Obviously there are problems when you get to the extremes. If your city is build completely around the car, you get Houston. If no regards are given to the car, you get London. OKC doesn't have to worry about being London, but Houston problems are a real possibility. That's why we need to try and develop the other direction.

The good news is we are already light years ahead of Houston for where it was when it was this size. They are playing catch up so bad with anything other than HOV lanes and commuter buses (which I know many here loathe, but when I worked downtown and lived in the burbs it was a Godsend).

^

Right, but JTF is specifically talking about moving to London and there almost no one has a car and must take public transportation, which is a very different proposition than in most U.S. Cities.

The point was that going to the complete opposite end of the spectrum isn't all fun and smiley subway and bus rides, especially when you are forced to use the systems and the weather, strikes or other conditions are less than ideal.

All my friends there aspired to have a car and got one as soon as they could afford to buy one and park it.

Another thing about public transportation and God forbid, there's been terrorist attacks in London and all over the world for that matter on buses and trains. All forms of public transport for that matter.

^

Right, but JTF is specifically talking about moving to London and there almost no one has a car and must take public transportation, which is a very different proposition than in most U.S. Cities.

The point was that going to the complete opposite end of the spectrum isn't all fun and smiley subway and bus rides, especially when you are forced to use the systems and the weather, strikes or other conditions are less than ideal.

All my friends there aspired to have a car and got one as soon as they could afford to buy one and park it.

I think this is an *excellent* point about how the notion of "dismantling the auto-centric city" is a non-starter in real-world terms. The reality is about balance.

We live here in OKC and in many respect a lot of us have no clue what transportation is like in other larger, more densely populated cities. Heck, go look at a city like Arlington, between Dallas and Fort Worth; the interstate and connecting roads are an inescapable part of moving tens (hundreds?) of thousands of poeple every day. The idea of translating that exclusively into something like a subway just doesn't even make sense. The key is balance, and that's why I don't mind exploring and expanding the use of other forms of transportation - but this notion of "we'll dump cars" just isn't realistic.

Regardless of the same arguments that continue to be had on this board about how OKC really just needs balance and all of the urbanists need to just get over it or move, that fact of the matter is, there is absolutely zero balance as it is and drastic measures need to be taken for many years for that to even come close to reality.

Regardless of the same arguments that continue to be had on this board about how OKC really just needs balance and all of the urbanists need to just get over it or move, that fact of the matter is, there is absolutely zero balance as it is and drastic measures need to be taken for many years for that to even come close to reality.

"Zero" balance? "Drastic" measures? Such as?

I tend to view hyperbole in any direction with a jaundiced eye, so I'm looking for something more concrete. What does "zero balance" mean? Yes, we are a car-heavy city and we always, always will be. I'm fine with the exploration of alternatives and more/better sensibly funded public transit. But I don't get this "drastic measures" bit. What does that mean, exactly?

"Zero" balance? "Drastic" measures? Such as?

I tend to view hyperbole in any direction with a jaundiced eye, so I'm looking for something more concrete. What does "zero balance" mean? Yes, we are a car-heavy city and we always, always will be. I'm fine with the exploration of alternatives and more/better sensibly funded public transit. But I don't get this "drastic measures" bit. What does that mean, exactly?

Zero balance?

The ratio is about 99:1 Suburban to Urban development. Nobody is calling for 50:50, that's never happening. 80:20 would be amazing.

Regardless of the same arguments that continue to be had on this board about how OKC really just needs balance and all of the urbanists need to just get over it or move, that fact of the matter is, there is absolutely zero balance as it is and drastic measures need to be taken for many years for that to even come close to reality.

I agree that we need a balanced approach but it's not nearly as bleak as you make it seem. In 10 years, downtown, midtown, AA, deep deuce, and avana arts will be one fluid walkable urban district. It will be completely infilled, the street car will be running to connect everything. It will be great. The progress being made just isn't as fast as many people would like, but there's a million different moving parts in a city that is trying to reinvent itself. It's no easy task and this would be the equivalent of London trying to be more car friendly.

It's very hard to change course once something has been started. (look at liquor laws) This city was built completely around the car up until the last 5-10years when urban environment became a priority. It's not going to be a quick or easy change and progress will be incremental and slow. The reason people get frustrated on this board is they aren't happy or content with the way OKC is now, they'll only be happy when it changes to what they want or what it could be.

The end result 20 years from now is still going to be a car centric suburb style city with a great urban core. (maybe LRT from NW expressway and Edmond into downtown although its probably 30 out)

Skanaly, what is the best way to get your name on this list? I'd really like to do this too.
I just told them I had family history there....and they were all for it. Very kind

"Zero" balance? "Drastic" measures? Such as?

I tend to view hyperbole in any direction with a jaundiced eye, so I'm looking for something more concrete. What does "zero balance" mean? Yes, we are a car-heavy city and we always, always will be. I'm fine with the exploration of alternatives and more/better sensibly funded public transit. But I don't get this "drastic measures" bit. What does that mean, exactly?

How do you know OKC will always, always be a car-heavy city? New inventions or a global climate crisis could end the car model for all we know. Cars could die as the primary means of transportation within a century. Who knows?

I stand corrected, Kerry. I apologize for the misinformation.


That is a good question. Back to the demo.
(btw - I live in OKC now).

Anybody that doesn't understand the deep, deep hole that OKC has had to dig out of just isn't very aware. In the context of the developed world, or even in the context of the US, OKC is very, very young. Most of the cities that JTF and others point to as their ideal have existed for a very long time and have been through many of the same problems we have experienced. Many have geographical issues containing their sprawl. Many have economic issues which altered their development patterns.

I have been blessed to have traveled the world many, many times over to most of the great cities of the world...and virtually all have traffic problems and parking problems. They have decay and rebuilding. They destroy buildings with heritage and have controversy over new development. They are fraught with corruption, stagnation, and other problems, just like we do. They are ruled by the powerful and the rich get their way. We didn't invent any of this stuff. If you want to pack up and leave for these reasons, you will be a vagabond hobo the rest of your life.

OKC has miles and miles to go. It is trying to get to good, let alone great or perfect. But I think some really, really underestimate the livability here. If OKC isn't the style they want then it will be much easier on everyone if they do go somewhere for a better match. But, if you want OKC to be a better place for succeeding generations and you are willing to help make that happen, OKC is a great challenge and not a bad place to live. Some people enjoy the work in progress, and some just have to have the finished product. Everyone is different.

If JTF thinks London is utopia, so be it. I have spent considerable time there and know it has some fabulous areas....if you can afford to hang there. But I know enough residents to know their challenges, as well. Bottom line, I hope JTF has a happy and fulfilling life wherever he is and continues to share his ideals and dogma with us here on okctalk. We should welcome his feedback after he has had time to actually immerse in a life somewhere else and give us good feedback.

I will agree that the distribution of wealth and overall equitability of OKC is vastly underrated. That said, any place worth being has traffic. It's not "you can have good development and traffic" or "you can have bad development and no traffic" though, as both that truism and your post tend to suggest. Communities that are more established than OKC aren't that different in terms of having "big city headaches." They all actually make these exact same mistakes, just not at the alarming clip that OKC is tearing down its historic buildings.

That said, considering that other cities also mistakenly tear their urban fabric down, each historic asset that OKC loses is another lost opportunity to become just as established as other cities. With a little vision, it's a huge opportunity that we can take advantage of. With the continued dearth of vision, it's slipping away.

Just as established as other cities? What does that mean, exactly?


I will agree that the distribution of wealth and overall equitability of OKC is vastly underrated. That said, any place worth being has traffic. It's not "you can have good development and traffic" or "you can have bad development and no traffic" though, as both that truism and your post tend to suggest. Communities that are more established than OKC aren't that different in terms of having "big city headaches." They all actually make these exact same mistakes, just not at the alarming clip that OKC is tearing down its historic buildings.

That said, considering that other cities also mistakenly tear their urban fabric down, each historic asset that OKC loses is another lost opportunity to become just as established as other cities. With a little vision, it's a huge opportunity that we can take advantage of. With the continued dearth of vision, it's slipping away.

You take his comment on London as an example of that RickOKC. London obviously has a much longer history and has had to evolve over hundreds of years. Great work over the years to maintain history and urbanness, but yet they still have traffic problems and it's so expensive to live there that there is a nice long list of issues that go with it. I think, and Spartan please correct me, what he was saying is that a lot of the comments here tend to be of "the grass is greener" type in that we often post here in reference to things that are done better in other cities, but we often forget to also think about the problems those cities have...which are often even worse than ours. We might do better in some areas and we do worse in others. A major part of things is the point in time OKC started to develop...heck, or even become a city. Like Houston, the advent of the car and A/C made a huge different in how the city grew compared to older cities like Boston that had their core developed long before that.

Agreed bomber.
I have said it a few times and will keep saying it because it will always hold true: Tulsa, OKC, and Oklahoma are YOUNG.
We are a young state with young cities, we don't have near the history as pretty much anything East of the Mississippi, or West of the Rockies.
When we look at things from that perspective, you'll realize that our two major cities and state are actually doing just fine given how long we've been around and what we have to work with.
Room for improvement? Of course, but it's not all hellfire and doom as many would suggest from time to time.

https://twitter.com/stevelackmeyer/status/626395335103918081

Never mind - it doesn't matter.

https://twitter.com/stevelackmeyer/status/626395335103918081

Off topic, but I have to give it to Steve. He's made great progress with the weight loss. Congrats to the guy.

I don't even undetstand why they are saving that sign. If the structure itself wasn't worth saving then who cares if its former location is memorialized? All it will do now is confuse people looking for the bus station.

I don't even undetstand why they are saving that sign. If the structure itself wasn't worth saving then who cares if its former location is memorialized? All it will do now is confuse people looking for the bus station.
Always a bucket of sunshine, aren't you?

^I think that's actually how a lot of people feel about it...

In the trial, Shadid's attorney called the plan to save the sign a "glass casket".

In the trial, Shadid's attorney called the plan to save the sign a "glass casket".

Except in this case, there's no prince to ride up, open the casket, do kissy-poo and make the building come back to life.

I don't even undetstand why they are saving that sign. If the structure itself wasn't worth saving then who cares if its former location is memorialized? All it will do now is confuse people looking for the bus station.

Or... People will adapt and they might call it the "Union Parking Garage". If people are still looking for the bus station there, they probably have much more serious issues than being lost. This fight is over. Cheerio.

In the trial, Shadid's attorney called the plan to save the sign a "glass casket".

Vestiges of the Baum Building were also saved and put on display. It happens, for better or worse.

From jeepnokc:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/bus073015b.jpg

Union Bus Station sign disassembled in Oklahoma City | NewsOK.com (http://m.newsok.com/article/5437113)

And gone:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/bus073015c.jpg

Maybe the sign should go in the amazing Baum Building remnants museum - the museum of what might have been.

I don't even undetstand why they are saving that sign. If the structure itself wasn't worth saving then who cares if its former location is memorialized? All it will do now is confuse people looking for the bus station.

Agree,

They need to contact the Oklahoma History Center--great donation; they probably have the room to house it.

I've wondered why Curtis Hart couldn't get his hands on that sign. It would make a nice addition to the Muscle Car Ranch. That way it could be saved, plus be on display with many other vintage signs.

I don't even undetstand why they are saving that sign. If the structure itself wasn't worth saving then who cares if its former location is memorialized? All it will do now is confuse people looking for the bus station.

Because the sign is neat and it's a homage to the history of that corner? For what it's worth, I care. It's really the least they could do... I don't want to see the sign shipped off to some hobbyist or museum where it is forgotten about and looses all remaining context.

I've wondered why Curtis Hart couldn't get his hands on that sign. It would make a nice addition to the Muscle Car Ranch. That way it could be saved, plus be on display with many other vintage signs.

This sign is going to be restored and placed at this same corner within the parking garage.

Because the sign is neat and it's a homage to the history of that corner? For what it's worth, I care. It's really the least they could do... I don't want to see the sign shipped off to some hobbyist or museum where it is forgotten about and looses all remaining context.

Maybe, but right now, given the circumstances, it kind of comes off as more like a big middle finger than an homage.

Because the sign is neat and it's a homage to the history of that corner? For what it's worth, I care. It's really the least they could do... I don't want to see the sign shipped off to some hobbyist or museum where it is forgotten about and looses all remaining context.

You're correct, it was the absolute least they could do and they did it. Which is what makes this whole development disappointing and underwhelming.

You're correct, it was the absolute least they could do and they did it. Which is what makes this whole development disappointing and underwhelming.

This.

J
This sign is going to be restored and placed at this same corner within the parking garage.

I know what they're doing with the sign. That's not my question. I wonder why the sign couldn't have been moved to a place like MCR, that is transportation related and has many other vintage roadside signs and displays from around the city and state. That way it's off the corner where many don't want it anyway, and put in a place where many others can still see it and appreciate it if they want to.

I love old signs, gas station "petrolania", etc. I have that stuff all over my garage. It just seems to me that the old sign would be out of place behind glass on a parking garage/office building that has no relation to the old bus station other than being on the same corner.

I think it's a pretty homage to what was there.

And no its not the least they could, they could have done nothing. Once this gets built and alters the skyline, or the first cutaway shot in a playoff game that you can see the cranes, opinions might change pretty quick.

I think it's a pretty homage to what was there.

And no its not the least they could, they could have done nothing. Once this gets built and alters the skyline, or the first cutaway shot in a playoff game that you can see the cranes, opinions might change pretty quick.

I've been wondering what some people will think when the building starts to take shape and big sky cranes go up, and then what everyone will think when it's complete and you see a brand new, 27 story tower as part of the skyline.

^^^^^

I know, for me, I'll be happy to see the growth, and excited about future development to the west as a likely result of that growth, but will always shake my head and wish they could've incorporated (at least) some of the existing historic infrastructure into the new stuff.

I've been wondering what some people will think when the building starts to take shape and big sky cranes go up, and then what everyone will think when it's complete and you see a brand new, 27 story tower as part of the skyline.

I think I'll mostly be thinking about how much more the skyline AND the actual environment could have been improved in this part of downtown. As it is, this will mostly be low rise structured parking. The net result is that the skyline is actually being limited to one high rise building on this block. For one of the most valuable blocks in the city, that's actually not that impressive, even for the "anything for better postcards and NBA TV bumpers" crowd.

What's going to be impressive is having 3 fairly tall buildings in a row on Hudson all at the same time under construction with cranes on top. With 499 being the tallest, it might as well start first.

What's going to be impressive is having 3 fairly tall buildings in a row on Hudson all at the same time under construction with cranes on top. With 499 being the tallest, it might as well start first.

Ooo, cranes. Neat.

Ooo, cranes. Neat.

Perception is reality. The perception to the country on a NBA broadcast is, Oklahoma is growing enough to have a sky crane downtown. Outside of this board knowledge about Union Bus Station is fairly low.

You can be super upset about how it all went down but excited to see a large crane and new tower.

Kinda like how I can be a republican and think Trump is one of the worst presidential candidates to ever run.

I forgot to post this when I took it... it's not a great picture, but just for posterity's sake, here's a picture of the bus station I took on July 22, before demolition had begun:

11167

Ooo, cranes. Neat.

How about a little progress. Until Devon was built it'd been since 1985 when LS was built with nothing built over 15 floors (hotel) for over 25 years. And the reference was to 3 high rise structures not just one.

Perception is reality. The perception to the country on a NBA broadcast is, Oklahoma is growing enough to have a sky crane downtown. Outside of this board knowledge about Union Bus Station is fairly low.

You can be super upset about how it all went down but excited to see a large crane and new tower.

Kinda like how I can be a republican and think Trump is one of the worst presidential candidates to ever run.

Among the younger set, you are most certainly right. Aren't you the fairly recent transplant who said you moved here because of the Thunder?

Among the younger set, you are most certainly right. Aren't you the fairly recent transplant who said you moved here because of the Thunder?

I'm 62 and I pretty much agree a lot of folks out there don't know much about the bus station, other than the fact it always had a bad stigma due to the clientele that hung out on a regular basis there. It was always a place where the pimps were known to frequent.
Now if it would have become another Republic GastroPub, then it's image would have changed.

I'm 62 and I pretty much agree a lot of folks out there don't know much about the bus station, other than the fact it always had a bad stigma due to the clientele that hung out on a regular basis there. It was always a place where the pimps were known to frequent.
Now if would have become another Republic GastroPub, then it's image would have changed.

Touché. You are probably right.

Among the younger set, you are most certainly right. Aren't you the fairly recent transplant who said you moved here because of the Thunder?

Yeah. I went to Oklahoma state and was plotting my next move. Picked okc because I had friends moving here, the economy is great, and the thunder were something that everyone in okc seemed to follow and love. Gave the city something to bond over.

Started wearing a thunder polo whenever I traveled and you wouldn't believe the reactions I got. Around the country okc has a very positive perception and it's mostly due the spotlight the thunder brings. The sky crane next spring will help with positive perception that during NBA cutaways with 15-20 million people watching.

Edit: I get that's not an amazing reason to move somewhere but I love sports and didn't want to live somewhere the size of Dallas.

The NBA does not use live, or even current, video for their cutaways. They have been showing the same 2 people walking down the canal for 3 years.

The NBA does not use live, or even current, video for their cutaways. They have been showing the same 2 people walking down the canal for 3 years.

Maybe not for most regular season games, but they do in playoffs.

The NBA does not use live, or even current, video for their cutaways. They have been showing the same 2 people walking down the canal for 3 years.

Playoffs are different than the standard shots, it also depends on which network is carrying the game.... TNT, ABC or ESPN.

Perception is reality.

Huh?

Well, a shiny new box that looks good from I-40 and crappy from 30 feet isn't going to change Oklahoma City's image or people's perception of it on TV much. You know, the Devon tower really isn't the reason for changing perceptions, either. That's evident by all the good press we've been reading for the last few years which tend to focus on the more unexpected parts of OKC that have popped up. I don't think anyone is surprised to find a few tall buildings in Oklahoma City. Everyone's got em. What I think more and more people are surprised to find is a cluster a varied neighborhoods with unique character and vibrant street life. The areas that get mentioned again and again are the ones that used revitalization and re-purposing to create a place in which people actually want to spend time. The developer even used them in promotional pieces for THIS development. (Though I do appreciate the irony)

I guess it doesn't hurt to have projects that stress vanity over integration from time to time to satisfy the drive bys, but it certainly could have been done without another loss of most of a downtown city block to parking, I'm not even sure how much more density we really net out of this one. This really just stacked and repackaged what was there. There will be a higher density of cars on the block though. I'm just saying that IF the best part of this is another sliver in the sky line for a handful of establishing shots during the NBA playoffs or a couple of cranes for a couple of years, then it's worse than I thought. It was a lot to trash just for that.

Well said BDP. In all of these threads I keep mentally coming back to the same quote from Enrique Penalosa.


"I'm often asked to talk people in cities about transport. I say, I cannot talk about transport unless we have an idea of what type of a city we want. Before we have a vision of what type of city we want, we have to know, how do we want to live. Because really, a city is only a means to a way of life. So actually, whenever we start talking about transport, we really end up discussing how we want to organize our daily life."

While this particular quote is about transportation, it could just as easily apply to any civic subject.


"I'm often asked to talk people in cities about downtowns. I say, I cannot talk about downtown unless we have an idea of what type of a city we want. Before we have a vision of what type of city we want, we have to know, how do we want to live. Because really, a city is only a means to a way of life. So actually, whenever we start talking about downtown, we really end up discussing how we want to organize our daily life."

Too many people in OKC are still searching for validation from people they don't even know. OKC might never get over that.

Too many people in OKC are still searching for validation from people they don't even know. OKC might never get over that.

Possibly. But if that's the case, then I don't get support for this project and the demolitions. You would think more people would be against this type of development, then. If it's validation from the outside people are looking for, then converting the majority of a block from old buildings to parking garages isn't really a step in the right direction. No one, and I mean no one, is going to come to OKC and say to the folks back home, "hey you gotta check out that town. They got whole blocks almost entirely dedicated to parking!".

Now, even in context of skyline vanity and how clusters of tall buildings can portray an image of significance, this project doesn't do that much in terms of gaining validation. The scale or design just isn't there to make much of an image impact and it effectively prevents any more height being added to the block. IMO, 499 isn't an ugly building as rendered (though the garages don't look very exciting), but it's relatively pedestrian in aesthetic, at least in terms of "wow factor". It's certainly not going to turn heads of anyone from larger markets.

The reality is that Oklahoma City is so far away from creating a skyline that commands instant validation upon first glance that it's kind of silly to even talk about it. The good thing is, though, it's become clear that it doesn't really matter that much anymore. Several cities have become or became hot spots despite having fairly modest skylines. Off the top of my head, Austin and Portland grew significantly in stature and population without much in the way of high rise architecture. They got there more on lifestyle amenities, culture, and/or prudent urban development. But we don't even have to look at other markets to know that's true. All we have to do is look at what about Oklahoma City has already been generating outside validation. For the most part it's been about the the increasing vitality of our urban districts other than the CBD or some of our public works and occasionally the opportunities it offers for entrepreneurs and low cost of living. If media attention is a measure of outside validation, then it seems to me that Bricktown, Midtown, Deep Deuce, and the Plaza district have done more for our image with their low rise buildings than any of our high rise buildings have. I suspect that 23rd street will soon be getting a lot of attention as well.

I'm not really trying to say that tall buildings don't have any significance, but in terms of being a source of outside validation for OKC in general, I think it will continue to play a very minor role for a long time and this is far from a game changer. Now, would placing this on a underdeveloped or under utilized lot somewhere else downtown while re-purposing this block into restaurants, apartments, and loft offices bring more validity to OKC as a vibrant and nice place to live and work, possibly even visit? Who knows, but it certainly would be much more in line with what attracts attention these days and we'd still would have a slightly expanded skyline with little to no loss of architecture and the chance at another lively destination in the core that people would actually want to go to and write about.

BDP - while you and I might agree with that assessment, we are clearly in the minority. As a suburban dominated city, downtown OKC is still seen as a work of art to be admired from a distance (10 miles). Many of the people who work downtown don't interact with the downtown environment other than their 1 hour lunch, and a lot of them use the concourse system to even do that.

On that note however, being able to see downtown from a great distance is a Midwest and Great Plains phenomena. Unless one is on the St Johns River or a bridge, downtown Jax isn't visible from most places so it isn't part of the suburban psyche here.

I really understand your last paragraph and you make some good points, but it all came down to location for this building and it's clients. 499 though is not intended to be the wow factor building, that one is just across the street.

...On that note however, being able to see downtown from a great distance is a Midwest and Great Plains phenomena...

You've apparently never approached Manhattan from a distance.

I really understand your last paragraph and you make some good points, but it all came down to location for this building and it's clients. 499 though is not intended to be the wow factor building, that one is just across the street.

I do understand that, but I also think it makes it all the more perplexing. If it's such a good location, then making over 50% of it parking garages is a huge waste.