SandRidge Center & Commons

[Urbanized]

I thought the questions I posed were all valid questions, with the possible exception concerning Moshe Tal, and only one of the questions has been answered provding Metro might of been telling us that our Council members might not see things as many members of this forum do.

Yeah, I wasn't saying they weren't valid at all. I felt like you were asking them mostly rhetorically to make a point, and some readers were missing said point. Based on other posts you've made, I was guessing you were trying to point out that the community in general and even members of the city council -- who could potentially make the ultimate decision here -- probably don't place the same importance on "urbanism," "streetwalls" and the like that some of the posters here do.

I think some of the folks have mis-read your posts as being supportive of the urbanism issue when in fact you've been mostly derisive regarding those positions. And I'm not condemning your viewpoint; only making an observation that I think a few people are missing. Am I correct?

[Popsy]

Yeah, I wasn't saying they weren't valid at all. I felt like you were asking them mostly rhetorically to make a point, and some readers were missing said point. Based on other posts you've made, I was guessing you were trying to point out that the community in general and even members of the city council -- who could potentially make the ultimate decision here -- probably don't place the same importance on "urbanism," "streetwalls" and the like that some of the posters here do.

I think some of the folks have mis-read your posts as being supportive of the urbanism issue when in fact you've been mostly derisive regarding those positions. And I'm not condemning your viewpoint; only making an observation that I think a few people are missing. Am I correct?

You were correct. Seemed like a better way to get my misguided thoughts across. Comprehension seems to be a lost ability at times in this forum.

[metro]

That's the nature of ANY internet forum Popsy, even wise ones like you should know that.

[Popsy]

That's the nature of ANY internet forum Popsy, even wise ones like you should know that.

Metro. I do not claim to be wise, just opinionated with an open mind to others opinions that might change my own. On this subject however, my opinion has not changed.

[andy157]

I wish you were correct but didn't the staff recommend against a new Chamber of Commerce building that got approved by the council?

I did say, for the most part, plus who plays hardball any better than the CoC.

[DelCamino]

I wish you were correct but didn't the staff recommend against a new Chamber of Commerce building that got approved by the council?

The City Council took no action on the CofC building. No matter concerning that building was ever before them.

The Board of Adjustment heard a variance request concering setbacks and signage (I think signage) and the Downtown Design Reveiw Committee heard the project as a whole. Both groups gave approval. An appeal of the Design Review is heard by the Board of Adjusment and an appeal from that group is heard by District Court. Neither group's decision goes before the City Council.

[Spartan]

I think there continues to be widespread misinterpretation of popsy's points. Maybe I'm the only other person here fluent in sarcasm.

Possibly. I'm only fluent in self-importance..

[Kerry]

The City Council took no action on the CofC building. No matter concerning that building was ever before them.

The Board of Adjustment heard a variance request concering setbacks and signage (I think signage) and the Downtown Design Reveiw Committee heard the project as a whole. Both groups gave approval. An appeal of the Design Review is heard by the Board of Adjusment and an appeal from that group is heard by District Court. Neither group's decision goes before the City Council.

Thanks. I couldn't remember where that ended up.

[jbrown84]

I'm not sure if anyone can say for certain what fair market value would be considering SandRidge deems them worthless...

Touche!

[metro]

INVITE SANDRIDGE TO WORK WITH MASTER PLAN
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
By Steven Newlon

Following up on Kelley Chambers’ “Temple topple” article from the March 10, 2010, Oklahoma Gazette, I wanted to clarify a few of my thoughts I felt could easily be misconstrued by readers, and at the same time offer a public call of action for SandRidge to better work with the downtown community.

It’s reasonable to conclude that SandRidge (a good corporate citizen) understandably has PR envy in light of the new Devon Tower rising up and Chesapeake’s sprawling campus. SandRidge should study carefully how this benefits the overall master plan for downtown, and not just the SandRidge compound. If SandRidge has sought additional structural reports, it would be good PR for them to make those efforts public.

Many people thought the historic Skirvin Hotel was too far gone, but look at it today. The India Temple may take a few million extra to preserve and bring up to modern structural standards, but in the long run it will be worth it for both SandRidge and the City of OKC.

Preserving this historic building will build much more PR than SandRidge could ever buy with their current proposal.

Proof of funds for construction should also be in place before we allow any additional historic demolition. It makes me suspicious when there were previous plans in place by a local investment group to turn several of these buildings into housing just a couple years ago when Kerr-McGee was still in OKC, and now the buildings are suddenly deemed not structurally intact or historically relevant.

Destroying what is arguably Oklahoma’s best “urban canyon” or “street wall” along Robinson can have devastating effects on an already sparsely dense downtown core. As former executive director of OKC’s young professional organization, this proposal is the opposite of what the “creative class” (that the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber is desperate in attracting and retaining) is looking for when considering a location to start their career. Most young professionals are looking for a dense, urban location with a high quality of life.

The biggest issue with this is that it obstructs the walkability between districts. Another park in the core doesn’t make sense with Myriad Gardens nearby and “Central Park” coming on board. It is this continued suburbanization of downtown and goes against all of the effort Oklahoma City is putting toward walkability. Less building frontage at zero setback equals a less pedestrian-friendly environment.

Isn’t this what community is all about?
—Steven Newlon
Oklahoma City
Newlon, a marketing and PR professional, is a longtime downtown resident and homeowner.


INVITE SANDRIDGE TO WORK WITH MASTER PLAN | OKG Scene.com

[Popsy]

Metro. Are you seriously ego bloated enough to think that the residents of this city care about what you care about? The PR worth of what you suggest is almost nil. You even stated recently that there are very few in OKC that care about urban canyons and streetwalls. Perhaps it made you feel good to write about it, but good grief, because Sandridge is a good corporate citizen they should not be attacked by obstructionists.

[metro]

ego has nothing to do with it, just want to preserve what urban fabric we do have and at least I have the guts to do something about it instead of complain on a message board like 99%.

[OKC@heart]

Metro. Are you seriously ego bloated enough to think that the residents of this city care about what you care about? The PR worth of what you suggest is almost nil. You even stated recently that there are very few in OKC that care about urban canyons and streetwalls. Perhaps it made you feel good to write about it, but good grief, because Sandridge is a good corporate citizen they should not be attacked by obstructionists.

Popsy I think that you might be surprised to know that there are a lot more citizens who are aware and concerned about these issues. Granted I know that it is not centrally important to everyones day to day way of life, but the loss by extension whether they are aware of it or not will impact them. There is a ballance that must be struck here and yes Sandridge as a good corporate citizen needs to consider this as feedback and examine what the possible unintended consequences there may be to the plan. Just becuase they spent money on it doesn't mean it shouldn't be evaluated and questioned. That is the reason we have design review commitees. There is a great opportunity for Sandrige to do exactly what they have expressed that they would like to do. It just might need to be tweeked and adjusted so that it really does end up meeting thier needs and showing an expression of integration with the City as a corporate citizen who is eager to contribute to the growth taking place in our dynamic city.

[Pete]

ego has nothing to do with it, just want to preserve what urban fabric we do have and at least I have the guts to do something about it instead of complain on a message board like 99%.

Metro does deserve credit for actually getting involved and trying to make a difference.

If more people on the board did the same (and more people in general) OKC would be a better place.

[Popsy]

OKC@heart. I am not totally unsympathetic to the urbanist view, however I cannot help but think that this city owes Sandridge the respect to allow their plan to go forth without a fight. Sandridge did not have to move here. They had corporate offices in Amarillo and moved here at considerable expense. With out them you would be looking at considerably more empty space in the core of the city. With Devon about to vacate 900,000 sq. ft. of space, coupled with the existing inventory the numbers are going to look pathetic. Letting some useless buildings be torn down will help with those numbers. Yes, some of them might have been converted, however that does not fit the Sandridge plan. I say let them build their plazas now and if they grow as I think they will we might be looking at another tower being constructed on that site in the future.

Metro. I admit you have courage of your convictions, however do you realize you run the risk of being looked at as another Moshe Tal or the guy that fought for the rail lines, whose name I can never remember?

Pete. I will gladly give up credit to Metro for getting involved, but involvement does not always equate to the good of the city. Sometimes it is simply obstuctionism and costly to the tax payers. To the apparent urbanist majority of this forum fighting Sandridge would be good for the City, but for the majority of the city it might not be quite so good.

[metro]

Popsy do you realize Sandridge only employes about 300 downtown? They have TONS of room for growing before a "second tower" would be ever considered. You also never hear about them hiring or growing like the other companies. Devon employes about 3000 downtown, big difference.

[Popsy]

Metro. They are young. They will grow, unless some one takes them over.

[OKC@heart]

Popsy, you will find that I am very pro business and am very pleased that Sandridge is here and has aspired to be a participant in the growth of the city. Where as the "urbanists" of which I guess I am one, are passionate about seeing the city reach its potential while not repeating the mistakes of the past in erasing the history and density that makes a city more than a location to do your work and then flee from at 5:00. To make the city a great place that will attract other Sandridges to relocate here we need to help guide the intentions of those newcomers to what we are trying to accomplish as a city. This is not an attack (at least I hope) on their plans and never should approach those types of emotive tones, rather should be a formal and gracious discussion where the corporate interests are considered and the vision of the city through the design review committee as well as other vested and interested parties can constructively work towards a solution where defenses are not up but openmindeness is fosterd and gratitude extended for the investment and effort that Sandridge has shown in putting this plan together. Once the issues are raised, and Sandridge sees that we are not interested in attacking them but are looking to work with them to develop a more effective solution then I think both OKC and Sandridge will win and they will have further shown thier determination to be a great corporate citizen.

And I am in no way trying to say that we have all the answers because the solution will require the benefit of both camps working together toward a solution. I am very aware of the real costs that Sandridge has spent to produce these designs and renderings. We by no means want this to be delivered as a slap in the face, rather we want to guide and encourage smart urban growth and development.

[Larry OKC]

...The biggest issue with this is that it obstructs the walkability between districts. Another park in the core doesn’t make sense with Myriad Gardens nearby and “Central Park” coming on board. It is this continued suburbanization of downtown and goes against all of the effort Oklahoma City is putting toward walkability. Less building frontage at zero setback equals a less pedestrian-friendly environment. ...

Obviously I am missing something here but how does putting buildings in the way help walkability any? Seems open spaces would allow greater access between districts. Aren't the buildings the obstacles? It is easy to cut through a park but through a building....

Not taking a position either way on their plans, but don't understand the argument.

Similar to those that are for Urban Canyons yet against the Convention Center and the Super Block it will create. Aren't these essentially the same thing?

[BDP]

Seems open spaces would allow greater access between districts.

It actually just disconnects them. If you want people to walk, you want the districts to flow together and not be divided by nothingness.

A good example is Western Ave. It's should be very walkable between about 42nd and 50th, but there are a lot of broken areas and parking lots, so you don't see as many people do it as one might expect by looking at it. If there were more structures along the way and places to go or walk by as you walked that corridor, I suspect that would be the norm.

[mheaton76]

Larry, if I'm not mistaken it relates to how people interact with spaces in an urban environment. Density is the key concept here. Though it may seem counter-intuitive at first, those wide open spaces actually discourage people from wanting to be outside and interact with their city. For instance, take this photo, it could be any random area in Houston:



Imagine yourself walking in this area. Would you feel safe? Would it feel inviting? The answer, is probably no. There's a reason for that. Psychologically, we actually feel safer and interact in spaces that are more at the human level. And those are ones with narrower streets, and the "urban canyons," which have been discussed in great detail on this thread. For example,



That lovely little district in Charlottesville, VA practically begs people to be outside, walkaround and enjoy the built environment. This next shot is what I think of as an urban canyon:




In this shot from downtown Calgary, Notice there are no "missing teeth" (gaps between buildings), and wide open spaces. Things are hemmed in pretty well, and it all feels very warm and inviting. And it's not just empty lots, and buildings that are set too far back from the street - urban plazas are often deadzones too that discourage an urban feel.

The Robinson corridor could one day be like the one pictured above if the right decisions are made from the urban planning standpoint. There's a great book by Jane Jacobs that was a real eye opener for me. You can find it here - it's a great place to start:

Amazon.com: The Death and Life of Great American Cities (Modern Library Series) (9780679600473): Jane Jacobs: Books

My interest in urbanism is purely from the layperson point of view, and I think it's something we can all benefit from learning more about. I certainly have.

[OKC@heart]

Larry, if I'm not mistaken it relates to how people interact with spaces in an urban environment. Density is the key concept here. Though it may seem counter-intuitive at first, those wide open spaces actually discourage people from wanting to be outside and interact with their city. For instance, take this photo, it could be any random area in Houston:



Imagine yourself walking in this area. Would you feel safe? Would it feel inviting? The answer, is probably no. There's a reason for that. Psychologically, we actually feel safer and interact in spaces that are more at the human level. And those are ones with narrower streets, and the "urban canyons," which have been discussed in great detail on this thread. For example,



That lovely little district in Charlottesville, VA practically begs people to be outside, walkaround and enjoy the built environment. This next shot is what I think of as an urban canyon:




In this shot from downtown Calgary, Notice there are no "missing teeth" gaps, and wide open spaces. Things are hemmed in pretty well, and it all feels very warm and inviting. And it's not just empty lots, and buildings that are set too far back from the street - urban plazas are often deadzones as well that discourage an urban feel. This could be the Robinson corridor one day if the right decisions are made from the urban planning standpoint. There's a great book by Jane Jacobs that was a real eye opener for me. You can find it here - it's a great place to start:

Amazon.com: The Death and Life of Great American Cities (Modern Library Series) (9780679600473): Jane Jacobs: Books

My interest in urbanism is purely from the layperson point of view, and I think it's something we can all benefit from learning more about. I certainly have.

That is a great suggested read! I learned a great deal from Jane Jacobs when we studied her book in Arch school!

[Popsy]

[quote]That lovely little district in Charlottesville, VA practically begs people to be outside, walkaround and enjoy the built environment./[quote]




That lovely little district looks more like a plaza than a sidewalk to me.

[mheaton76]

That lovely little district looks more like a plaza than a sidewalk to me.

I included it, because I've been there ... it's not a plaza - it's a street that's been closed to traffic that has essentially become one big sidewalk - perhaps not the best shot, but it does speak to my point more generally.

[Popsy]

Perhaps if Sandridge would do away with the plaza concept and converted the plaza area into very large sidewalks would any one feel better? Those tables and chairs on the sidewalk look appealing to me.