^

No curb cuts on NWEx:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/oncueblack110318a.jpg

The public meeting about the OnCue on Classen&10th has been rescheduled to tonight at 6:30 PM at Sunbeam Family Services at 1411 N Classen.

How did the vote go this morning for 13th and Western store?

How did the vote go this morning for 13th and Western store?

The meeting is happening now and they haven't reached the this particular item as of 1:45PM.

^^ I’ve been wondering the same thing. I figure it’s going to be a while. Steel work for the Okie Express car wash is going up next door to the OnCue site.

I must make a correction. The structure going up by178th & Western is west of the Okie Express. So it looks like that whole strip is going to be developed.

I'm on the live stream. Meeting started at 1:30 and it's 3:44 and they are still on this item (it was way down the list at item 24).

Still debating but here are some interesting bits of info.

OnCue is proposing to do the following all at their expense:

- Move the homes on their properties to other lots
- Install much more landscaping than is required by code (1st photo below)
- Improve the 13th and Classen/Western intersection (2nd photo)

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/oncue011019a.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/oncue011019b.jpg

I'm glad to hear that OnCue is responsive to the concerns put forth by the neighborhood - especially about preserving those houses. I think it's also impressive that they'd offer to do all of that at their expense. These concessions seem acceptable to me, anyway.

I'm glad to hear that OnCue is responsive to the concerns put forth by the neighborhood - especially about preserving those houses. I think it's also impressive that they'd offer to do all of that at their expense. These concessions seem acceptable to me, anyway.


I can't decide if this is good or not.the traffic is a problem. I wish they would buy the existing gas station and fix the intersection.

STILL debating this issue... (5:45PM)

STILL debating this issue... (5:45PM)

It is interesting.

Committee voted to send to council with their approval.

Some minor changes to the application.

Is that approval contingent on OnCue implementing their proposals in post #667?

I just wish the design were more urban with the pumps in back. Also, I wish some trees were between the street and the sidewalk. Both of those things could have increased walkability.

Is that approval contingent on OnCue implementing their proposals in post #667?

Yes, and a few other minor changes.

Also, I wish some trees were between the street and the sidewalk.

I don't believe planting trees in the right of way is an option for them. Could be wrong, would love for someone more familiar with the law to chime in.

Personally, 'walkability' can go fornicate itself if it means planting trees so close to the roadway that they block visibility and cause accidents.

Thumbs down.

Lol, Manhatten is about as urban as it comes and I don't recall seeing trees planted around gas stations when I lived back in Jersey.

Still debating but here are some interesting bits of info.

OnCue is proposing to do the following all at their expense:

- Move the homes on their properties to other lots
- Install much more landscaping than is required by code (1st photo below)
- Improve the 13th and Classen/Western intersection (2nd photo)


A few clarifications:
- They offered to donate the homes but not pay for actually moving them or have someone lined up to accept them (other than "talks" with Positively Paseo who built one of the homes they'd tear down)
- The landscaping is just another example of the "suburban" design that makes it inappropriate for this location
- Even with improvements, the Western intersection will still be rated an F because of the increased gas station traffic with average delays of up to 90 seconds

I thought all the talk about not including a speaker box on their drive through was a great illustration of this whole process. OnCue doesn't have any speaker boxes in any of their drive throughs, and never had any plans to put in a speaker box at this location, but it was one of the major concessions they made to not have a speaker box in the design. How kind!

A few clarifications:
- They offered to donate the homes but not pay for actually moving them or have someone lined up to accept them (other than "talks" with Positively Paseo who built one of the homes they'd tear down)

That was not my understanding .

From the Oklahoman: "Box said OnCue has arranged to move the homes and donate them for new addresses with nonprofit urban home developer Positively Paseo."

That was not my understanding .

From the Oklahoman: "Box said OnCue has arranged to move the homes and donate them for new addresses with nonprofit urban home developer Positively Paseo."

"arranged" is ambiguous enough to mean they won't pay for it, but "donate" does seem to make it clear they will foot the cost. With the money they're printing, they'll probably just hit the "no sale" button on a register and take some petty cash out to do it, glad they stepped up for the houses, even if the station design sucks.

I just wrote this in a private message but I will post here as well:


Who actually pays to move the houses is a minor point and even if that wasn't their initial plan, OnCue would have agreed to underwrite that in order to get the approval.

We may not always like the outcome but my primary interest is that people know what is going on and that proper process is followed.

We broke this story long before anyone else (I worked on it a long time before we published) and gave residents and surrounding businesses plenty of opportunity to get organized, which they did. OnCue met with concerned parties several times. The item was continued an additional month to allow more input.

The commission members were all fully engaged, most spoke at length, and plenty of opponents also had their say.

And in the end, the vote wasn't even close.


If people don't like the outcome they should lobby for stricter design standards, as that's the way to address something like this. As it stands, the commission really could not deny their application as there are gas stations throughout the urban core and most are total junk.

And there are thousands of commercial properties that abut residential neighborhoods. OKC's development pattern is commercial developments along major streets with housing behind and that is the case all up and down Western and Classen.

This will sail through city council as well.

It will sail through city council and OKC will sail ever closer to becoming a giant cookie cutter wasteland with no soul.

I get that’s a bit harsh but it sure is disappointing to see how many people(on here and other social media sites) get so excited over a gas station and don’t care how it is built. Great to see trees but this should be standard on all of their properties. Have some damn pride for f@cks sake.

Someone posted an example of an urban gas station in Atlanta which was cool. I don’t like OnCue’s TBH, but I will admit they are nice facilities and are raising the bar in OKC. It just sucks how we went from a really nice urban development on this property where the homes would have been left alone to a giant cookie cutter gas station which is apparently okay now because they are planting more trees than they usually do.

Pete, I completely agree about stricter design standards. I messaged Mayor Holt about this and I interpreted his response as not very supportive but take that with a grain of salt and message him for yourself to get his stance on it. We also should have city wide design review. I don’t know if most cities have that but I would support it.

OKC is one of the only cities I notice that has so many ugly buildings surrounding the interstate and I-35 is particularly bad about this. Maybe I’m just harsh on OKC because I’m biased.

The landscaping is just another example of the "suburban" design that makes it inappropriate for this location


Great to see trees but this should be standard on all of their properties.

Make up your damn minds. This is part of the problem with OKC. A bunch of people on this side of the room yell for more trees, a bunch of people on the other side of the room yell for fewer trees. The city patiently listens to both sides and then does whatever the heck they want, because 'the people' clearly don't know what they want.

Make up your damn minds. This is part of the problem with OKC. A bunch of people on this side of the room yell for more trees, a bunch of people on the other side of the room yell for fewer trees. The city patiently listens to both sides and then does whatever the heck they want, because 'the people' clearly don't know what they want.What am I unclear about? I said I’m glad to see more trees.

Urban design: trees and/or landscaping go in between the sidewalk and the road.

Suburban design: trees and/or landscaping goes in between the building and the sidewalk.

In urban design the sidewalk should be right up against the building with landscaping acting as a buffer between it and the street. Suburban layouts are complete opposite. You can still have trees and good urban design. In fact a good tree canopy arguably enhances urban life and reduces urban heat island effect or whatever it’s called.

In fact, I believe my statement advocates for more trees in the city as I said it should be the standard for all of their stores.

What am I unclear about? I said I’m glad to see more trees.

Read the other message quoted.

^^^ I can’t speak for the other poster, but regardless it is good to have differing opinions. It usually leads to balance which is a good thing.

I do not like trees between the street and sidewalk for the following: They block the view of traffic and this is a runoff from a 4 lane section line road, with a 40 MPH speed limit. Years after planting the trees grow to where their roots and base rise up to where they buckle the sidewalk and/or the curb.


An interesting quote from the NewsOK article was from Planning Commissioner Michael Hensley, who stated that he had voted against the first OnCue application at NW Expressway and Wilshire 8 years ago, which he now regrets. "Experience has shown that similar development in my neighborhood has been a benefit...they improved the intersection..."

I do not like trees between the street and sidewalk for the following: They block the view of traffic and this is a runoff from a 4 lane section line road, with a 40 MPH speed limit. Years after planting the trees grow to where their roots and base rise up to where they buckle the sidewalk and/or the curb.


An interesting quote from the NewsOK article was from Planning Commissioner Michael Hensley, who stated that he had voted against the first OnCue application at NW Expressway and Wilshire 8 years ago, which he now regrets. "Experience has shown that similar development in my neighborhood has been a benefit...they improved the intersection..."
It might come to a shock for many on here but this is where I would advocate for a lower speed limit. Good urban design is good urban design no matter which way you put it in placing landscaping in between the building in the sidewalk is bad urban design. You can still design a sidewalk that directly Pushes up against the street and still have trees planted on it With minimal sight line disruptions.

Relocating the houses is akin to "saving the bus station sign" and integrating it into the development. There is no historically relevant structure being razed here, but offering to plant some trees and move some houses is so condescending to people who care about preserving urban fabric and encouraging appropriate land use. I struggle to evaluate renderings at times but OnCue *the faux QuikTrip* just seems like a terrible fit for an urban location. I guess the footprint of this store is more appropriate to urban scale? I don't know but I'm not a big OnCue fan.

Make up your damn minds. This is part of the problem with OKC. A bunch of people on this side of the room yell for more trees, a bunch of people on the other side of the room yell for fewer trees. The city patiently listens to both sides and then does whatever the heck they want, because 'the people' clearly don't know what they want.

I think the bifurcation is not about people not making up their damn minds, it's about developers not getting it. We love trees. Yes to trees. But building out urban fabric requires nuance. This particular spot on Classen Blvd. calls for more urbanity and density. Can trees be incorporated? Of course. But this is like arguing with your redneck uncle at Thanksgiving and shows how clueless some of our developers are. You can imagine them huddling in their office with the lawyer throwing spaghetti at the wall: "What if we produce a rendering with lots of trees? Don't those weird hippie urbanists love trees?" This general lack of "getting it" is why OKC looks mighty ****ty. It's an incoherent mess of confused design. Everything in its place. Have you been to Paris?

I think the bifurcation is not about people not making up their damn minds, it's about developers not getting it. We love trees. Yes to trees. But building out urban fabric requires nuance. This particular spot on Classen Blvd. calls for more urbanity and density. Can trees be incorporated? Of course. But this is like arguing with your redneck uncle at Thanksgiving and shows how clueless some of our developers are. You can imagine them huddling in their office with the lawyer throwing spaghetti at the wall: "What if we produce a rendering with lots of trees? Don't those weird hippie urbanists love trees?" This general lack of "getting it" is why OKC looks mighty ****ty. It's an incoherent mess of confused design. Everything in its place. Have you been to Paris?
Which part of Paris are you referring to? The 200 year old Paris or the modern Paris. I’ve been more than 30 times and have spent significant times in many parts of Paris that are way different than most imagine because they just see travel pictures. The old part was built in a completely different time with different social, demographic, economic, transportation, technological, and political conditions. Surely you cannot suggest OKC can and will develop like Paris or any of the old European city cores. We need to develop what is reality in Oklahoma.

This project is not a negative for the area, IMO. The west side of Classen/Western doesn't have a clear identity south of 18th street. Seems to be a combination of various post WW2 commercial buildings. Within the last 10-12 years some new construction includes the Sunbeam Family Services building (which looks "too nice for the area") and 7-11 (which didn't appear to provide any of the landscaping and other concessions that OnCue did). It may be cookie-cutter, or corporate, but it is also better choices at lower prices for an urban area.

I have driven that stretch of road regularly for 40 years, and that specific plot of land has been a crap property for the entire time. This might offend out gritty, urban sensibilities, but it is something that is going to be used by a large portion of it's neighbors and make a lot of money.

So just because an area doesn’t have an identity means we should build whatever there?

So just because an area doesn’t have an identity means we should build whatever there?

Well, we're not building 'whatever', so would you like to take another stab at making whatever your point is?

Has anyone had the discussion about what could potentially become of the scab of a gas station on the flatiron lot across the stree after it inevitably closes?

Btw I don’t get all the bickering abou trees, why couldn’t hey just be planted behind the sidewalk? Who wants trees between the car and ped right of ways?

Out of my love for this group, I made the sacrifice this morning and drove around the area of discussion for a half hour. 10h east to Western, north to 23rd, east to Robinson, south to 14th, 14th to Broadway, Broadway to 13th, west to Western, and back south to 10th. Appears the landscaping proposed for OnCue is in line with what has been done at other properties of size within the last 20 years. Homeland, 7-11, Sunbeam, CVS, Walgreens, MBOKC UCD all have trees 6-10 feet from the curb and sidewalk in between. And all other properties on this route are doing something along the same lines.

Western is almost all commercial on this stretch and what residential remains is largely out of place and less well maintained. The specific OnCue location has been mostly vacant land for decades and doesn't appear to offer a high quality of life if it were to be residential. 13th going west then sweeping south into Western give the appearance of cars bearing down on east facing lots. I don't find any unifying or majority design theme for commercial or residential buildings.

Has anyone had the discussion about what could potentially become of the scab of a gas station on the flatiron lot across the stree after it inevitably closes?

At the community meeting the owner of that gulf station was present, as well as the owner of OnCue, and during a heated debate betweeen them, the OnCue owner said something like (paraphrasing) "why would you over to sell your land to me previously if you believe so strongly in the small businesses in the neighborhood".

Btw I don’t get all the bickering abou trees, why couldn’t hey just be planted behind the sidewalk? Who wants trees between the car and ped right of ways?

In urbanist design trees make the pedestrian feel protected from cars.

Well, we're not building 'whatever', so would you like to take another stab at making whatever your point is?
My apologies, sure. We’re building a cookie cutter gas station in area we are trying to showcase as our “look we’re moving away from cars.”

It’s smack dab in the middle of corridor that has a new urbanist community being built to the south and an area to north that was just reduced from four to two lanes with bike lanes as an effort to strengthen the areas appeal to active transportation and more pedestrian oriented development.

Furthermore, the road right next to it(Classen) is proposed to be reduced from six to four lanes with a bus lane as part of a BRT corridor.

But hey, lets just make sure we don’t let that area get too great. Let’s dead end western at a cul de sac for a new elevated boulevard we’re build and while we’re at it, let’s throw in a gas station that has no unique design, completely developed to get cars in and out as quick as possible(as the point to a gas station is to fuel cars), and is the complete opposite of what urban development is because a few people believe the area has no identity.

FYI, this was what was originally proposed: http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=41815&highlight=13+Chelsea

It evolved from that glass build on the first to post to this: http://www.okctalk.com/content.php?r=374-4-level-mixed-use-project-proposed-for-lower-Western-Avenue

So my point is actually several:

1. This development sucks.

2. This area does have identity. For the sake of arguement even if it didn’t this will set the areas identity— a cookie cutter gas station designed for cars with very little pedestrian interaction in mind.

3. This development sucks.

4. Actually part of 2 but this be a further blow to the western corridor which the city does things like narrow the road, reduce the speed limit, talks about how great the road is becoming for pedestrians and cyclists then allows OkDOT to end it right in the core as a cul de sac and further allows for a cookie gas station to be built.

5. This development sucks.

Don’t mind me though, if you support it then congratulations. You’ll get your gas station. I’ve never been a fan of OnCues as I’ve said and I don’t like the mega gas station concept in general.

In urbanist design trees make the pedestrian feel protected from cars.
That design also fosters a better street interaction with the build as it’s closer to where pedestrians walk and not separated by landscaping. That is also why the new MJ ATTORNEY’s buildings is not good urbanism either.

Seems like much of what we are discussing is ideals versus realities. "Getting rid of cars" is impossible in OKC, and the demand for it in this area ignores the economic needs of the neighborhood. It is still a scruffy area, and doesn't have the geographic protection of The Hill, Steelyard, Bricktown, etc...

Here's what I know from 35 years in the urban area: Always keep a five and five ones in the left front pocket to give something to the beggars at the gas pump. Have the credit card out of wallet and in pocket before stopping at the pump (never put it back in the wallet until leaving the area). Go inside the station as soon as beginning to pump fuel. 7-11 always has too much inventory in too tight spaces inside, where I stand in line for an uncomfortable amount of time while indifferent employees ring up purchases. The neighboring "Skanky-Gas" probably feels/is safer, but you need some time to figure out the customer base.

I don't love OnCue, or the idea that I should spend money with a company that is directly trying to hurt OKC owned 7-11 stores (which are the only 7-11 stores that are independent of the international chain). But I feel safer, and the prices and products are top of market.

Cookie cutter be damned. Urban customers deserve safety, quality and value.

^^^ you make good points but I’m not advocating getting rid of cars— quite the contrary. In fact my plan would leave more space for cars as I’d keep Classen at six lanes, propose and under pass for western under classen to connect each end, and have classen AND western go under the boulevard with a larger superstructure. My BRT classen plan would add two lanes in the median of classen where the grass and trees are. But those plans are either pipe dreams or just the ship sailed.

But I still argue with all of that dedicated car infrastructure, it would be more pedestrian friendly under my plan. However the reality is pretty much what have now and this gas station can still tend to to cars while fostering a more walkable area. The egress for cars would be a bit more restrictive, but that’s to be expected in dense urban areas.

I agree the immediate area doesn’t have much character, but for crying out loud, if anything, that’s more reason to be MORE careful what is built so as to set the standard for future development in the area.

PS, cookie cutter development is in way exclusive to suburban areas. I won’t go off on a rant but I’m seeing it all the time in LA with new developments. IMO, cookie cutter development has its place as I’m sure it’s cheaper to design but within the exisitjg urban areas and neighborhoods of OKC, we should be careful not to encourage such development.

I don't love OnCue, or the idea that I should spend money with a company that is directly trying to hurt OKC owned 7-11 stores (which are the only 7-11 stores that are independent of the international chain). But I feel safer, and the prices and products are top of market.

Cookie cutter be damned. Urban customers deserve safety, quality and value.

None of which the 7/11s here really did until OnCue came in

I get loyalty to a local chain, but that same loyalty should flow back from the chain to the community. 7-11 let their stores stagnate and were happy to let us have an inferior product due to lack of competition.

It’s the same reason I won’t “buy American” if it’s just an inferior product.

Before the "shop local" train leaves the station, I'd like to get on board. My travel companion is "OnCue is a local company, and hasn't treated the OKC market like crap". Where do we check our luggage? It's a matter of semantics, I suppose, but the accusation that by giving the customers what they want they are 'directly trying to hurt' 7-11 says a LOT more about 7-11 than it does about OnCue, if you think about it.

Case in point, the experience at 7-11 that was described above. If someone coming in with well-lit stores, ones where beggars aren't hanging out at the pumps, and an overall much better customer experience is 'hurting' 7-11, then I'm selling popcorn to watch the well-earned beatdown.

I did not mean to defend 7-11 at a high level. I am disappointed that they became dominant in our market by being just a little bit better than the competition and then coasted, IMO. I am of the opinion that they have made a tremendous amount of money over the last 30ish years, should have seen this new threat coming, and practically invited it through their inaction.

I think OnCue has a very good operation. One thing I learned through living in the urban core during the 1990s is that those suburban, cookie-cutter stores are actually pretty nice, and in short supply in the central city.

The OnCue at NW 13th & Western/Classen will go to city council on Tuesday with final approval set for 2/26.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/oncue012519a.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/oncue012519b.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/oncue012519c.jpg

Pete, is OnCue still going to make the improvements to the intersection that you mentioned in #667? That intersection is a mess and its almost worse coming from the west due to the nonsensical street layout of Ten-Penn. From Penn: 12th, 13th, and 14th all dead-end so your options are drive through the Plaza district (pretty slow going) or drive down 10th and turn past an existing 7-11 to get to the nicer but harder to reach gas station (which I will gladly do, I hate that 7-11).
Also, Nextdoor people who attend the meetings have confirmed what you said about OnCue relocating the historic houses onto vacant lots.

OnCue said they would pay for improvements to that 13th/Western/Classen intersection.

From Steve's chat:


JoBeth: We are still awaiting a city council vote. From feed back I've received from folks in surrounding neighborhoods is they are not excited about having such a suburban style gas station in this area that has become more dense and walkable. I do understand that On Cue has worked with the neighborhood and the commissions to make it as pedestrian friendly as possible. But there is already a gas station around there. It doesn't make sense to me to have a very suburban gas station there even though they have made modifications.

I really hope they are successful in killing this project. Good for the people of OKC to finally stand up and not be deterred like gimmicky tactics of more landscaping which should be standard or those who are playing a strawman; I'm referring to the people who are trying to say that "they don't want trees" after there is a repeated push to have higher standards for landscaping around OKC. I've never been a fan of OnCue or the mega gas station concept and I'm certainly no fan of placing a cookie cutter gas station in an area that has seen good developments and prospects lately for increased walkability and urbanism.

^

That project come up for final council vote in a couple of weeks, before JoBeth and the James start their terms.

It's likely to passed?

It's likely to passed?

Yes.

But here's the thing about those cookie cutter, suburban mega gas stations; they're pretty damn nice. One thing I learned from living at 14th and Robinson throughout the 1990s is that the gritty, authentic, urban life has some shortcomings in the quality of life area. Big name brands and open square footage were in horribly short supply then and still are now, in some areas. We all love Uptown 23 and the Plaza District, but, as a neighborhood resident, sometimes you think that you deserve to have the convenience of a Sonic Drive In, or an OnCue (with a beer cave, spacious aisles, check out lines that are less than 5 people deep, space around the many gas pumps and a lower chance of being hit up for money from the beggars).

Urban areas deserve these services, IMO.

But here's the thing about those cookie cutter, suburban mega gas stations; they're pretty damn nice. One thing I learned from living at 14th and Robinson throughout the 1990s is that the gritty, authentic, urban life has some shortcomings in the quality of life area. Big name brands and open square footage were in horribly short supply then and still are now, in some areas. We all love Uptown 23 and the Plaza District, but, as a neighborhood resident, sometimes you think that you deserve to have the convenience of a Sonic Drive In, or an OnCue (with a beer cave, spacious aisles, check out lines that are less than 5 people deep, space around the many gas pumps and a lower chance of being hit up for money from the beggars).

Urban areas deserve these services, IMO.
You should have a look at some of the gas stations around LA. They're nice and have a unique design which contributes to the unique characteristics each neighborhood LA has. Not make a strawman here as I know you weren't saying this, but you don't have to have a mega cookie cutter gas station in order for it to be nice.

But here's the thing about those cookie cutter, suburban mega gas stations; they're pretty damn nice. One thing I learned from living at 14th and Robinson throughout the 1990s is that the gritty, authentic, urban life has some shortcomings in the quality of life area. Big name brands and open square footage were in horribly short supply then and still are now, in some areas. We all love Uptown 23 and the Plaza District, but, as a neighborhood resident, sometimes you think that you deserve to have the convenience of a Sonic Drive In, or an OnCue (with a beer cave, spacious aisles, check out lines that are less than 5 people deep, space around the many gas pumps and a lower chance of being hit up for money from the beggars).

Urban areas deserve these services, IMO.
In major urban areas you often see businesses that even rely on drive thru's elsewhere not provide any.

In major urban areas you often see businesses that even rely on drive thru's elsewhere not provide any.

Yes, but I would suggest that would be due to geographic density and/or high land acquisition costs. Neither of which are a problem in Oklahoma City IMO. In fact, at over 600 square miles, OKC probably has too much land, since all of it deserves services and protections like downtown gets.

Yes, but I would suggest that would be due to geographic density and/or high land acquisition costs. Neither of which are a problem in Oklahoma City IMO. In fact, at over 600 square miles, OKC probably has too much land, since all of it deserves services and protections like downtown gets.
Unlikely. It's due to the fact that drive thru's prioritize car traffic over walkability, not geographical restraints or a demand for density.