I am wondering if Fred Hall and Bob Howard can franchise this area for a W Oklahoma City Hotel-Residences. I think it would be a good idea, one high-rise would be condos, the other hotel rooms, I don't see why it wouldn't work, great location, and capital wouldn't be a problem....

Besides, I don't see a reason why Starwood would deny a franchise of W here, we already have the Aloft brand coming from Starwood Hotels anyways, just a thought though, if I were Fred Hall or Bob Howard, I would consider it...

Don't be so sure about the ultimate future for the old Bob Howard Ford site. It could end up being used differently from what Hall discussed in my story.

Don't be so sure about the ultimate future for the old Bob Howard Ford site. It could end up being used differently from what Hall discussed in my story.

Differently from housing/retail, I mean why wouldn't you put a nice mixed-use development there? It's a prime location...probably the best piece of land in all of Oklahoma City...

Maybe a convention center? Or an extension of Central Park so it actually meets up with the Myriad Gardens? Prior to last year, we were seeing urban planning that, quite frankly, was being guided by the mayor. Now with professional planners and consultants in the mix, and the mayor not presiding over every meeting (as he pretty much did with Core to Shore, placing items on the MAPS 3 ballot), don't be surprised if different ideas start emerging.

If the City could agree to a land swap that both extended the park and gave park front land to a developer with deep pockets then I think that would be a win-win-win for everyone.

Extending central park to connect to Myriad would be completely ludicrous...I mean seriously, 70 acres for central park is good enough, connecting the two will take away the uniqueness of Myriad Gardens...and how would that work with new boulevard?

Convention Center location, I think that plot of land is too small for convention center, convention center should be placed where original C2S plans have it located...or go with ULI recommendations...

Boston Common is right next to the Boston Public Garden.

Boston Common is right next to the Boston Public Garden.
That is exactly what I was thinking.......

If the City could agree to a land swap that both extended the park and gave park front land to a developer with deep pockets then I think that would be a win-win-win for everyone.

For retail it will loose them traffic going to/from downtown to the boulevard, access directly across from the ford center and the cox center. Plus the city does not own the majority of the land the park will be on yet, let alone the land surrounding the park that was likely never planed to be bought by the city.

For retail it will loose them traffic going to/from downtown to the boulevard, access directly across from the ford center and the cox center. Plus the city does not own the majority of the land the park will be on yet, let alone the land surrounding the park that was likely never planed to be bought by the city.

That would depend on the type of retail and how large their residential component is. Even on their current Ford Center site, if it isn't destination retail it won't last. You can't have sucessful relying only on 1 shopping hour a day from office workers 5 days a week. Of course, the City would have to acquire non-park land and trade it for the Ford center site, probably at a 2:1 ratio. If Hall/Howard are going to be asked to give up 15 acres of prime real-estate between two parks and next to the Ford Center, I think it would be fair that they get 30 acres in exchange.

That would depend on the type of retail and how large their residential component is. Even on their current Ford Center site, if it isn't destination retail it won't last. You can't have sucessful relying only on 1 shopping hour a day from office workers 5 days a week. Of course, the City would have to acquire non-park land and trade it for the Ford center site, probably at a 2:1 ratio. If Hall/Howard are going to be asked to give up 15 acres of prime real-estate between two parks and next to the Ford Center, I think it would be fair that they get 30 acres in exchange.

There is no acreage in all of Oklahoma City that is worth more then that 15 acres with Myriad and Devon to the north, new boulevard and park to the south, Ford center to the east, and future residential to the west...why waste that real estate on more park area? How would that boost economy of downtown?

A nice hotel and condos would be perfect there with lower level retail...Hall/Howard are smart men, I am sure they will make a good decision...

I think connecting the Central Park and Myriad Gardens would be a great idea. Just downsize the oversized boulevard and possibly lower it as it crosses the park. As the other Central Park in NYC has done eliminating the barrier that roads can create.

Also, it will provide a better connection between downtown and the River. That is what Core to Shore was supposed to be about. Connecting downtown to the River. A park is the perfect connection. Also, the large park will make the land around it even more suitable for development/redevelopment, causing it to develop faster. (20 years instead of 50)

A massive convention center would creat a huge divide between downtown and the central park. Why would we want a convention center creating another divide.

Putting the convention center on the Ford site would be like shooting yourself in the foot ... with a nuclear weapon. Does anyone else find it sad that the most valuable piece of real-estate in the state is a close car dealership?

They could always connect park to downtown by pedestrian bridges over boulevard, something like this:

http://yourwebperson1.com/sda-blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Picture-7.jpg
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://places.designobserver.com/media/images/KMVP-bridge-exterior-angle-small.jpg

Or this:

http://places.designobserver.com/media/images/KMVP-bridge-exterior-angle-small.jpg

I don't think connecting parks via a bridge is good idea. It doesn't solve anything other than making the street easier to cross. You still have interupted park space. BTW - what are these 'bridges' supposed to be crossing over; a boulevard that shouldn't be built in the first place?

I think connecting the Central Park and Myriad Gardens would be a great idea. Just downsize the oversized boulevard and possibly lower it as it crosses the park.

A convention center is not seriously being proposed their, it is hard to fit one larger than the cox center in the space avalible.

How are you proposing to fix the access issues from the interstate that downsizing the boulevard will create getting into and out of downtown. It might be more possible if we had the population living in residential apartments in the C2S drawings now, but that will take years assuming it happens anything like the plan.

Putting the convention center on the Ford site would be like shooting yourself in the foot ... with a nuclear weapon. Does anyone else find it sad that the most valuable piece of real-estate in the state is a close car dealership?


Not me, it is what it is, what does the former use have to do with value---nothing.

In light of the way they stropped the skydance bridge plan down, hoping for nice pedi bridges further north in the park seems, sadly, pipedreamish.

for a single street crossing it is a bit a hassle to go up and down for such a short span, walking over to the nearest light is not that much worse, if they found a way to work that into an extension on the underground/skybridge network then it might be more likely to be used, Though without having the new convention center south of the ford center even that seems unlikely, and putting the convention center their has issues that have been well discuses on other threads.

A convention center is not seriously being proposed their, it is hard to fit one larger than the cox center in the space avalible.

How are you proposing to fix the access issues from the interstate that downsizing the boulevard will create getting into and out of downtown. It might be more possible if we had the population living in residential apartments in the C2S drawings now, but that will take years assuming it happens anything like the plan.

Since I-40 is being relocated, the main points of access will be from the exits along it (forget which streets they are). Turn one or both of them into Boulevards if you have to (N/S instead of E/W). Supposedly there will be some using the Boulevard coming from the east, but again, the traffic count will be mitigated by the other exits. As others have suggested, just return it back to the grid as a regular street (if at all). Does DT really need another street?

While the ULI didn't say not to build it, they did say that what the City hopes to achieve along it, just ain't going to happen.

Ah crap - I just looked to see where you can enter and exit I-40 from. I have to re-think my whole idea of the boulevard. You can't enter or exit I-40 on either side of the park (except for an exit ramp from westbound I-40 at Robinson). Without the Boulevard there is no way to enter or exit the immediate downtown area to I-40. They should have made three thru lanes and two exit lanes so they could have had more places to get on and off.


Eastbound I-40 traffic:

exit at Agnew Ave.
exit at the Boulevard
exit and entrance at Pennsylvania Ave., Western Ave. & Shields Blvd.
entrance from eastbound Boulevard
Westbound I-40 traffic:

exit at the Boulevard
entrance from Shields Blvd.
exit at Robinson Ave.
exit & entrance at Western Ave.
exit at Pennsylvania Ave.
exit at Agnew Ave.
entrance from the Boulevard
entrance from Agnew Ave.

Ah crap - I just looked to see where you can enter and exit I-40 from. I have to re-think my whole idea of the boulevard. You can't enter or exit I-40 on either side of the park (except for an exit ramp from westbound I-40 at Robinson). Without the Boulevard there is no way to enter or exit the immediate downtown area to I-40. They should have made three thru lanes and two exit lanes so they could have had more places to get on and off.

A westbound entrance would have been nice somewhere east of shields would have been nice as well. The closest places near bricktown are using shields, from easter before the i35/i235/i40 juncture and off NW 4th if you stay in the exit lane. from Lincoln or Reno would probably been the most doable in the bricktown area.

Enclosed sky-bridges are no good.

I do think Blair is thinking ahead. Perhaps in the future we are going to be looking for planning solutions that connect the two big downtown parks. What if the big mixed-use development that will be built on the old Downtown Ford site can somehow be oriented around a High Line-type of green space that serves as a backbone connecting the two. That could make for some interesting energy that is very different from anything already downtown.

Enclosed sky-bridges are no good.

I do think Blair is thinking ahead. Perhaps in the future we are going to be looking for planning solutions that connect the two big downtown parks. What if the big mixed-use development that will be built on the old Downtown Ford site can somehow be oriented around a High Line-type of green space that serves as a backbone connecting the two. That could make for some interesting energy that is very different from anything already downtown.

I assume you are referencing the High Line in New York City. It runs close to our apartment in Chelsea and is a great urban way. I agree that it would be a really unique and cool addition here. It is an odd twist, in a way... take down the elevated car route east and west and add an elevated pedestrian greenbelt/walkway north and south. What an interesting and clever twist. Taking lemons and making lemonade.

If it weren't so ugly underneath and didn't have so many maintenance issues, I was thinking that the old I-40 would make a great High Line too. But, I think it would be prohibitively expensive to create and maintain, and development beneath it would suffer. I like the idea of a pedestrian greenbelt/walkway as well.

We were at the Capitol recently and were told people don't use or hate to use the skybridge at the capitol. I think unless they're connected to an existing building/s, they're a terrible way to move people. Again, the question should be why we need a road that needs a skybridge to cross it. I-40 I understand. The boulevard...not at all.

I drove by the Ford dealership today and it appears they are readying it for demolition. Workers were inside tearing the place apart. It looks like they're gutting everything and shipping it off. Since it doesn't appear too substantial, I assume the actual building will be quite easy to take down and clean up.

So, I guess they're already preparing it for whatever it's to become, whether that's part of the park or a new mixed-use development.

Has Howard stated some kind of unofficial date that he'd like things to take shape? I think I remember hearing he's being held up until the I40 demolition, but I'm not sure if that's true.

I drove by the Ford dealership today and it appears they are readying it for demolition. Workers were inside tearing the place apart. It looks like they're gutting everything and shipping it off. Since it doesn't appear too substantial, I assume the actual building will be quite easy to take down and clean up.

So, I guess they're already preparing it for whatever it's to become, whether that's part of the park or a new mixed-use development.

Has Howard stated some kind of unofficial date that he'd like things to take shape? I think I remember hearing he's being held up until the I40 demolition, but I'm not sure if that's true.

Funny that you posted this, just got bid alert, bid is calling for mixed-use development on 22 acres, two residential buildngs with ground floor retail, could it be for this? but didn't give location, or too many details...I am to cheap to signup and pay...lol...

Funny that you posted this, just got bid alert, bid is calling for mixed-use development on 22 acres, two residential buildngs with ground floor retail, could it be for this? but didn't give location, or too many details...I am to cheap to signup and pay...lol...

Interesting. I think I recall reading that the Ford site is 8 or 10 acres (I could be wrong on that). If it is a bid for this site, perhaps they expanded the project.

How many acres is the downtown airport aka Humphrey's river development ??

How many acres is the downtown airport aka Humphrey's river development ??

86 acres for Humphrey's development....Humphrey's development is not scheduled to turn dirt until March 2012....

Interesting. I think I recall reading that the Ford site is 8 or 10 acres (I could be wrong on that). If it is a bid for this site, perhaps they expanded the project.

22 acres looks plausible, below is a rough estimate of how much area their is if it goes between Walker and Robinson & Old i40 and Reno.

Estimate of how large the 3 sections their are buildings, lots, sidewalks and 2nd street merged together.
500 ft wide x 600 ft long = 300000 sq ft
300000 sq ft / 43560 sq ft / acre= 6.887 acres

Estimate of how much of harvey will end up in the project that will merge two of the 3 blocks.
50 ft wide x 600 ft long = 30000 sq ft
30000 sq ft / 43560 sq ft / acre= .689 acres

6.887 * 3 + .689 = 21.35 acres

Twin towers on the old Ford site? That is what I heard a couple months back. I heard mid rise but in the same sentence I heard 30 stories.

A couple 20-30 story towers would be nice in that area IMO.

A wide boulevard would not be ideal but it isn't like other cities don't have something similar. The Boston Common is bordered on the north by Beacon Street (5 lane road, 3 traffic/2 parking), the east by Park Street (3 lanes expanding to 5 at Beacon), on the south by Tremont Street (4 lanes), The Common and Boston Public Garden are split by Charles Street (5 lanes) and bordered on the south by Boylston (a divided 6 lane) and the Garden is bordered by Arlington (5 lanes) splitting it from park on the Commonwealth Avenue Mall. If I recall correctly Central Park in NYC is bordered all the way around with 5 or more lanes with most cross streets below grade.

22 acres looks plausible, below is a rough estimate of how much area their is if it goes between Walker and Robinson & Old i40 and Reno.

Estimate of how large the 3 sections their are buildings, lots, sidewalks and 2nd street merged together.
500 ft wide x 600 ft long = 300000 sq ft
300000 sq ft / 43560 sq ft / acre= 6.887 acres

Estimate of how much of harvey will end up in the project that will merge two of the 3 blocks.
50 ft wide x 600 ft long = 30000 sq ft
30000 sq ft / 43560 sq ft / acre= .689 acres

6.887 * 3 + .689 = 21.35 acres

From the original article...

"The site is bordered by Robinson, Walker, Reno avenues and Interstate 40. With planning for the Core to Shore development continuing and Project 180, another downtown revitalization effort, under way, the future calls for the site to be bordered by the Oklahoma City Arena on the east, a revamped Myriad Gardens to the north and a new central park and boulevard to the south.

"Hall estimates the entire site spans eight to 10 acres."

Well how do they not know how big the site is? They own it.

Well how do they not know how big the site is? They own it.

We don't know if the bid for 22 acres of mixed-use development is for the old Ford site...the bid could be for anywhere in Oklahoma City...just a speculation...but the bid alert did say plans were early in development, and not scheduled to start construction until July 2012...given that info, you would think it would be for downtown area, because 2012 is key year for development projects to end or start in that area, The new I-40 Crosstown, Devon Tower, first two phases of project 180, Oklahoma City Arena Renovations... are all slated to be completed towards then end of 2012...

G. Walker....Where are you getting your info? What construction bid news service are you reading?

There may be someone on here that would pay for the full bid news service and we won't need to play this guessing game.

G. Walker....Where are you getting your info? What construction bid news service are you reading?

There may be someone on here that would pay for the full bid news service and we won't need to play this guessing game.

BidClerk...

http://www.bidclerk.com/construction-bids.Oklahoma-City.Oklahoma.html

although its pricy to signup and get full access....

Interesting find G.Walker. The bid includes elevators which means they will probably be taller than 3 stories.

Don't read anything into the attached aerial and map with the bid. The place identified is just the Google marker for Oklahoma City.

http://www.bidclerk.com/project.1092338.html

Interesting find G.Walker. The bid includes elevators which means they will probably be taller than 3 stories.

Don't read anything into the attached aerial and map with the bid. The place identified is just the Google marker for Oklahoma City.

http://www.bidclerk.com/project.1092338.html

yea, that is the default..but I guess if you have full access, you can view proposed location...

G. Walker... thanks for sharing your source for your info. Now we need someone ...uhum..Kerry.. to pay for the service and get the full scoop.

another good site is www.constructionwire.com, they give a little more info, and price of project, but they are not as up to date as BidClerk...

http://www.constructionwire.com/projects/search_result.asp?action=search

This seems to be another large apartment complex like The Lincoln or Legacy located somewhere other than downtown.

This seems to be another large apartment complex like The Lincoln or Legacy located somewhere other than downtown.

Are there any apartments outside of downtown that have retail on the bottom of them?

Interesting, Tulsa has plans for new 15 story office tower, I am sure this is part of their highly anticipated mixed-used development "OnePlace" across from the BOK Center:

http://www.bidclerk.com/project.978396.html

Are there any apartments outside of downtown that have retail on the bottom of them?

Good question. I don't know.

That 22-acre mixed use development listed on bidclerk is for a project at Morgan Road & SW 44th.

The listing didn't say retail on ground floor, just multi-tenant housing and retail. Probably means apartment buildings and a convenience store.

Why would they be putting elevators in a rural apartment complex? Could this be a relocation of the apartment complex on Route 66 near Lake Overholser that was just rejected. It was also adjacent to Morgan Road.

The listing on bidclerk says nothing about elevators.

The address is: 11448 SW 44th St Oklahoma City, OK 73101

Here is the project G.Walker is talking about.

http://www.bidclerk.com/project.1092338.html

Under Divisions of Work -> Conveying Systems it says 'elevators'. Under Doors/Windows is also lists 'store fronts'. That makes me think the retail components are not in stand-alone buildings. It also list 'overhead doors'. This could mean loading dock doors. The only retail I know that would include overhead doors is auto repair but none of the work listed is consistant with auto repair. It also mentions EIFS. I am still thinking this is mid-rise/high-rise development.

It does not say anything about elevators in the full listing. I have a subscription.

We are talking about the same project.

The listing on bidclerk says nothing about elevators.

The address is: 11448 SW 44th St Oklahoma City, OK 73101

Google Maps puts this address just north of Will Rogers Airport? could this be for the new mixed-use development proposed for that area by OKC Airport Trust, a few weeks ago?

Well - here you go


Deferral to the February 25, 2010 meeting was requested on the following items:
18. (PUD-1403) Application by Westpoint Developers, L.L.C., to rezone 11448 SW 44th Street from
the AA Agricultural District to the PUD-1403 Planned Unit Development District. Ward 3.

http://www.okc.gov/agendapub/view.aspx?cabinet=PUBLISHED_MEETINGS&fileid=828941

No, not near the airport... It's on Morgan Road and SW 44th.

Well - here you go


Deferral to the February 25, 2010 meeting was requested on the following items:

18. (PUD-1403) Application by Westpoint Developers, L.L.C., to rezone 11448 SW 44th Street from
the AA Agricultural District to the PUD-1403 Planned Unit Development District. Ward 3.

http://www.okc.gov/agendapub/cache/2/wuf1upir2rjhhijtpy33gh45/82894102082011125153925.PDF
Well that clears that up, I was getting happy for a min, hoping it would be for urban core...

Why would they approve this? This is a really rural area (for OKC).

Why would they approve this? This is a really rural area (for OKC).

multi residential can mean anything, when we hear multi residential we automatically think apartments/condos...but senior living centers/dorms/low-rent housing/duplexes can fall under multi residential...

Why would they approve this? This is a really rural area (for OKC).

Why would they not approve this? Its not like that this developer would do this downtown if this was turned down from the city. Should the planning commision go ahead and turn down everything not in a 5 mile radius of downtown?

Why would they not approve this? Its not like that this developer would do this downtown if this was turned down from the city. Should the planning commision go ahead and turn down everything not in a 5 mile radius of downtown?

Yes.