Neighborhood Jam to anchor new Midtown development (https://www.okctalk.com/content.php?r=611-Neighborhood-Jam-to-anchor-new-Midtown-development)

Plans have been submitted for a new development on the site of the former Boulevard Cafeteria.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/midtownblvd1.jpg


The new 2-story, 32,922 square foot retail, and office building would have Neighborhood Jam – a popular breakfast and brunch spot – as the anchor tenant.

The building could cover existing parking and vacant lots where Boulevard Cafeteria once stood at 525 NW 11th, near Saint Anthony Hospital.

The proposed mixed-use structure would include additional space for retail at ground level and office space on the second floor.

Unlike the prior building which was set back far from the street, the new l-shaped structure will front both 11th and Dewey with parking behind.

The developer is the Midtown Renaissance group which owns much of the surrounding property, including Plaza Court to the south and most the buildings along Walker between NW 10th and 13th.

The cafeteria building was demolished in February 2017.

Ftizsimmons Architects is the designer of the new project.



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


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/midtownblvd2.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/midtownblvd3.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/midtownblvd4.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/midtownblvd5.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/midtownblvd6.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/midtownblvd7.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/midtownblvd8.jpg

The design closely resembles a modern-day Plaza Court, which is directly south.

i like it, just bummed about the height and honestly sick of these surfaced parking lots. ( i get it...we "need" it in this area)

i like it, just bummed about the height and honestly sick of these surfaced parking lots. ( i get it...we "need" it in this area)

In the NewsOK article, it literally says that they were wanting to be consistent with the height of the area, and not be too tall and stick out like a sore thumb.

Villa Teresa condos will be directly to the west and they made a huge squawk about the Elliott's height, so I'm sure part of this was not wanting to ruffle feathers and drawing protest.

In the NewsOK article, it literally says that they were wanting to be consistent with the height of the area, and not be too tall and stick out like a sore thumb.
I get it. I read it. I am saying i dont agree with it. IMO, like i said before, i would rather see residential with several stories and an added commercial component.

I think two stories is appropriate in this location. It would seem to match with Plaza Court as well as the building to the north. 3 stories might have been fine but anything above that would have been weird there, in my opinion.

I agree the height is a bummer. It would be nice to see at least 5 stories. Not a huge fan of the massive parking lot but that can get developed down the line. Eh, it’ll be a nice infill development.

Odd name, but the development itself is nice enough. Mid-rise infill is what we need, even if that rise is a bit on the shorter side.

Nice urban friendly design right up against the streetcar line.

I knocked down some food at the Boulevard Cafeteria over the years. Amazing how many cafeterias there were in OKC in the day - Anna Maude, Queen Anne (Founders Tower), Boulevard, Dodsons just to name a very few.

Funny how times change! (and I know....sounding like an OLD man).:)

OK, back to the building/development discussion!

Odd name, but the development itself is nice enough. Mid-rise infill is what we need, even if that rise is a bit on the shorter side.

Nice urban friendly design right up against the streetcar line.

I think that name stood on signage on that property for the last half century.

Yes, since we now have a boulevard of significance in a completely different area, it will be confusing for those not already familiar with the history of the spot. Sort of like all the "Bricktown" names on properties not in Bricktown.

i like it, just bummed about the height and honestly sick of these surfaced parking lots. ( i get it...we "need" it in this area)

While I agree, at least the surface lot is behind the building so the building is pushed out to the street... That's still better. :)

Very nice. I think 3 stories would have been okay here. In the very least, they should have planned for a rooftop option. Definitely noticed the plaza court design omage. While I'm not a surface parking fan, thankful it is in the back, which is not uncharacteristic for this area.

I know this wouldn’t happen but it would have been cool to see the parking lot at Midtown Plaza Court turned into a pedestrian area with maybe a farmers market activity on some days, patio area, and a park mix.

The removed parking could be mitigated by a 3-4 level parking garage where the current parking lot on this development will be. I could give around 200-300 spaces. Add a raised mid-block pedestrian crossing on 11th St. with a HAWK signal.

Anyone find the design bland? I'm not terribly good at viewing renderings but I hope these retail spaces look more inviting than the ones at Plaza Court. I've been pleased with just about all of Midtown's Renaissance's work so far. Maybe this will grow on me. However, in the effort to blend in with Plaza Court, this project seems to take away from Plaza Court. Just my opinion.

Anyone find the design bland? I'm not terribly good at viewing renderings but I hope these retail spaces look more inviting than the ones at Plaza Court. I've been pleased with just about all of Midtown's Renaissance's work so far. Maybe this will grow on me. However, in the effort to blend in with Plaza Court, this project seems to take away from Plaza Court. Just my opinion.

I have a good friend who is an architect and he said when developers are going to bid and sometimes for media, they will throw something together that is not finalized. That is why when you see the initial renderings and when they go to city council for approval, there are changes to the plans and the look of the project.

That being said, I like the look of it as it fits with the neighborhood and would like another floor or two, but overall, I really like the interaction with the street and the hiding of the parking.

They are seeking design approval for all this, so these are exactly what they are planning to build.

i like it, just bummed about the height and honestly sick of these surfaced parking lots. ( i get it...we "need" it in this area)

I get the frustration, but at least we've made progress to the point that the parking lots are going BEHIND the building and not between the building and the street. Small victories.

I don’t get the fuss about height on this specific project... I’m usually all for it but I don’t mind this at all. Especially with the Midtown Plaza Court directly across the street. This is like a mirror

I will never understand why people use the argument that a building should be built as the same height as those around it.

I have no problems with the development, the name, the height, --- but I am a little disappointed in the design. It looks a little 70's/80's with early mid-century thrown in for good measure. I don't know, just first thoughts looking at it here for the first time.

Noticed some movement on this. Heavy equipment brought in to bust up the old foundation of the cafeteria that was there.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/jam062119a.jpg

They have now removed that entire concrete parking lot.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/jam062619a.jpg

Villa T. needs to get moving like this.:)

but Marva tho

Footings going in.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/jam080719a.jpg

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/jam081719a.jpg

Steel going up:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/jam101419a.jpg

Assuming I have the project right, the developers of this had a proposal up in front of the City Council this morning for parallel parking spots along NW 11th next to the streetcar line. It just failed 8 to 1.

https://twitter.com/OKC_SPAN/status/1191765363190616064?s=20

Assuming I have the project right, the developers of this had a proposal up in front of the City Council this morning for parallel parking spots along NW 11th next to the streetcar line. It just failed 8 to 1.

https://twitter.com/OKC_SPAN/status/1191765363190616064?s=20

Yay! Thread also says that we've experienced 893 stoppages (62 per month) due to idiots parking on the line. This is absolutely absurd, ridiculous, and should never, ever, ever have gotten to that point. There needs to be at least one wrecker parked somewhere along the line that's on-call during streetcar operating hours, and just tow the ***holes IMMEDIATELY, and add a $100 stupidity surcharge on to the regular towing fees.

Yay! Thread also says that we've experienced 893 stoppages (62 per month) due to idiots parking on the line. This is absolutely absurd, ridiculous, and should never, ever, ever have gotten to that point. There needs to be at least one wrecker parked somewhere along the line that's on-call during streetcar operating hours, and just tow the ***holes IMMEDIATELY, and add a $100 stupidity surcharge on to the regular towing fees.

I've seen some escort vehicles, so why not replace those vehicles with wrecker trucks? Yeah some could be solved by folding in a mirror, but why not be more reactive and lay down the law a little to to speed up the street cars, these things are gonna fail if they aren't moving faster

Yay! Thread also says that we've experienced 893 stoppages (62 per month) due to idiots parking on the line. This is absolutely absurd, ridiculous, and should never, ever, ever have gotten to that point. There needs to be at least one wrecker parked somewhere along the line that's on-call during streetcar operating hours, and just tow the ***holes IMMEDIATELY, and add a $100 stupidity surcharge on to the regular towing fees.

Yeah, I don't know why we don't fine or have "real" consequences for most of these stoppages. Running in to a shop or a restaurant like "Who drives the red Kia?!" and then letting them move it doesn't feel like it's going to have an impact on how well that person pays attention to their parking job in the future. Unless you get towed, they do nothing.

And I get what they're trying to do, but just saying "people don't know how to park, so we just aren't going to let them" doesn't feel like right answer.

Yeah, I don't know why we don't fine or have "real" consequences for most of these stoppages. Running in to a shop or a restaurant like "Who drives the red Kia?!" and then letting them move it doesn't feel like it's going to have an impact on how well that person pays attention to their parking job in the future. Unless you get towed, they do nothing.

And I get what they're trying to do, but just saying "people don't know how to park, so we just aren't going to let them" doesn't feel like right answer.

Completely agree. I know there are some car haters on the council now but this was kind of a dumb decision imo.

Completely agree. I know there are some car haters on the council now but this was kind of a dumb decision imo.

If you look at the map and renderings in the first post, there are 88 parking spaces behind the bldg, not to mention other lots on the same block, there's really no need for parallel parking in front if it would impact the streetcar in any way (which it would).

If you look at the map and renderings in the first post, there are 88 parking spaces behind the bldg, not to mention other lots on the same block, there's really no need for parallel parking in front if it would impact the streetcar in any way (which it would).

So with that thinking we should eliminate all parallel parking along the street car route, no?
Of course we shouldnt, which is why these 6 spots were not going to matter to the street car much at all.

So with that thinking we should eliminate all parallel parking along the street car route, no?
Of course we shouldnt, which is why these 6 spots were not going to matter to the street car much at all.
Yes we absolutely should eliminate parking along the streetcar route on the side of the street the line is on.

Yes we absolutely should eliminate parking along the streetcar route on the side of the street the line is on.

:yeahthat: :iagree: :please:

Yes we absolutely should eliminate parking along the streetcar route on the side of the street the line is on.
I agree.

As an aside - it was sure stupid (and I know there were outside forces at play) to not run the streetcar down the middle of Broadway as opposed to the east side of the lane.

So with that thinking we should eliminate all parallel parking along the street car route, no? .

Sounds like a great idea, I'm glad you suggested it!

Maybe the reason theres been so many parking issues is enforcement, no one is getting punished for illegally parking, only 29 cars out of 893,

Since the streetcar launched in December 2018, the service has been interrupted 893 times due to vehicles that are not properly parked in parallel parking spots alongside the tracks. In some instances, simply folding in a vehicle’s mirror allows the streetcar to safely pass, but since inception 29 vehicles have been towed.

Also, when the streetcar largely serves people who have driven to downtown, more parking seems to make sense if you want more streetcar riders.

“Most people riding the streetcar are not walking to get on the streetcar, they actually are driving from somewhere and they have to have a place to park to get on that streetcar,” said Burson. “So those six parking spaces that they just turned down would have been very close to two stations that you can catch the streetcar from.”

“This proposed on-street parking supports new sales tax revenue,” said Fleming. “We’re going to have retail and restaurant in this development.”
Each new parking stall can generate up to $300,000 in annual sales to a retail district, said Fleming.
“The importance of having these stalls to each shopper or restaurant patron cannot be overemphasized,” he said.

https://journalrecord.com/2019/11/06/streetcars-win-midtown-parking-plan-denied/

If this is true, maybe the city can invest in some off-street parking and combine parking & streetcar as one fee. If you park in it you ride free on the streetcar. Get those cars off the street.

Do we need a Midtown parking garage on one of those giant empty lots as part of a denser development?

EXCERPT FROM DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK POLICY FRAMEWORK:
2-4 Parking Priority
On-street parking serves two essential functions in a downtown environment: 1) it provides a renewable supply of easily
accessible, doorstep parking for customers; and 2) it provides a “barrier of steel” between pedestrians and moving traffic in high
intensity urban environments. Though it fulfills only a fraction of total downtown parking demand, the “promise” of on-street
parking is essential to nurturing development of a lively pedestrian environment, particularly along High Intensity, Storefront
and Neighborhood Streets. The Framework divides the downtown street network into two levels of priority: primary parking and
secondary parking streets. In most cases, on street, parallel parking will occur on both sides of the street. Secondary parking
streets may include parallel parking on one or both sides. In some locations on street parking may be angled to make more
effective use of limited space.

EXCERPTS FROM WALKABLE CITY: HOW DOWNTOWN CAN SAVE AMERICA, ONE STEP AT A TIME - JEFF SPECK:
It would seem that only one thing is more destructive to the health of our
downtowns than welcoming cars unconditionally and that is getting rid of them
entirely. The proper response to obesity is not to stop eating, and most stores need car
traffic to survive. With autos reintroduced, most failed pedestrian malls, like Monroe
Place in Grand Rapids, have come back at least partway. The key is to welcome cars
in the proper number and at the proper speed.
----------
What makes a sidewalk safe is not its width, but whether it is protected by a line of
parked cars that form a barrier of steel between the pedestrian and the roadway. Have
you ever tried sidewalk dining on a sidewalk without curbside parking? Those sorry
little table installations rarely last long. Whether they are two feet away or ten feet
away, nobody wants to sit—or walk—directly against a line of cars traveling at sixty
feet per second. On-street parking also slows traffic down, since drivers are wary of
other cars potentially pulling into the roadway
---------
Few sidewalks without parking entice walking, yet cities routinely eliminate it in
the name of traffic flow, beautification, and, more recently, security. Many curbs in
Oklahoma City have lost their parking spaces based on the assumption that terrorist
bombers are afraid of getting a parking ticket. This line of reasoning is so patently
ridiculous that it has been embraced by the federal government.● Fortunately, at least
local leadership has shown a capacity for reform: our new plan for OKC’s central
business district more than doubles the number of on-street parking spaces—from
fewer than eight hundred to more than sixteen hundred. According to the National
Trust’s Main Street Center program, each eliminated on-street parking space costs an
adjacent business ten thousand dollars each year in sales. If the inverse is true, we’ve
just made Oklahoma City merchants $9 million richer every year.
--------------
The latest enemies of on-street parking to make the scene are two erstwhile friends:
bikeways and transit lines. Stripping a sidewalk of its protection in order to add bike
lanes is just sacrificing one form of nonmotorized transportation for another. And
since transit depends on walkability for its success, any trolley system that undermines
pedestrian comfort is shooting itself in the foot. If they are truly to offer an alternative
to the automobile, bikes and trolleys must displace moving cars, not parked ones.

Maybe the reason theres been so many parking issues is enforcement, no one is getting punished for illegally parking, only 29 cars out of 893,

Since the streetcar launched in December 2018, the service has been interrupted 893 times due to vehicles that are not properly parked in parallel parking spots alongside the tracks. In some instances, simply folding in a vehicle’s mirror allows the streetcar to safely pass, but since inception 29 vehicles have been towed.

Also, when the streetcar largely serves people who have driven to downtown, more parking seems to make sense if you want more streetcar riders.

“Most people riding the streetcar are not walking to get on the streetcar, they actually are driving from somewhere and they have to have a place to park to get on that streetcar,” said Burson. “So those six parking spaces that they just turned down would have been very close to two stations that you can catch the streetcar from.”

“This proposed on-street parking supports new sales tax revenue,” said Fleming. “We’re going to have retail and restaurant in this development.”
Each new parking stall can generate up to $300,000 in annual sales to a retail district, said Fleming.
“The importance of having these stalls to each shopper or restaurant patron cannot be overemphasized,” he said.

https://journalrecord.com/2019/11/06/streetcars-win-midtown-parking-plan-denied/

Right behind the building the 6 spaces are in front of are literally 88 spaces, and who knows how many more within a block. I have a really hard time buying that those 6 spots could generate up to $1.8 million annually (I don't have a JR subscription, so I can't see if there is any methodology behind his $300K/space). Those 6 spaces should never have even been up for discussion as being allowed. Having said that, yes, a park-and-ride scenario would probably be good somewhere for the streetcar.

EXCERPT FROM DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK POLICY FRAMEWORK:
2-4 Parking Priority
On-street parking serves two essential functions in a downtown environment: 1) it provides a renewable supply of easily
accessible, doorstep parking for customers; and 2) it provides a “barrier of steel” between pedestrians and moving traffic in high
intensity urban environments. Though it fulfills only a fraction of total downtown parking demand, the “promise” of on-street
parking is essential to nurturing development of a lively pedestrian environment, particularly along High Intensity, Storefront
and Neighborhood Streets. The Framework divides the downtown street network into two levels of priority: primary parking and
secondary parking streets. In most cases, on street, parallel parking will occur on both sides of the street. Secondary parking
streets may include parallel parking on one or both sides. In some locations on street parking may be angled to make more
effective use of limited space.

EXCERPTS FROM WALKABLE CITY: HOW DOWNTOWN CAN SAVE AMERICA, ONE STEP AT A TIME - JEFF SPECK:
It would seem that only one thing is more destructive to the health of our
downtowns than welcoming cars unconditionally and that is getting rid of them
entirely. The proper response to obesity is not to stop eating, and most stores need car
traffic to survive. With autos reintroduced, most failed pedestrian malls, like Monroe
Place in Grand Rapids, have come back at least partway. The key is to welcome cars
in the proper number and at the proper speed.
----------
What makes a sidewalk safe is not its width, but whether it is protected by a line of
parked cars that form a barrier of steel between the pedestrian and the roadway. Have
you ever tried sidewalk dining on a sidewalk without curbside parking? Those sorry
little table installations rarely last long. Whether they are two feet away or ten feet
away, nobody wants to sit—or walk—directly against a line of cars traveling at sixty
feet per second. On-street parking also slows traffic down, since drivers are wary of
other cars potentially pulling into the roadway
---------
Few sidewalks without parking entice walking, yet cities routinely eliminate it in
the name of traffic flow, beautification, and, more recently, security. Many curbs in
Oklahoma City have lost their parking spaces based on the assumption that terrorist
bombers are afraid of getting a parking ticket. This line of reasoning is so patently
ridiculous that it has been embraced by the federal government.● Fortunately, at least
local leadership has shown a capacity for reform: our new plan for OKC’s central
business district more than doubles the number of on-street parking spaces—from
fewer than eight hundred to more than sixteen hundred. According to the National
Trust’s Main Street Center program, each eliminated on-street parking space costs an
adjacent business ten thousand dollars each year in sales. If the inverse is true, we’ve
just made Oklahoma City merchants $9 million richer every year.
--------------
The latest enemies of on-street parking to make the scene are two erstwhile friends:
bikeways and transit lines. Stripping a sidewalk of its protection in order to add bike
lanes is just sacrificing one form of nonmotorized transportation for another. And
since transit depends on walkability for its success, any trolley system that undermines
pedestrian comfort is shooting itself in the foot. If they are truly to offer an alternative
to the automobile, bikes and trolleys must displace moving cars, not parked ones.

Thank you for posting this could not agree more. Laid out in sensible terms for all to see.

Do we need a Midtown parking garage on one of those giant empty lots as part of a denser development?

There's plenty of parking in Midtown. At some point, people may have to walk a block or two to their destination, which is part of the purpose of the streetcar: Transforming the core into a more walkable environment. If OKC puts a parking garage on every block then that actually hurts the streetcar being used as a real form of transportation. Why take a streetcar if you can find parking everywhere all the time?

There's plenty of parking in Midtown. At some point, people may have to walk a block or two to their destination, which is part of the purpose of the streetcar: Transforming the core into a more walkable environment. If OKC puts a parking garage on every block then that actually hurts the streetcar being used as a real form of transportation. Why take a streetcar if you can find parking everywhere all the time?

This is pretty much true, and is a large part of the reason I have not found much personal use for the streetcar. There are very few locations along the streetcar route (and certainly none in Midtown) where I can't find free parking somewhere and walk to my destination in about the same time as it would take via the streetcar. And I'd much rather spend 15 minutes walking somewhere than wait 10 minutes for the streetcar and then ride it for 5 minutes (though this is admittedly a personal preference).

This is pretty much true, and is a large part of the reason I have not found much personal use for the streetcar. There are very few locations along the streetcar route (and certainly none in Midtown) where I can't find free parking somewhere and walk to my destination in about the same time as it would take via the streetcar. And I'd much rather spend 15 minutes walking somewhere than wait 10 minutes for the streetcar and then ride it for 5 minutes (though this is admittedly a personal preference).

You would be surprised how many people in OKC don't understand the concept of parking and walking to the destination. A perfect example is The Collective in Midtown. There are actual reviews online complaining about lack of dedicated parking and complaints about having to park in the lots and pay to use The Collective's little electric shuttle.

Not only is the Collective within walking distance to a large parking garage, but it is also immersed within the core of the district that has free on-street parking everywhere around it. Oh, and there is also two streetcar stops within about 150 yards of it on both sides. OKC is pathetic when it comes to the mentality of walking.

True dat.

You would be surprised how many people in OKC don't understand the concept of parking and walking to the destination. A perfect example is The Collective in Midtown. There are actual reviews online complaining about lack of dedicated parking and complaints about having to park in the lots and pay to use The Collective's little electric shuttle.

Not only is the Collective within walking distance to a large parking garage, but it is also immersed within the core of the district that has free on-street parking everywhere around it. Oh, and there is also two streetcar stops within about 150 yards of it on both sides. OKC is pathetic when it comes to the mentality of walking.

You can't judge the entire city based on what some knucklehead on the internet says.

You can't judge the entire city based on what some knucklehead on the internet says.

Except that's the culture that car culture has created in a sprawling city like OKC. There's an expectation that every retail or commercial establishment is going to have a massive parking lot within feet of an entrance. There's plenty of parking in Midtown. A good chunk of people here just can't fathom walking more than 10 feet to any establishment. They're so used to being able to find ample parking like they do at a parking lot at Wal-Mart or Belle Isle Station. What they don't understand is that Midtown wouldn't be Midtown if it were businesses with a sea of surface lots. That's called Quail Springs Mall, the Memorial Road corridor, Chili's, Chisholm Creek, Rockwell Plaza, or any other commercial area deprived of character and urban fabric.

This is changing, and I'm an example of it. I was raised in the suburbs and the thought of parking and walking any distance to a destination was foreign to me. Even just a few years ago, I would avoid a restaurant if I couldn't park there. But now, I enjoy the vibe of downtown and it has become my go-to dining destination. I'll park and walk several blocks and think nothing of it. It's now the norm and is much more enjoyable than parking within a few feet of some restaurant. As cities evolve, so do the people living in them.

You would be surprised how many people in OKC don't understand the concept of parking and walking to the destination. A perfect example is The Collective in Midtown. There are actual reviews online complaining about lack of dedicated parking and complaints about having to park in the lots and pay to use The Collective's little electric shuttle.

Not only is the Collective within walking distance to a large parking garage, but it is also immersed within the core of the district that has free on-street parking everywhere around it. Oh, and there is also two streetcar stops within about 150 yards of it on both sides. OKC is pathetic when it comes to the mentality of walking.

Yeah, I've got no problem walking up to two miles round-trip, as long as I have enough time and the weather is nice enough out (which it really is, most of the time). OKC certainly isn't the most walkable city in the world, but most of the core is pleasant enough. What really does need improvement IMO is bicycle infrastructure, I'd love to buy a bike for most of my shorter trips but I just don't think I'd feel safe biking around this city for the most part. Any sort of protected bike lanes would be an improvement.

Back on topic, there's absolutely no reason to care about losing six spaces of street parking in front of this building when there's a lot 10x the size behind the building.

Except that's the culture that car culture has created in a sprawling city like OKC. There's an expectation that every retail or commercial establishment is going to have a massive parking lot within feet of an entrance. There's plenty of parking in Midtown. A good chunk of people here just can't fathom walking more than 10 feet to any establishment. They're so used to being able to find ample parking like they do at a parking lot at Wal-Mart or Belle Isle Station. What they don't understand is that Midtown wouldn't be Midtown if it were businesses with a sea of surface lots. That's called Quail Springs Mall, the Memorial Road corridor, Chili's, Chisholm Creek, Rockwell Plaza, or any other commercial area deprived of character and urban fabric.

Midtown does awesome business. The car culture you're describing hasn't seemed to hurt it.

I disagree with the logic driving is too easy we need to make it harder so people will be “encouraged” to take mass transit which is nice way of saying borderline forced. If that’s the case then I’d rather see parking remain.

This whole subject just leaves me shaking my head... when we passed the first Maps, downtown was a decaying **** hole... It was like a cancer and the city was dying from the inside out... What we’ve accomplished over the last 25 years is truly amazing...

...but now that it’s been revived, it’s a place that’s too expensive for most to afford...

The population of downtown is now around 10,000 people and you can argue how many more depending on what you consider walkable...and if you’ve wondered what your restaurant and entertainment options would be if it weren’t for those in the suburbs driving in, think about living in Coweta...

Oklahoma City As well as most cities in the south were built to accommodate the freedom that comes with every family being able to afford a car and the city being built around that car culture... there is no going back and it’s never going to change...

Bitching about cars and parking that accommodate those in the suburbs coming downtown to spend their disposable income is kinda crazy to me but I’m doing my part...unless I’m going to a Thunder game or concert, I rarely go downtown anymore because there are just too many other options...

Downtown Oklahoma City belongs to all of us... we all paid those Map’s taxes for decades rebuilding it...it’s not just for the ones that can afford and have decided to live down there...and it would go all the way back to being dead if it wasn’t for metrowide support of those driving in... Think Coweta...be careful what you wish for...

I disagree with the logic driving is too easy we need to make it harder so people will be “encouraged” to take mass transit which is nice way of saying borderline forced. If that’s the case then I’d rather see parking remain.

You realize people are both forced to buy a car and constantly drive it based on car-centric design, right? Environments nudge behavior. At least the core could move towards an alternative option so people have some choice.

^^^^ so with that logic let’s force people to ride transit or have to put with more traffic and harder to find parking?