General Urban Development

[UnFrSaKn]

I've been spending a lot of time on Doug's site and a few others trying to learn about what buildings used to be downtown but have been demolished. I must be the only 29 year old interested in such things. It amazes me that something like the Biltmore was demolished like it was nothing at all. People my age will never get to see it, whether it was boarded up and covered in pigeon crap or not. How long was the Skirvin left abandoned? Now it's one of the last gems downtown. Buildings are like a time machines, and I would bet the people who built them would roll in their graves to see their blood and sweat turned into a parking lot or whatever. Part of what makes a city unique is the wide range of architecture you see. I can't believe buildings like the Baum building, the old courthouse and the downtown library once existed. The old guys I work with like Doug's site and old pictures of downtown how they remember when they were kids. They all talk like it was a bygone era.

I've been spending a lot of time using Bing street view and Google street view trying to find what's still standing and where the old buildings were. So I'm trying to remember a lot of buildings. I had assumed the tall building across from Sandridge was the India Temple, and wondered what the one on the corner was but that makes sense now. What's the one across from Sandridge then?

I personally can't see a single reason for ever demolishing a piece of history. A city and a building is only what people choose to make of it. Were people considering tearing down the Skirvin when it was in disrepair? Money and the economy are fleeting things, that go up and down over the years. Once a building is demolished, there goes the cities history and the legacy of those that worked to build it. I guess that's my rant that's formulated in my head lately.

[UnFrSaKn]

I'm also planning on visiting friends in Denver in April, and maybe use the two weeks vacation to spend time there again. I haven't been on vacation there since 2004. My friend's brother builds condos in the Italian area of downtown and is renowned for restoring or preserving old buildings. After a 4th of July party at the top of his condo, my friend went riding around downtown Denver around midnight-1am, around the train station and we stopped inside the Brown Palace Hotel.







http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_P...r,_Colorado%29

You talk about fascinating and a long history. This place was amazing. There are other examples of old buildings that only add to how cool Denver is that were never demolished/burnt down etc. I'm looking forward to doing video this year, if it works out.

[Steve]

i've been spending a lot of time on doug's site and a few others trying to learn about what buildings used to be downtown but have been demolished. I must be the only 29 year old interested in such things. It amazes me that something like the biltmore was demolished like it was nothing at all. People my age will never get to see it, whether it was boarded up and covered in pigeon crap or not. How long was the skirvin left abandoned? Now it's one of the last gems downtown. Buildings are like a time machines, and i would bet the people who built them would roll in their graves to see their blood and sweat turned into a parking lot or whatever. Part of what makes a city unique is the wide range of architecture you see. I can't believe buildings like the baum building, the old courthouse and the downtown library once existed. The old guys i work with like doug's site and old pictures of downtown how they remember when they were kids. They all talk like it was a bygone era.

I've been spending a lot of time using bing street view and google street view trying to find what's still standing and where the old buildings were. So i'm trying to remember a lot of buildings. I had assumed the tall building across from sandridge was the india temple, and wondered what the one on the corner was but that makes sense now. What's the one across from sandridge then?

I personally can't see a single reason for ever demolishing a piece of history. A city and a building is only what people choose to make of it. Were people considering tearing down the skirvin when it was in disrepair? Money and the economy are fleeting things, that go up and down over the years. Once a building is demolished, there goes the cities history and the legacy of those that worked to build it. I guess that's my rant that's formulated in my head lately.

i highly recommend visiting www.impeiokc.com

[UnFrSaKn]

i highly recommend visiting www.impeiokc.com

Is that cupola (3:09) behind Philip Morris from the Baum building? (1:57) I read that one of them was preserved. What building is that being demolished? (4:47)

EDIT: Should Google first.







Here's another related article.

http://newsok.com/will-project-180-m...rticle/3494725

Doug's
http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2009/05...ry-center.html

[Jettmiester]

i highly recommend visiting www.impeiokc.com

Is the Pei model still on dsiplay to be seen?

[Kerry]

No doubt that there will need to be a major re-work of the tracks on the south side of downtown to create an east-west alignment out of Santa Fe station. Removing the Co-op and lumberyard will go a long way towards solving this problem. It doesn't help that there is a pretty good elevation change to get up to the elevated tracks.

[Snowman]

No doubt that there will need to be a major re-work of the tracks on the south side of downtown to create an east-west alignment out of Santa Fe station. Removing the Co-op and lumberyard will go a long way towards solving this problem. It doesn't help that there is a pretty good elevation change to get up to the elevated tracks.

Tthe remaining connections on the south of the new i40 are only a slight shift from the current line, and it looks like they did the grating so they can run a line between shields and the existing line just north of the new i40 to tie it in their.

[Kerry]

Tthe remaining connections on the south of the new i40 are only a slight shift from the current line, and it looks like they did the grating so they can run a line between shields and the existing line just north of the new i40 to tie it in their.

Perfect.

[UnFrSaKn]

Looks like I managed to get enough off topic to split the thread into another discussion.

[Kerry]

Spartan - I think you missed every point I was trying to make. Not every site along the rail is good for TOD. TOD doesn't only have to make sense for rail, it has to make sense for other modes of transit around the site.

Let's start with the Kilpatrick Turnpike stop. The site I picked is the first place I-40 is close enough to the tracks to make it a viable park and ride for I-40 commuters. It is also at an exit ramp for the Kilpatrick Turnpike. It is the last place that is not industrial in nature until you get to downtown and it has direct access to Mustang. Finally, it has existing vacant land.

Fairgrounds - if you think activites at the fairgrounds don't match the demographics of the average person in OKC you're crazy. Frankly, I am more than a little put-off by the elitist position you seem to be taking with rail travel. People from every walk of life will be riding the rails, not just the upper-crust and those of us from the middle class that the upper-crust will tolerate. I am more than sure people from Edmond, Norman, and Midwest City attend events at the fairgrounds. If there is a reliable mass transit system they can use it will even increase attendance. Also, I never said Festival of the Arts would be at the fairgrounds. I said over-flow parking could be at the fairgrounds. In fact, over-flow parking from any downtown event could be done at the fairgrounds.

The stop at the AICC is only because the train is going right by it anyhow. If there isn't demand then the train doesn't stop there.

Now, having said all of that, I suggest you start laying some lines on Google Earth and see what you come up with. I think most of us would be interested to see what you come with.

[Spartan]

Spartan - I think you missed every point I was trying to make. Not every site along the rail is good for TOD. TOD doesn't only have to make sense for rail, it has to make sense for other modes of transit around the site.

Let's start with the Kilpatrick Turnpike stop. The site I picked is the first place I-40 is close enough to the tracks to make it a viable park and ride for I-40 commuters. It is also at an exit ramp for the Kilpatrick Turnpike. It is the last place that is not industrial in nature until you get to downtown and it has direct access to Mustang. Finally, it has existing vacant land.

Fairgrounds - if you think activites at the fairgrounds don't match the demographics of the average person in OKC you're crazy. Frankly, I am more than a little put-off by the elitist position you seem to be taking with rail travel. People from every walk of life will be riding the rails, not just the upper-crust and those of us from the middle class that the upper-crust will tolerate. I am more than sure people from Edmond, Norman, and Midwest City attend events at the fairgrounds. If there is a reliable mass transit system they can use it will even increase attendance. Also, I never said Festival of the Arts would be at the fairgrounds. I said over-flow parking could be at the fairgrounds. In fact, over-flow parking from any downtown event could be done at the fairgrounds.

I didn't say that the Fairgrounds wasn't an average OKC demographic. I don't really want to go there, or get into the nuances of defining on OKC demographic..probably not possible to do, probably not a worthwhile endeavor. But I do think there is value in determining who will ride the rails. It has nothing to do with elitism, populism, or any ism that politically-charged people like to think in terms of. I don't think it's unfair to say that the fairgrounds attract a large ag-oriented demographic, and I don't think it's elitist (but rather reasonable) to conclude those guys aren't going to ride the rails. Who will? Commuters who live in suburbs and work downtown. People looking to go to a shopping hub. People going to Thunder games. People going clubbing/drinking downtown. College students at OU/UCO. I see all of those as much more solid bets for ridership than the Fairgrounds, I mean, why ride the rails, when you can overcompensate for all your shortcomings with a big Hemi pick-up truck? Lol..I don't mean to be offensive, I'm just offering pragmatic, possibly blunt, opinions on how this could go. Consider it my way of contributing to the discussion..I don't do it to be an arse, I mostly just mean for most of these remarks I make like this to come off with a few laughs, but there is a lot of truth buried under some of these juvenile wise-cracks I make. Let's not deny that or get too bent out of shape with the way I often phrase things in jokes and sarcasm.

The stop at the AICC is only because the train is going right by it anyhow. If there isn't demand then the train doesn't stop there.

OK, fair enough--the way you phrased it suggested that it was its own line in your vision, and I was a little puzzled by that.

Now, having said all of that, I suggest you start laying some lines on Google Earth and see what you come up with. I think most of us would be interested to see what you come with.

Oh, I'm definitely more than happy to do that. I've been toying around with a few maps that I've kept to myself for the past few months, since Jeff invited me to a streetcar subcommittee meeting. My personal outlook on it is that the service area needs to be broken up into a streetcar zone, where street does not leave, and a LRT/commuter zone. LRT/commuter rail doesn't serve the streetcar zone, and vice versa. So to that end, I'm not sure there should be a MetroRail or whatever stop in the inner city unless it is heavily interfaced with the streetcar and other modes of transit.

I can post a few of the things I've been working on. I've been thinking in a few of my own directions on this, and it's mostly streetcar-based just because of how comparatively cheap that is, whereas other modes might be more prohibitively expensive, and would involve cross-governmental jurisdictions. For instance, there is no point in constructing a commuter line that ends at the Kilpatrick (and I don't know if you intended this, but it is fairly cunning at first glance) that is obviously intended to serve the Edmond area. It could be construed at first as a way of getting Edmond ridership without having to seek involvement from the City of Edmond. But then that's serving them without them paying for any of it, because we know the ridership won't support it, unless tickets are considerably more expensive for Edmond residents. You might as well get funds from Edmond and go all the way to downtown Edmond.

If Edmond is not interested in paying up, then no commuter rail for the north metro. That simple. Same goes for Moore/Norman. I think it's 100% certain that Norman is interested in paying up, at least as long as Rosenthal is mayor. Moore probably wouldn't care because they're so flush with what used to be everyone else's sales tax revenue right now.

[Kerry]

Thanks for the reply Spartan. In retrospect the stop at the fairground probably is not a good idea. Maybe that stop should be reserved for events only and not part of the regular scheduled service. As for service to Edmond, I agree it should go right into downtown Edmond. The goal of rail should be to increase TOD at every station and it only make sense that if you are going to increase density, it be done in the downtown areas. Stations in Norman, Yukon, Edmond, and Moore would be downtown (yes - Moore has a downtown). Eventually I would like to see places like Norman and Edmond introduce their own local streetcars.

For the record, I am not a big fan of Park and Ride lots because they only contribute to sprawl but hopefully those stations would develop high density TOD. Of course, this is not possible with Tinker/Town Center station becasue of the runway issues but that station also serves the largest employer in the state so I guess in that case it is okay.

[Snowman]

A report on identifying potential future development of metro transit had one near the fairgrounds for a special event station.

A map is on page 31 of this document.
http://www.gometro.org/Websites/gome...hapter%205.pdf

Document TOC
http://www.gometro.org/fgp

[Spartan]

Kerry:

Well I must agree with your overall suggestion that these lifestyle centers proposed around the metro (yet to see a good one actually get built though) be a little more than a pig with lipstick in terms of functional urbanism. I agree that TOD is the way to go, the way of the future for OKC. I also agree that in the area around Kilpatrick and Broadway is great TOD potential, with potential synergy with what's going on at other stops. One of the things about TOD though is that we are going to discover opportunities that we didn't realize existed, like with Tyson's Corner, or the Panorama Village thing in Denver that Blair Humphreys worked on. I can see something like that happening around 63rd and Broadway, also along the BNSF tracks--right between Chesapeake and Broadway.

When you think hard about it, there will be a lot of these potential nodes. You have to just design the system and the TOD will happen where it happens, for the most part--though there is nothing wrong with making sure the main stations develop as planned. I think Norman and Edmond downtowns just have so much TOD potential, especially how the area along the tracks in Norman between Boyd and Main is so ripe for infill, on the edge of both Chautauqua, Campus Corner, and Downtown Norman.

Snowman:

The FGS is already severely outdated and the timeline has already ran out for it to have any bearing in my opinion. Plus, what it proposed was pretty conservative (and proposed phases that took forever, and for instance, a commuter line between downtown and Crossroads Mall is going to have ZERO riders, not now or ever, so that's a big FAIL). We've taken our time with the goal of building a more comprehensive system as soon as we can get ready, in terms of funding. I think we all understood though that streetcar would be first, and we're going to knock that one out of the ballpark. OKC will be a streetcar city once again.

[Kerry]

Kerry:

Well I must agree with your overall suggestion that these lifestyle centers proposed around the metro (yet to see a good one actually get built though) be a little more than a pig with lipstick in terms of functional urbanism.

I still laugh to myself everytime I see the site plan for Village Verde. It is classic segreagtion zoning; residential over there, commerical over here, retail in that spot, etc. The only thing that makes it 'urban' is it's size but it isn't sustainable.

This is more urban than Village Verde and it is in the Yemen desert. It is also sustainable as it has been there for 500 years in its current form.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shibam

[Spartan]

That would be Village No-Verde.

[UnFrSaKn]

Some might find this interesting, architecturally.

Brick and Mortar: Tallest buildings of each U.S. city, 1950

[Kerry]

Some might find this interesting, architecturally.

Brick and Mortar: Tallest buildings of each U.S. city, 1950

They don't make them like they used to, and the world is worse off for it.

[UnFrSaKn]

Per request of Doug, this image is for those that think we are becoming more "urban".

New York in 1905

[Kerry]

Look Ma! No corporate plazas

[Lafferty Daniel]

Look Ma! No incredibly ugly buildings like the ones SandRidge tore down

[Kerry]

Look Ma! No incredibly ugly buildings like the ones SandRidge tore down

Tru dat - but those building they tore down were not always ugly.

[USG'60]

Is that Wall Street? Or, at least, the financial district?

[UnFrSaKn]

Most of those buildings as far as I can tell, are replace with more modern ones or they changed the face of them.

[Kerry]

Most of those buildings as far as I can tell, are replace with more modern ones or they changed the face of them.

Yep - they screwed up there as well.