 parking space per lane. Which is obvious because 4 people bowl on a lane at a time and everyone at the bowling alley drives their own car. Plus, at least one person is watching and not bowling at each lane, and they also drove their own car.


TABLE 10600.2 I: RETAIL1
For the first 12,000 sf GLA 1 space/200 sf GLA
From 12,001 to 48,000 sf GLA 1 space/225 sf GLA
From 48,001 to 120,000 sf GLA 1 space/300 sf GLA
Over 120,001 sf GLA 1 space/325 sf GLA

TABLE 10600.2 II: OFFICE
For the first 8,000 sf GLA 1 space/200 sf GLA
From 8,001 to 12,000 sf GLA 1 space/250 sf GLA
From 12,001 to 48,000 sf GLA 1 space/300 sf GLA
Over 48,000 sf GLA 1 space/350 sf GLA

TABLE 10600.2 III: MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL
For the first 20,000 sf GFA 1 space/500 sf GFA
Over 20,000 sf GFA 1 space/1,000 sf GFA

TABLE 10600.2 IV: WAREHOUSING
For the first 20,000 sf GFA 1 space/1,000 sf GFA
Over 20,000 sf GFA 1 space/5,000 sf GFA

It is not the stores, it is the City parking requirements. The City mandates how many parking spaces they are required have based on the sq footage of the store.

Then perhaps those requirements need to be changed. As times change, so should our regulations.

Then perhaps those requirements need to be changed. As times change, so should our regulations.

I believe they have been looking at changing that at least in the downtown areas (or might have already done so), but I do not remember if what I heard was going to apply outside of the 4-ish square miles of the classic downtown area.

Then perhaps those requirements need to be changed. As times change, so should our regulations.

They need to be done away with completely. Let CVS figure out how much parking they need. They only have 6,267 stores; I am sure they know by now how much parking they need for one. A standard 13,000 sq foot CVS would require 65 parking space. That won't be happening in Deep Deuce.

The City removed parking requirements in downtown proper in the late '90s.

The City removed parking requirements in downtown proper in the late '90s.

Do you by chance know the boundary of "downtown proper". And of course, that only solves part of the problem. These parking requirments are most problematic where new development is occuring along the suburban fringe which is preventing the development of new walkable neighborhoods. And then people wonder why cars are required to get around (or maybe they don't wonder).

I don't recall the exact boundaries, but do know that all of Automobile Alley was included, which is the area I was specifically concerned with at the time. Perhaps Steve or some of the planning people I know are on here can answer the boundary question as it relates to relaxed parking requirements.

If you leave it up completely to the business, they will have too few and expect the city to accommodate. There is a compromise. The requirements should change depending on availability of public transit, total parking space availability in the area, population within walking distances, etc. There is an algorithm that makes sense.

If you leave it up completely to the business, they will have too few and expect the city to accommodate. There is a compromise. The requirements should change depending on availability of public transit, total parking space availability in the area, population within walking distances, etc. There is an algorithm that makes sense.

Do you really think a business would make it impossible to have customer? In traditional neighborhood development parking was provided off-street in a common lot in addition to on-street parking and individual buildings didn't provide their own parking. Then the idea came along that each building should provide their own parking and surprise, sprawl happened.

As for algorithms based on X, Y, and Z I quote Thomas Paine

The simpler something is the less likely it is to become disordered, and if it does become disordered, the easier it is to repair. Solutions to problems should be simpler than the previous solution that led to the new problem in the first place. In other words, if over regulation created the problem then why would even more complex regulations solve the problem?

Do you really think a business would make it impossible to have customer?

Yes, of course that's what I was saying and what I think. :( Frown

If you impose strict parking lot development standards and make it more expensive, then businesses will avoid putting any more spaces in than they have to. They will rely on the public spots. To not believe this is as naive as to think the proposed development on the canal with the parking spots is working with the public's good in mind.

Do you by chance know the boundary of "downtown proper". And of course, that only solves part of the problem. These parking requirments are most problematic where new development is occuring along the suburban fringe which is preventing the development of new walkable neighborhoods. And then people wonder why cars are required to get around (or maybe they don't wonder).

I don't think they wonder at the suburban fringe it is generally expected, the boundary apparently does not cover at least parts of bricktown since that was what was being discuses in the meeting.

I understand the local population base requirment but I constantly see both CVS and Walgreens with their own stores just a mile apart. The nearest Walgreens to me is 3 miles away. Are they saying there are 10,000 people within 3 miles of Walnut and NE2? This is probably a situation where the City needs to step in with BID funding and get the ball rolling. If the City can spend $20 million to lure Bass Pro, I think a few hundred thousand to lure CVS/Walgreens would offer a better return on the investment.

In what I call the Urban Core of OKC there are only 6 Walgreens and 4 CVS's despite a population of several hundred thousand. If their threshold is 10,000 there should be about 20 of them.
When I was at Benham and we were doing Walgreens stores we went to an architects conference at the Walgreens HQ in Deerfield, Illinois, they discussed a lot fo this type stuff. They have a different criteria than just number of residents, there are a lot of other things that go into store locations and the demographic factors they look at are what determines the locations and the "service area". A higher concentration of elderly people will pump that factor up because older people tend to need more prescriptions and are typically less willing to travel as far. That is just one of the many factors they assess when doing store location studies.


If you leave it up completely to the business, they will have too few and expect the city to accommodate. There is a compromise. The requirements should change depending on availability of public transit, total parking space availability in the area, population within walking distances, etc. There is an algorithm that makes sense.
That is not entirely true, I know Walmart typically does 1.5 times the amount of spaces required by code because they don't want the parking lot to "appear crowded" and have people leave because of that. Most of the national retailers that I have done work for want more than the absolute minimum, the same for office complexes and those financing those projects typically require more than city code. Sometimes those expectations have to be modified, especially here in Southwest Austin over the Edwards Aquifer were the impervious cover limits are highly restrictive. If you are doing a project in that area you can only have 15% impervious cover. The project we did on Southwest Parkway had only 11 surface parking spaces for a 4 story office building, every other space was in the parking garage. It was also designed for another 4-story building and an addition to the garage in the future. Our impervious cover calculations had to include all impervious cover to the centerline of the main divided road instead of just to our property line. To achieve the parking ratio the group financing the project wanted we had to add a level to the parking garage.

That is not entirely true, I know Walmart typically does 1.5 times the amount of spaces required by code because they don't want the parking lot to "appear crowded" and have people leave because of that. Most of the national retailers that I have done work for want more than the absolute minimum, the same for office complexes and those financing those projects typically require more than city code. Sometimes those expectations have to be modified, especially here in Southwest Austin over the Edwards Aquifer were the impervious cover limits are highly restrictive. If you are doing a project in that area you can only have 15% impervious cover. The project we did on Southwest Parkway had only 11 surface parking spaces for a 4 story office building, every other space was in the parking garage. It was also designed for another 4-story building and an addition to the garage in the future. Our impervious cover calculations had to include all impervious cover to the centerline of the main divided road instead of just to our property line. To achieve the parking ratio the group financing the project wanted we had to add a level to the parking garage.

I guess I was reflecting more on downtown settings where there are more public parking garages, other surface lots, etc. than for stand alones and big box developments. I have been to many inner city drug stores, etc. that have NO dedicated parking. Land is relatively cheap and available in suburban environments so the cost of adding more surface spaces is generally fairly inexpensive. I am wondering if your clients in the inner city have different thoughts.

I am also curious if customers of the businesses at Level will be able to use the parking there or will have to park on the streets, etc.

I guess I was reflecting more on downtown settings where there are more public parking garages, other surface lots, etc. than for stand alones and big box developments. I have been to many inner city drug stores, etc. that have NO dedicated parking. Land is relatively cheap and available in suburban environments so the cost of adding more surface spaces is generally fairly inexpensive. I am wondering if your clients in the inner city have different thoughts.

I am also curious if customers of the businesses at Level will be able to use the parking there or will have to park on the streets, etc.
You are right, the closer in locations the parking dynamic is different and mainly following whatever parking regulations are set forth by the city if there are any. JDM Place is the only CBD type project that I had a lot of involvement in (other than tenant finish out type of projects) and they had no parking required by the city. I know the new and older retail here in Downtown Austin typically doesn't have their own parking and all is satisfied by street parking or pay parking lots/garages. The only places that do are places like Whole Foods and other areas on West Fifth/Sixth Streets west of Lamar. My new office is in the LoDo area of Downtown Denver, the firm owns the building and there is no on-site parking but street and surface lots are close by.

Great CNBC article about Bricktown.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/44929808/

http://www.news9.com/story/17105143/city-leaders-have-game-plan-for-bricktowns-future

More street parking cool.

This is how I see the parking thing going. More street parking will lead to more access to businesses as people will be able to park closer and cheaper. That will improve the business climate as well as reduce demand for surface lots, making them less economically viable causing the owners to look at other options.

Part of the plan is to add sidewalks and lighting to Russell M. Perry Ave.

With the addition of of the East Bricktown Apartments and hotel this is a timely improvement.

I would like to see some effort to entice retail to Main Street, where there are still a fair number of empty buildings. But I don't see any significant retail succeeding without other retail. Somehow, it all has to happen simultaneously, as to make it a destination for anyone who doesn't live nearby, there has to be enough retail to make it worth the drive or the walk. Or, it has to start with such a popular store that people are willing to drive there to shop. Urban Outfitters would have that kind of appeal. CB2 or West Elm maybe. If we had something like that down there, other retail would likely follow it. But, it doesn't sound like that is going to happen as Urban probably doesn't see it as a place that is retail-friendly or where people go to shop. It's kind of a vicious cycle. The city is going to need to do something to make it appealing, since almost every retail effort in Bricktown has failed. Red Dirt Market probably works because it appeals to tourists, but I don't think people from OKC make the trek to Bricktown just to shop there. It sounds like the Bricktown merchants want retail, but the question is, will they do more than simply wish for it?

They may need to consider some Bass Pro-style incentives (except nothing remotely near $17 million) to lure some destination retailer that would be safe bets to snowball more retail activity.

They may need to consider some Bass Pro-style incentives (except nothing remotely near $17 million) to lure some destination retailer that would be safe bets to snowball more retail activity.

I agree, Spartan. And nothing approaching anywhere near that amount should be necessary if existing buildings are used.

To expand on the thought, $40 million to lure Bloomingdale's is just not realistic, not a good idea, not going to happen. Maybe a small incentive, match whatever sweetheart deal McClendon has offered UO, or something to lure a GAP? That would seem feasible. Then perhaps go after a grocer, and make sure both locate nearby other fledgling retail to establish synergy and retail destination. That would be how you can effectively go after some small pieces that would combined make a huge difference, and pave the way for retail to coexist as it must.

To expand on the thought, $40 million to lure Bloomingdale's is just not realistic, not a good idea, not going to happen.

$10 million to lure Target would be a much better plan. How cool would it be if Target moved into the un-used floors above Spaghetti Warehouse?

$10 million to lure Target would be a much better plan. How cool would it be if Target moved into the un-used floors above Spaghetti Warehouse?

I hope you are being sarcastic

I hope you are being sarcastic

Why would that be sarcastic? I have been to a 4 story urban K-mart, why not an urban Target? Multi-story urban department stores used to be the norm in America - from Montgomery Wards to Kress to Woolworths.

I've been to Urban Target n Miami, tit off the light speed rail line.

I've been to Urban Target n Miami, tit off the light speed rail line.

Now we know who Genghis Duck is!

there is very little chance of reno having on street parking on both sides ..

Could you give a reason for that, perhaps?

there is very little chance of reno having on street parking on both sides ..

Even one side would be significant.

I'm pretty sure the plan will be to have on-street parking on both sides.

Could you give a reason for that, perhaps?

just very much doubt the city would agree to it ..

just very much doubt the city would agree to it ..

Whom would the City be agreeing with - it is their street and their plan.

Whom would the City be agreeing with - it is their street and their plan.

the plan was made by the planning dept and bricktown stakeholders ....

not public works /traffic /council / ect....

those groups may have very different ideas on the reno st parking (one small part of the bricktown plan)

How about a John A Browns,Rexall Drugs,Streets,CR Anthony ect ect.
Why did all those stores move out of downtown along with all the movie theaters? Malls? Malls help kill downtown OKC right along with the Pee plan. Can or will it ever recover? I just don't know. I only can hope to see some decent retailers move back downtown. I am not getting my hopes up though.

Thanks for posting Sid. I don't know why that idea was such a novelty for Duany because it only makes sense to me. Maybe I am just way ahead of the curve or something. OKC should be spending money to attract a provider of everyday needs.

I love this quote though:


I was in Austin,” he said. “... Their urbanism is 190 bars. I was downtown, and I couldn’t find a Q-Tip.”