Kitchen 324, if operated by tuck, could move into some old building on S Shields and they'd still be good eating. Sure, the view is nice where they are. But if the food and service were horrid, it's not such a view, nor such a building, that I'd bother to return.

As usual, excellent take on this from Steve... Fair and balanced

Panda, you may only be 21 years young, but you are wise beyond your years. I'd say you are by far one of the most passionate posters on here and put a lot of energy into your posts. You also have some great ideas and the city of OKC needs more people like to to express their goals and desires for the direction this city wants to go. I am more outspoken to a fault no doubt and then go negative on OKC out of frustration but share the same goals.

Wish you the best out in LA. I'd check out the Redondo/Hermosa Beach areas. You will love it there, it almost feels like a small beach community in a strange kind of way. Great weather, ocean air, palm trees, and lots of cougars for you! :) Be sure and check out Sharkeez there, you will love it. Hope you keep up with OKC on here and don't be a stranger. Also, if you make it big, come back and film a movie here! Wish you the best, you will love it and probably won't ever come back. As much as I love OKC, I realize their are just much better places out there that offer so much more. Maybe someday that will change but we can always keep dreaming. It is a much better place than it was and in some ways heading the right direction.

You know, I'm only 21 and I have a lot to learn in life, but some of the things said on this forum just make my jaw drop. It is absolutely incredible the disconnect and separation from reality that occurs. I think when a certain group of people that are like minded spend too much time around each, they start to believe things are changing towards their wants and desires because they around others that think like them but they fail to realize they are in the minority. I have seen on this website where people say we are in the minority, but do they actually believe that on a subconscious level or are they just saying that to try and tell themselves they are being reasonable.

I understand I am not going to get the kind of highways I desire here and I'm fine with that. I believe we could have better interchanges and road networks without widening one single road or highway and traffic would flow faster and smoother; I also think that is realistic, but no one has the courage to take it on.

I mean I am literally in a state of disbelief at what I read from Betts post for many reasons, the main one being that she seriously went and used China as an example saying look at their air pollution because they no bikes and it's caused by them abandoning cars. Let's just say hypothetically that she was right: what the f#ck does that have to do with us here in OKC, a metro of 1.4 million people sprawled out over 1,000 sqaure miles with a low density--the complete opposite of Chinese cities--removing a bike that I've literally only seen used 3 times and adding a car lane to that particular piece of pavement????? I mean WOW!

Many on here bash Dallas for having large highway, yet look at the massive growth in Dallas. Then we say that highways prevent good growth, lower property values, etc. yet look at property values along 635. Look at property values in Edmond along I-35 than look at them 3 miles from I-35; same thing with a lot of highways. Why is that we claim induced demand always works and use bs examples of adding one lane to already extremely congested highway like the 405(L.A.) that isn't induced demand, it's just common sense. What about Kilpatrick? Why isn't that bumper to bumper every morning and evening like it was sometimes? Now that rarely happens. Same thing with the new Crosstown... Someone tell me that if widened I-35 from downtown OKC to Norman to 12 lanes, 10 lanes plus an HOV lane(each way) that induced demand would kick in and the highway would be bumper to bumper again. You can't. Know why? Because if a couple billion were spent widening that highway to 12 lanes with good quality cement, light-rail down the center connecting to downtown Norman, commuter rail, and a BRT route, you wouldn't have to touch that highway for another 30-50 years. It would entirely solve the problem. It would impress people driving along the highway. New artwork and landscaping would be installed. New development would spur. But oohhhh no that will never happen and would be horrible if it did and blah blah blah....

Why does Europe, a place that a lot of people like to use for good development, and a lot of their countries have huge debt, high-unemployment, and some countries high poverty? I though urbanism was supposed to prevent most of that stuff? Why does Japan, an extremely urbanized country, have one of the highest suicide rates with their lack of disconnected suburban neighborhoods, I mean subdivisions, and cul-de-sacs? Sure, there are some suburbs that are dilated, but if anyone here wants to play ball, show me a suburb like Del City or something that is run down and I'll show you an urban city that over-run with crime and poverty worse than you could ever imagine.

None of this sh!t makes any sense and we have people on here like Sid and Cautromayo that saying they are glad they don't live here because of that but did they fly down here at all and protest or do something to help? Probably not. I'm sure their excuse if they see and respond to this will be 'it wouldn't have done any good.' Just like to all the people that didn't vote against Marry Fallin because she was going to win anyways. The people in this city work for us. Not the other way around. We have the power to kick their asses out if they don't meet our standards and if our council members aren't doing what they're supposed to be and our city is over-run by engineers who only care about fast moving traffic and new construction, then kick the council person or whoever elected them out of office, let them know why they were relieved of their duties, and put a new on in there that supports your beliefs. Spread the word. Campaign. Send letters. Start and advocacy group. Don't just sit on a talk forum with a bunch of other people like you and talk about how the council person(s) are too out of touch.

OKC has amazing potential and while I'm not overjoyed when this building could have been taller(putting the parking garages underneath and floors 3-10), had a better site plan(see KanyeMo's drawing), existing buildings preserved, renovated, and put to use again... but who did anything? We had a preservation group that seems like they were pussies and didn't do anything. We had a company who made their employees feel uncomfortable so they would sign the supporting petition. What the hell did we do besides sign some online petition that probably less than 0.01% of the city new about? Same thing with the Stage Center. We had an awesome piece of art that was torn down and now it might have been for nothing. Did anyone actually go out and stand around it holding a sign trying to save it? Did anyone organize a group? Did anyone chain themselves to it, getting arrested and ending up in the news spreading awareness that it is getting demo'd? What? Is that too crazy? It happens in other cities all the time. Did anyone go door to door handing out pamphlets and trying to explain to people the value and rareness the Stage Center is?

I mean what is your vision of the city? Do anyone ever see me bitching about the lack of Houston like highways in London or NYC? No. Because I like Houston and Dallas because of that. OKC is a car oriented city. The car was developed after the street car and bicycle as faster, more personal, and more efficient form of transportation. While highways might be more costly to build and maintain, that argument is quickly going to become irrelevant soon. Even when I joined, a big argument here was the high gas prices was going to make mass transit more attractive, but the recent news in the gas mileage of cars has quickly put that to rest. With sub-compacts getting 50-70MPG to trucks SUV'S getting 20-30MPG(and rising), better economy, new car ownership is now again rising. This sudden fascination with small urban areas and districts like the Plaza with Millennials is smelling more and more like a fad. I don't think it will go away, but I do suspect we will see a lot of Millennials start moving into the burbs. It has already happened from several people I know.

America is not special in sprawl. The only difference between our sprawl and sprawl in Europe is ours usually has parking in front of the buildings. Europe has it in back. Now, Europe's sprawl is more walkable, yes, but what kind of moron would move outside to the outskirts of city and complain about not being able to walk everywhere? Here in the US, we're just one of the first countries it seems to actually fund large highways giving people the additional option of living out in the green suburbs with 6 lane roads, strip malls, nicer schools, 10 lane highways, etc... which I like. Then we have these groups popping up like weeds complaining about too many highways in a city Dallas that is thriving and the question bears, why not move to a city like San Francisco or NYC if you want good urbanism? Oh, your job is located in Dallas and you can't get a good paying job in the type of city you seem to desire, well that is just downright ironic.

Sorry if I offended anyone, but some of the stuff I hear on here makes no sense to me. I'm moving to L.A. on May 21st to pursue a career in acting, so I'm going to get to experience a different city. I'm going to take a break for awhile as it seems my latest posts are getting on people's nerves, but we need to start stepping up here in OKC or nothing is going to get accomplished. I just hear a lot of talk on this site about needing to do stuff(kind of hypocritical I know) and how bad this is, but I never really see anything and I'm downtown a lot and looking at the news everyday. I never see anything progressive activism like what you hear about in cities like Austin and Portland. We had Friends for a Better Boulevard(which I don't think made one difference in fact made things worse because we are essentially getting the same road, just one less lane and a mile of bike lanes in front of the CC and Park, and a lower speed limit. That will do absolutely nothing for the walkability of the area. It's still a boulevard designed to move a car from point a to point b very quickly and reducing it from 6 to 4 lanes, adding a bike lane a part of it, and even reducing the speed limit doesn't change a thing. At the end of the day, it is still a road designed to move people from point a to point b very fast) and a couple other small projects, but nothing really that will make an impact on a large scale. I'm not trying to dog on the site or the people here, but just the people around the city in general don't seem to do too much about some of these issues.

That is my 2 cents on a lot things and again, if you are offended, sorry, but that's the way I see it currently.

Oops, replied to the wrong poster on my last post.


Panda, you may only be 21 years young, but you are wise beyond your years. I'd say you are by far one of the most passionate posters on here and put a lot of energy into your posts. You also have some great ideas and the city of OKC needs more people like to to express their goals and desires for the direction this city wants to go. I am more outspoken to a fault no doubt and then go negative on OKC out of frustration but share the same goals.

Wish you the best out in LA. I'd check out the Redondo/Hermosa Beach areas. You will love it there, it almost feels like a small beach community in a strange kind of way. Great weather, ocean air, palm trees, and lots of cougars for you! Be sure and check out Sharkeez there, you will love it. Hope you keep up with OKC on here and don't be a stranger. Also, if you make it big, come back and film a movie here! Wish you the best, you will love it and probably won't ever come back. As much as I love OKC, I realize their are just much better places out there that offer so much more. Maybe someday that will change but we can always keep dreaming. It is a much better place than it was and in some ways heading the right direction

There's nothing desperate about stating the obvious and your post is pretty weak.

Downtown is for all of us living in the metro, all 1.3 million of us... The ones that voted in the MAPS projects, paid the sales taxes, have used our disposable dollars supporting everything downtown as it's developed, provide the work force and many of who will become residents...but the majority of us have no desire to live downtown and never will...

We love our city and its suburban lifestyle and really don't ask for much... an easy commute when we come in to work and play and a good place to park when we get there.

Over a million square feet of new class A office space and plentiful parking in a great spot along the new streetcar route trumps the loss of the Stage Center and the buildings on this block for suburbanists...but it will be for urbanists as well. These developments will be a great benefit to every district surrounding the CBD where retail and residential make much more sense and are well on their way.

Great post.

I agree that downtown OKC is for the entire metro and at this point in OKC's development, its suburban residents who are supporting all these downtown businesses and creating the vibrant, up and coming districts that people love. I fully support urban living and people who prefer that lifestyle but also realize that adequate parking and other amenities aimed at suburbanites are necessary for a thriving downtown. Any effort to create an urban vs suburban rivalry is an effort to undermine the progress that OKC has made.

These peripheral neighborhoods are definitely the core strength of OKC at the moment. Without them, OKC would be in a serious world of hurt, especially in the face of declining energy prices.

I believe that the primary centers of activity for OKC will always be on the peripheral and not right in the CBD itself. That is simply how this city has developed and there isn't anything wrong with that.

I don't know the statistics for most cities, but a lot of the recent office space development in Dallas, the bay area, and San Diego has been suburban. Many larger corporations prefer to have campus facilities. I give Devon credit for choosing downtown OKC. They certainly could have built a facility outside the core. SF is seeing increasingly reverse commutes with employees heading down to Palo Alto/Cupertino/Sunnyvale, which have large business office developments going on. Much of the pharma and biotech in San Diego continue to develop in the mid-town area and Carmel Valley. The recent relocations in Dallas has been north of LBJ and American Airlines is looking at the old Texas Stadium site for a corporate campus. All these cities continue to see downtown growing too, but the suburban areas are outstripping them in growth.

Kitchen 324, if operated by tuck, could move into some old building on S Shields and they'd still be good eating. Sure, the view is nice where they are. But if the food and service were horrid, it's not such a view, nor such a building, that I'd bother to return.

But if it were on the second floor of a parking garage in the CBD, would you be as likely to go? My point is that I think the reason downtowns that are all parking garage and new buildings are off putting. Couple that with absent foot traffic in the evenings, and I suspect it's less appealing to people. That's probably why a lot of CBDs are empty at night. We're just extending the empty space in our downtown with these parking garages and my point was that a restaurant like RePubLic is probably wise enough to locate in a district with older, smaller buildings with space on the first floor and foot traffic. A second floor garage is probably the place to put a Bonefish Grill or some national chain people who work downtown are drawn to.

betts, as I live in Norman, when I eat at K324 it is because I want to enjoy what they prepare and their level of service. Not many breakfast places even try to come close. So yes, if they relocated elsewhere for some reason, I'd follow when I want a relaxing and tasty breakfast. Unless they shifted up north several miles. I just rarely ever venture north of 23rd or 36th anymore, and often not that far.

I'm sorry, I have to agree with betts on this one. That building provides an incredible ambiance to boost the experience. Put that same breakfast in any other place and it just wouldn't be as good.

Think about where people want to hang out these days. Auto Alley, Midtown, 23rd St., the Plaza District are booming. Kitchen 324 is in a renovated building. Maybe we need to not worry about restaurant and retail space in these new buildings because what appeal will they have anyway? Who will want to go to a second floor restaurant when you can hang out on a street side patio at one of these great old buildings? How many people would rather go to Vast than Broadway 10? Would you rather go to the bar at the Aloft or the O bar. Old buildings have a unique appeal. When you go through our CBD and really look, it is actually quite shocking to see how much of the available land and how many buildings are dedicated to parking. I'm not sure there was much hope for that area anyway, once I really look at it.

Ultimately, yes we can't worry about it, but I think it's good to point out what opportunities are being missed to encourage better development going forward. The advocates for 499, as it is now, have basically admitted that they are departing from Oklahoma City's proven successful development strategies when they pointed them out on a post card and then asked everyone to support that they do the opposite. It was quite the Jedi mind trick and it seems to have worked. lol.

However, there is a bigger concern. These developers and the people behind them have an influence that extends beyond their sandbox, one that has potential to undermine the public and private investments made in these districts that have begun to create a new urban center for Oklahoma City. The most high profile examples is obviously Nichols's oppositions to aspects of the streetcar. We have concrete examples of how they think urban areas should be developed, and basically they are 30 year old ideas (at least) and depart completely from the strategies of development that have facilitated a true urban renaissance in countless cities across the country and from which we are beginning to see similar success in Oklahoma City. We can write off the west side of the CBD as a 24 hour urban district, but the minds behind that are actively working against public investment in other districts that have shown the possibility of actually bringing the new urban environment to Oklahoma City. So, really, the question going forward is how do we keep that influence from working against the implementation of good urban development in the districts that have had already seen a great deal of success and rejuvenation because of those strategies?

I think we need to just stop focusing on this project as it is done and Nichols and company won. This non impressive 27 story building and its garages are going to take up this block. It has little chance for retail or street interaction and that is just the way it is. What we can focus on is getting more people DT and with districts like BT, DD, AA, and Wheeler, that remains a positive. I think OKC DT district needs to focus on an area where they have almost a strip of retail and great street interaction. It may be sterile over by Devon/499 Sheridan but people going to the Peake, MBG, and the park can still have a place where the OKC downtown has an area that is vibrant and lively. What do you think about that?

In fact I hope someone steps up and does something amazing that will draw people back to DT and literally rub it in the face of Devon/499 of what could have been. It would be great to actually show them what could have been type thing. I would have someone go check out Fort Worth's DT and how they have done things there. People are moving back DT there and they have blended the past with lot of growth. The retail and street interaction is really impressive. It is actually a really neat place that OKC could easily follow their pattern of success. They don't have huge DT but have done great things with what they have. How great would it be to see cafe's with outside patio's, retail shopping, etc and just people watching, the street car going past you, etc?

But if it were on the second floor of a parking garage in the CBD, would you be as likely to go? My point is that I think the reason downtowns that are all parking garage and new buildings are off putting. Couple that with absent foot traffic in the evenings, and I suspect it's less appealing to people. That's probably why a lot of CBDs are empty at night. We're just extending the empty space in our downtown with these parking garages and my point was that a restaurant like RePubLic is probably wise enough to locate in a district with older, smaller buildings with space on the first floor and foot traffic. A second floor garage is probably the place to put a Bonefish Grill or some national chain people who work downtown are drawn to.

No way. Even the large, well known chains know better and wouldnt put in a restaurant that was on the second floor and not ground level. And Im quite certain you wouldnt see them go into a retail space of a parking garage, ground level or not.

I was in Denver recently and got a future glimpse this block on Welton between 17th and 18th:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.74622,-104.989062,3a,75y,287.69h,93.47t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sOvVN64I3ui7ImMjyejTSbQ!2e0

That "parking garage with retail" has a nail salon, a 7-11, and I think I lock and key store. There's a Grand Hyatt across the street, yet, this area was relatively dead the whole time I was there.

I found all the people in LoDo, a large area of downtown full of well integrated new construction for offices and residences and lots of repurposed renovations that housed retail and restaurants. It's largely credited for putting downtown Denver back on the map.

So, it's interesting that you can go to about any major city in American and compare the difference between the old "super block" strategy of razing multiple buildings for monolithic massing that made downtowns so unappealing for decades and the new concepts of revitalization through renovation and integrated new construction. It's easy to see which method has the better overall return and impact on a city. Even when they do demolition, no one seems to replace it with stuff like this anymore. It's crazy how when some developers here try to "leave their mark" on the city, they end up doing it the same way did decades ago that only resulted in leaving scars.

No way. Even the large, well known chains know better and wouldnt put in a restaurant that was on the second floor and not ground level. And Im quite certain you wouldnt see them go into a retail space of a parking garage, ground level or not.

It wasn't in a parking garage, but on a trip to DC last year I ended up eating in a Del Frisco's Steakhouse (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Del+Frisco's+Steakhouse/@38.900647,-77.024605,2a,90y,90t/data=!3m5!1e2!3m3!1s-_g4eUxzIChY%2FVAykcBzrRAI%2FAAAAAAAAEBQ%2FINkU5kV1 Bv0!2e4!3e12!4m2!3m1!1s0x0000000000000000:0xc8b4f5 a061052cf7!6m1!1e1?hl=en) that had no apparent problems with most of their space being on the second floor of the building it was in.

Maybe I'm not understanding the objection to second floor spaces.

Maybe I'm not understanding the objection to second floor spaces.

In a lot of urban areas, it's not a problem and actually sometimes needed because the ground floor is not conducive to a lobby and a restaurant. It's usually not the ideal spot, but I think it works for well branded or destination restaurants.

That being said, it may still well be too foreign of a concept for OKC. There would be an upside to it though because, if it's in a parking garage, putting it on higher levels would mean that less people had to walk as far, and I think that's what a lot of people here are most concerned about.

It wasn't in a parking garage, but on a trip to DC last year I ended up eating in a Del Frisco's Steakhouse (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Del+Frisco's+Steakhouse/@38.900647,-77.024605,2a,90y,90t/data=!3m5!1e2!3m3!1s-_g4eUxzIChY%2FVAykcBzrRAI%2FAAAAAAAAEBQ%2FINkU5kV1 Bv0!2e4!3e12!4m2!3m1!1s0x0000000000000000:0xc8b4f5 a061052cf7!6m1!1e1?hl=en) that had no apparent problems with most of their space being on the second floor of the building it was in.

Maybe I'm not understanding the objection to second floor spaces.

Google street view seems to show that this Del Friscos has a sizable spot on the ground floor and the restaurant is 3 stories total. This is different than a restaurant having none or just a small entrance on the ground level. You may not understand the objection to something not having a street and ground preference, but I can tell you that restaurant owners and operators can. The people are on the street, and thats where most savvy restaurants want to have their presence.

Google street view seems to show that this Del Friscos has a sizable spot on the ground floor and the restaurant is 3 stories total. This is different than a restaurant having none or just a small entrance on the ground level. You may not understand the objection to something not having a street and ground preference, but I can tell you that restaurant owners and operators can. The people are on the street, and thats where most savvy restaurants want to have their presence.

From my ~4 month old memory, the entrance was on the first floor and the dining area I ate in was on the second floor. That's why I linked the night image that I did as it shows that part of the restaurant all nicely lit up. There may have been a dining area on the first floor but I don't remember seeing one.

The people are on the street, and thats where most savvy restaurants want to have their presence.

Crossing my fingers.

And of course, I think we all realize that even a second floor restaurant has to have access from the first floor street entrance. Hotels can get away with it sometimes, but they have a captive audience.

Haha, no kidding. Why are there going to be any people on the street during dinner time, won't all those Devon employees have already driven back out to the suburbs?

Haha, no kidding. Why are there going to be any people on the street during dinner time, won't all those Devon employees have already driven back out to the suburbs?

Maybe they'll walk from the nearby destination spots of bricktown, midtown, or film row.

Maybe they'll walk from the nearby destination spots of bricktown, midtown, or film row.

I bet plenty would have walked in to a Republic in the bus station.

I was in Denver recently and got a future glimpse this block on Welton between 17th and 18th:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.74622,-104.989062,3a,75y,287.69h,93.47t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sOvVN64I3ui7ImMjyejTSbQ!2e0

That "parking garage with retail" has a nail salon, a 7-11, and I think I lock and key store. There's a Grand Hyatt across the street, yet, this area was relatively dead the whole time I was there.

I found all the people in LoDo, a large area of downtown full of well integrated new construction for offices and residences and lots of repurposed renovations that housed retail and restaurants. It's largely credited for putting downtown Denver back on the map.

So, it's interesting that you can go to about any major city in American and compare the difference between the old "super block" strategy of razing multiple buildings for monolithic massing that made downtowns so unappealing for decades and the new concepts of revitalization through renovation and integrated new construction. It's easy to see which method has the better overall return and impact on a city. Even when they do demolition, no one seems to replace it with stuff like this anymore. It's crazy how when some developers here try to "leave their mark" on the city, they end up doing it the same way did decades ago that only resulted in leaving scars.

I did video in this area of Denver that is posted on the Denver thread and I specifically went up to Broadway and 20th St just to see the Holy Ghost Catholic Church (http://bit.ly/1ADiTbf).

StreetView (http://bit.ly/1sV1Wvd)

1999 Broadway (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Broadway) is a skyscraper that they built to curve around this very old church. It's literally on the front doorstep and is really cool. We all know how this would have played out in Oklahoma City for this historic structure.

But if it were on the second floor of a parking garage in the CBD, would you be as likely to go? My point is that I think the reason downtowns that are all parking garage and new buildings are off putting. Couple that with absent foot traffic in the evenings, and I suspect it's less appealing to people. That's probably why a lot of CBDs are empty at night. We're just extending the empty space in our downtown with these parking garages and my point was that a restaurant like RePubLic is probably wise enough to locate in a district with older, smaller buildings with space on the first floor and foot traffic. A second floor garage is probably the place to put a Bonefish Grill or some national chain people who work downtown are drawn to.

I'm not sure what you're taking about but the renderings clearly show the restaurant in the second floor of the office tower with an outdoor dining terrace overlooking the street. The dining and kitchen areas look to be about 9000 sf. The entrance will be through the first floor lobby, up an escalator and then walking down a corridor with open views of the lobby below and the MG and downtown to the east. They also show 3900 sf of retail at ground level below it... My guess is this space will do just fine...

Haha, no kidding. Why are there going to be any people on the street during dinner time, won't all those Devon employees have already driven back out to the suburbs?

More Devon employees. Spend evenings downtown on a weekly basis than the number of people that post on this forum

I'm not sure what you're taking about but the renderings clearly show the restaurant in the second floor of the office tower with an outdoor dining terrace overlooking the street. The dining and kitchen areas look to be about 9000 sf. The entrance will be through the first floor lobby, up an escalator and then walking down a corridor with open views of the lobby below and the MG and downtown to the east. They also show 3900 sf of retail at ground level below it... My guess is this space will do just fine...

It might. We'll see. Maybe I'm in the minority. I find getting to Vast off putting and, even though I've had some good meals there, I will always choose Red or Broadway 10 because of the ease of access and homier feel (and yes, even with all the red neon and concrete, Red feels much more inviting). I think that's the appeal of the restaurants on 9th, in Midtown and the Plaza as well. I do the same in big cities - picking restaurants outside the CBD almost exclusively.

I'm not sure what you're taking about but the renderings clearly show the restaurant in the second floor of the office tower with an outdoor dining terrace overlooking the street. The dining and kitchen areas look to be about 9000 sf. The entrance will be through the first floor lobby, up an escalator and then walking down a corridor with open views of the lobby below and the MG and downtown to the east. They also show 3900 sf of retail at ground level below it... My guess is this space will do just fine...

Rumors were that Republic showed interest in leasing the Union bus station building, Im willing to wager they wont show any interest in this 2nd floor space.

If you ask me, they have plenty of ground floor space for a restaurant, but they were content with wasting prime space and street frontage so that they could "crank' the building. Why not cover that area and have the restaurant? It would get much more interest than something on the second floor.

The second floor space is not for lease. It is going to be nebu light. For employees but also open to the public

Rumors were that Republic showed interest in leasing the Union bus station building, Im willing to wager they wont show any interest in this 2nd floor space.

If you ask me, they have plenty of ground floor space for a restaurant, but they were content with wasting prime space and street frontage so that they could "crank' the building. Why not cover that area and have the restaurant? It would get much more interest than something on the second floor.

They do have plenty of space for it, they are not even bothering putting retail frontage along greater 80% of Walker, even the new 'improved' version is planned to be a blank wall (ok probably somewhat enhanced wall but otherwise dead space) with parking stalls behind it.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/hinesrevised1.jpg

The second floor space is not for lease. It is going to be nebu light. For employees but also open to the public

That's funny because I actually assumed it would end up being a company owned restaurant concept like nebu because of the difficulty of leasing a 2nd floor space. I don't see nebu light bringing much excitement to the area. And I assume it'll be closed at night too. I didn't have so much of a problem with the tower, more just the tearing down things for parking garages. Yet it appears they are wasting the potential of the tower too.

We all know how this would have played out in Oklahoma City for this historic structure.

Do we? In this case, they would have had to contend with the Archdiocese of OKC.

We had Friends for a Better Boulevard (which I don't think made one difference in fact made things worse because we are essentially getting the same road, just one less lane and a mile of bike lanes in front of the CC and Park, and a lower speed limit. That will do absolutely nothing for the walkability of the area. It's still a boulevard designed to move a car from point a to point b very quickly and reducing it from 6 to 4 lanes, adding a bike lane a part of it, and even reducing the speed limit doesn't change a thing. At the end of the day, it is still a road designed to move people from point a to point b very fast) and a couple other small projects, but nothing really that will make an impact on a large scale.

I don't want to derail the thread, but I don't agree with this.

FBB made a huge difference on many levels. We reduced the hideous overhead bridge by 3,200 linear feet and forced broad changes that will save taxpayers somewhere between $28.5 and $35 million dollars. We successfully delayed the project by nearly 3 years. A project that was said to not be possible of being delayed. That has allowed citizen input to actually occur. More intersections are being introduced to mitigate the "barrier affect" and subsequently slow traffic with more stops. A greater concern for crosswalks, bike lanes, and how the Boulevard interacts with the areas it bifurcates has occurred. Parallel parking has been introduced and the quantity of lanes and width of lanes diminished. The broader conversation regarding impacts has caused a political commitment to invest in rehabilitation and greater walkability investment to the streets leading up to the Boulevard.

Is it perfect? Hell no. Is it "better"? Hell yes.

We could have probably accomplished more if everyone was towing the same rope. There seemed to be a lack of recognition by urbanists that a "grid" option was never a politically viable option on all sorts of levels.

Some of your other commentary is fairly spot on. I am just a bit tired of the narrative that FBB failed somehow. We worked our a** off and forced a great many arrogant people to have to modify the design of their project. And they hate us for it.

I guess that is where the rub exists. This community is in transition with generational thinking. Suburban perogatives versus urbanity. The only way that positive change can occur is to get involved, get elected, or somehow else get a seat at the table.

More Devon employees. Spend evenings downtown on a weekly basis than the number of people that post on this forum

Are you just playing a numbers game, or do you know how often each poster spends time downtown each week?

i don't want to derail the thread, but i don't agree with this.

Fbb made a huge difference on many levels. We reduced the hideous overhead bridge by 3,200 linear feet and forced broad changes that will save taxpayers somewhere between $28.5 and $35 million dollars. We successfully delayed the project by nearly 3 years. A project that was said to not be possible of being delayed. That has allowed citizen input to actually occur. More intersections are being introduced to mitigate the "barrier affect" and subsequently slow traffic with more stops. A greater concern for crosswalks, bike lanes, and how the boulevard interacts with the areas it bifurcates has occurred. Parallel parking has been introduced and the quantity of lanes and width of lanes diminished. The broader conversation regarding impacts has caused a political commitment to invest in rehabilitation and greater walkability investment to the streets leading up to the boulevard.

Is it perfect? Hell no. Is it "better"? Hell yes.

We could have probably accomplished more if everyone was towing the same rope. There seemed to be a lack of recognition by urbanists that a "grid" option was never a politically viable option on all sorts of levels.

Some of your other commentary is fairly spot on. I am just a bit tired of the narrative that fbb failed somehow. We worked our a** off and forced a great many arrogant people to have to modify the design of their project. And they hate us for it.

I guess that is where the rub exists. This community is in transition with generational thinking. Suburban perogatives versus urbanity. The only way that positive change can occur is to get involved, get elected, or somehow else get a seat at the table.

like

Are you just playing a numbers game, or do you know how often each poster spends time downtown each week?

Re-read his post, that's not what he said.

I don't want to derail the thread, but I don't agree with this.

FBB made a huge difference on many levels. We reduced the hideous overhead bridge by 3,200 linear feet and forced broad changes that will save taxpayers somewhere between $28.5 and $35 million dollars. We successfully delayed the project by nearly 3 years. A project that was said to not be possible of being delayed. That has allowed citizen input to actually occur. More intersections are being introduced to mitigate the "barrier affect" and subsequently slow traffic with more stops. A greater concern for crosswalks, bike lanes, and how the Boulevard interacts with the areas it bifurcates has occurred. Parallel parking has been introduced and the quantity of lanes and width of lanes diminished. The broader conversation regarding impacts has caused a political commitment to invest in rehabilitation and greater walkability investment to the streets leading up to the Boulevard.

Is it perfect? Hell no. Is it "better"? Hell yes.

We could have probably accomplished more if everyone was towing the same rope. There seemed to be a lack of recognition by urbanists that a "grid" option was never a politically viable option on all sorts of levels.

Some of your other commentary is fairly spot on. I am just a bit tired of the narrative that FBB failed somehow. We worked our a** off and forced a great many arrogant people to have to modify the design of their project. And they hate us for it.

I guess that is where the rub exists. This community is in transition with generational thinking. Suburban perogatives versus urbanity. The only way that positive change can occur is to get involved, get elected, or somehow else get a seat at the table.

Well, I simply disagree that you guys made anything better. Like I said, I think you made it worse. It would have been more pedestrian friendly if left more of a bridge because you could go under it without having to worry about traffic. If done right and built a little higher than the old I-40 and more attention to artwork and detail, it would have been no barrier what so ever. There are plenty of elevated highway in cities that have booming neighborhoods on BOTH sides of the highway and it's very easy and comfortable to walk under them.

Ps, I still respect that we had people who actually cared about this city and fought for what they believed in putting their time and effort into this. I am glad to see that.

PPS, perhaps I would change my wording not to say you failed, but didn't achieve what you seeking out to achieve. Believe it or not, I would've loved to have seen CuatrodeMayo's vision of a low-speed, 4 lane with narrow lane, huge traffic circle, bike lanes, and everything else he had on it with the Thunder Circle way more than I would like to see an old I40 rebuilt.

The thing here is though, we're not getting either. We're getting a half ass, half BLVD half highway, I'm not even sure what to call it at this point.

It's a road that is designed to be a highway but is being declared as a pedestrian friendly roadway. It sucks. Either have one or the other because no matter, unless you do it right, it will still be a detriment to the Super walkable environment we want to see built around here, am I wrong?

Again, I do appreciate what you guys did and am not trying to bash you.

I see. You consider the bridge design less of a barrier. I mean, we could have essentially replicated the former Crosstown I-40. Point taken. Most of us preferred the idea of a great Boulevard however and disliked the visual barrier that the former bridge presented.

I would argue however that the bridges section that we reduced would not have impacted pedestrian connectivity one way or another as there are now intersections in that zone that were not planned.

I see. You consider the bridge design less of a barrier. I mean, we could have essentially replicated the former Crosstown I-40. Point taken. Most of us preferred the idea of a great Boulevard however and disliked the visual barrier that the former bridge presented.

I would argue however that the bridges section that we reduced would not have impacted pedestrian connectivity one way or another as there are now intersections in that zone that were not planned.

I updated my other post.

I will say I think if the BLVD would've been built like CuatrodeMayo's design it would have been amazing. It would have been iconic.

Now we're just stuck with a bland Boulevard that I don't even think will encourage any walkability.

The only thing is once it's turned over to the city, we could include a MAPS initiative or something that would essentially tear down the whole road and build it from scratch making it a true pedestrian oriented road, but how likely is that?

I think that can happen in the near term. I think that there is a willingness to do something grand once ODOT hands over the keys. The problem all along has always been highway engineers and city engineers. Once we are past that and have possession of it, making it the way we hoped it would be is entirely possible.

Regarding 499 and preservation; basically we have to have younger people or urbanists on these boards. They have to be meaningfully organized enough to educate and influence City Council.

and sometimes... God forbid... we have to be willing to compromise.

Well, I simply disagree that you guys made anything better. Like I said, I think you made it worse. It would have been more pedestrian friendly if left more of a bridge because you could go under it without having to worry about traffic. If done right and built a little higher than the old I-40 and more attention to artwork and detail, it would have been no barrier what so ever. There are plenty of elevated highway in cities that have booming neighborhoods on BOTH sides of the highway and it's very easy and comfortable to walk under them.

Really? Name one. Elevated highways in most urban centers (the old 40 included) are dark, piss-scented bum hangouts and NOT comfortable at all to walk under. There's a reason a lot trying to get rid of them.

I applaud the work of FBB; No the Blvd is not perfect but their work forced some badly needed change with ODOT. Up until recently, I'd been in OK for some time and I can't remember them being challenged like that, which is way overdue IMO. We'll see if they learned, of course.

You are entitled to your opinion but I think you are going to find yourself in a tiny minority.

I think that can happen in the near term. I think that there is a willingness to do something grand once ODOT hands over the keys. The problem all along has always been highway engineers and city engineers. Once we are past that and have possession of it, making it the way we hoped it would be is entirely possible.

Regarding 499 and preservation; basically we have to have younger people or urbanists on these boards. They have to be meaningfully organized enough to educate and influence City Council.

and sometimes... God forbid... we have to be willing to compromise.I hope you are right. I would love to see a new major pedestrian oriented BLVD like what they have in major cities.

Really? Name one. Elevated highways in most urban centers (the old 40 included) are dark, piss-scented bum hangouts and NOT comfortable at all to walk under. There's a reason a lot trying to get rid of them.

I applaud the work of FBB; No the Blvd is not perfect but their work forced some badly needed change with ODOT. We'll see if they learned, of course.

You are entitled to your opinion but I think you are going to find yourself in a tiny minority.

Alright. I spend a lot of time Street viewing cities and have found a ton of elevated highway with both sides being full with development and having Street life. When I get home, I'll post screen shots, name of the highway & city.

There was some non-agenda discussion of this at today's city council meeting. Here's the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y49UEwPs_0U&feature=youtu.be&t=79m) time keyed to it if anyone is interested.

Re-read his post, that's not what he said.

Ok. Makes sense now. Thanks.

He says some pretty off the wall stuff, but that seemed a little too crazy. My bad.

Alright. I spend a lot of time Street viewing cities and have found a ton of elevated highway with both sides being full with development and having Street life. When I get home, I'll post screen shots, name of the highway & city.

That'd be interesting to see.

I remember that when I lived in San Francisco, everyone told me how bad the embarcadero was before the 89 earthquake because of the elevated freeway. They had to tear it down after loma prieta and now the embarcadero is a serious asset to the city. And when I lived there they tore down the part of the freeway that went over Hayes Valley to Oak and Fell streets. Within a year of that Hayes Valley went from a junk neighborhood to trendy and hip with nice restaurants and shops. Tearing down freeways was the best thing they ever did in that city (or the worst if you're someone who had to pay double the rent after they did it).

I did video in this area of Denver that is posted on the Denver thread and I specifically went up to Broadway and 20th St just to see the Holy Ghost Catholic Church (http://bit.ly/1ADiTbf).

StreetView (http://bit.ly/1sV1Wvd)

1999 Broadway (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Broadway) is a skyscraper that they built to curve around this very old church. It's literally on the front doorstep and is really cool. We all know how this would have played out in Oklahoma City for this historic structure.

That is a cool building. Denver is interesting to me, because it's got a lot of cool architecture, but most of the high rises are very bland. There is a lot of cool stuff to check out in downtown, but you wouldn't know it from the interstate. Their successful districts are also a great mix of old and new and there a tone of examples around CBD that show why the design of 499 Sheridan is so weak when implemented.

yeah, lived in Mountain View, going into SF noticed some parts kinda of blighted. They were usually around the elevated freeway.

StreetView (http://bit.ly/1sV1Wvd)

Looking down California to the South you see a canyon wall of parking garages, you look back to the North and you see a very large garage plus surface parking. So OKC isn't the first place to get a cluster of garages.

Notice California is a one way street also.

StreetView (http://bit.ly/1sV1Wvd)

Looking down California to the South you see a canyon wall of parking garages, you look back to the North and you see a very large garage plus surface parking. So OKC isn't the first place to get a cluster of garages.

Notice California is a one way street also.

Do you notice anything missing in that streetview?

Denver also has a far bigger downtown, a far older downtown and far more hitorical structures of all kinds than does OKC. Denver also has sort-of two downtowns. One being at the traditional 1st and Broadway historical buildings and then the main one where the Union Station was built. Commerce moved to this area immediately after.

Do you notice anything missing in that streetview?

Cars parked in the metered spaces?

Denver also has a far bigger downtown, a far older downtown and far more hitorical structures of all kinds than does OKC. Denver also has sort-of two downtowns. One being at the traditional 1st and Broadway historical buildings and then the main one where the Union Station was built. Commerce moved to this area immediately after.

I agree. I don't think Denver and OKC are really comparable. Denver's downtown has so much more historical building stock and is so much larger it really is beyond comparison.

One city I would say is comparable to downtown OKC is Charlotte. Both cities have very little historic building stock left after suffering massive urban renewal failures. Both downtowns are consisting of mostly stock built within the past few decades. Charlotte is simply 25 years or so ahead of OKC in the revitalization process. It started with the Bank of America tower, which at the time was much taller than anything else there, and then they saw a massive building boom throughout the following two decades resulting in the very impressive, vibrant downtown that exists there today.

Charlotte - 1985 - This is comparable to OKC ca. 2010.

http://dilemmaxdotnet.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/charlotte-1985.jpg

Do you notice anything missing in that streetview?Cars parked in the metered spaces?

No pedestrians (despite a large residential building 1 block away and lightrail tracks).

No pedestrians (despite a large residential building 1 block away and lightrail tracks).
Google Maps isn't a great indicator of traffic or livelihood of neighborhoods, Usually they go out early or at times when there isn't very much traffic.

I agree. I don't think Denver and OKC are really comparable. [/IMG]

It's not a comparison, but a lesson. Denver's downtown has good contrast in development styles where you can easily compare the impact of good and bad urban development.

Shadid submits appeal resolution on bus station demolition | Red Dirt Report (http://www.reddirtreport.com/red-dirt-news/shadid-submits-appeal-resolution-bus-station-demolition)


OKLAHOMA CITY - Oklahoma City Ward 2 Councilman Ed Shadid revealed a plan to appeal the decision of the Downtown Redevelopment Review Committee (DDRC) to demolish the Union Bus Station, Red Dirt Report learned Thursday. - See more at: Shadid submits appeal resolution on bus station demolition | Red Dirt Report (http://www.reddirtreport.com/red-dirt-news/shadid-submits-appeal-resolution-bus-station-demolition#sthash.ROeDZqYn.oMhGzePA.dpuf)

Good, surely they can save just one building?

I like the bus station, but really - of all the structures on that block it is the one with the most support? It is maybe #3 on my list. Is it receiving the most attention because it is being replaced by a parking garage? Half of Hotel Black is being replaced with a corporate plaza.

I have said this before, Shadid is the only member of the council who speaks the language of urbanism.

I have said this before, Shadid is the only member of the council who speaks the language of urbanism.

Which is why it's disappointing that he's such a jackass.

The DDRC made the decision on this, has the City Council even had a say in it yet?