It seems strange for downtown OKC to have a "we are running out of places to put things" problem.
It seems strange for downtown OKC to have a "we are running out of places to put things" problem.
Convention Center or Transit Hub - either way the buildings on the north side of Main would be coming down.
If I was in front of a computer instead of a phone, I would post the giant arcing rail line that severs the site in two. You can not presume that the rail as it stands today is what we need right there.
Even if you don't believe that High Speed Rail is going to happen, it is exactly the same alignment and right-of-way that we need for the Adventure Line and Midwest/City Tinker line to connect to the hub.
That, in all probability, will happen. Their site plan completely ignores our concerns even though they were directly educated on the alignment.
Yes, that is the existing trestle. But your missing the arc that is needed to be constructed heading south. That arc is concieved as being a broader ramp with a wider turning radius to handle both commuter rail and potential future high speed trains.
Yep. That's pretty much it. This is so far along that even property acqusition maps and plot details have been completed.
My apologies to Mr. Weeman, but you don't have a meeting with people who tell you your going to have to build a building around a rail line there (conform to the coming constraint), then turn around and propose a big box.
This has nothing to do with my or any transit supporters opposition for greater urbansim, density, or infill. We are the biggest proponents for such initiatives. It has to do with protecting what we need to build an efficient regional transit system that people will actually use. In a big picture, that connector is absolutely vital.
So, how much potential real estate are we planning on wasting for a rail line which will be many years down the line? Large arcs take up a lot of room out of a square. Areas for the convention center that are attractive are limited because of the amount of space required. I'm sure we could come up with funding to re-route the rail line into downtown but still utilize the main line. We need to think outside of the box, could we run part of the rail south of downtown and connect there. What is so special about these parking lots that make it necessary for the rail to utilize that area?
The convention center site is down to 4 locations. The east bricktown parking lots (I'm somewhat in favor, would need to see some site plans though), the Skirvin proposal (highly in favor), the Cox site (neutral, would prefer a different site), and then the Ford site (highly disfavor).
There's a very good chance we will see the convention center placed on the Ford site or even the Cox site, and limiting the North bricktown site/Skirvin proposal based on a future rail line will only heighten the chances of the Ford site or the Cox site being picked.
We should pick the Skirvin proposal, unless a better proposal is made for the East Bricktown site, and find an alternate way to get that rail line into downtown to the hub.
Square parcels are much easier to sell than 2 or 3 parcels that have been cut up with a rail line. The inner "triangle" between all 3 rail lines will be pretty hard to develop and is a fairly good chunk of land.
"I'm sure we could come up with funding to re-route the rail line into downtown but still utilize the main line. We need to think outside of the box, could we run part of the rail south of downtown and connect there. What is so special about these parking lots that make it necessary for the rail to utilize that area?". Skywest
First of all, we don't have the money. With that logic, let's spend the money on a cool building around the line that still allows it to operate.
Second of all, it has to do with how the trains operate. The most efficient design is a "pull through". Based on where the proposed hub is, pulling through works more efficiently.
Third, grade elevation post the 2005 FGS have made the consultants shy away from the southside. It is also a corridor owned by Union Pacific who has made it explicitly clear to us they do not want passengers on or near their freight corridor.
Leave it as parking and develop the rest of downtown that needs just as much infill. That area was traditionally a rail coridoor so having it remain as one is ok in my book.
Since when did trains and transit become completely expendable items at the whims of developers and highways? For once, let's build a real transit system and make the room for it as being the highest priority enabling the densification of the rest of downtown.
I'm all for transit, but I want to know if there is an alternate way of doing this. Is this rail the only possible realistic way to connect the adventure line and possibly in the future Midwest City into downtown. If there are no other possible ways, after looking at every feasible option, then of course we don't need to demolish the rail line. If there are other possible methods, I would say we should try them and/or see if they are feasible on a reasonable budget level.
I'm all for that Skywest. And I appreciate your support throughout the years for transit.
If I honestly thought there was a practical and reasonable cost to do it somewhere else, I would have no problem with the "big box". But between the difficulties with getting Union Pacific to use their right-of-way, turning radiuses required, and ODoT's ongoing HSR applications, there really isn't a readily available alternative to connect all this stuff back to the hub efficiently and cost effectively.
I am sure it would be expensive but a combo Convention Center/Transit Center would solve all the problems.
Berlin Central Station opened in 2006. It doesn't have to be this big or grand, but you get the idea what combining the two could look like.
The Skirvin partnership obviously is directly ignoring our input, even after a 2 hour meeting with them. They want to believe what they want to believe. We never told them a building "can't" go there. We told them it would have to be designed "around" the proposed rail alignment. However, the cost of doing so is the question.
They decided not to even go there and simply propose a "big box" and unify the urbanists behind their proposal. I have the greatest respect for the people involved in the Skirvin. But their success doesn't entitle them to subvert our transit system. This is a giant PR stunt to try to make the site look more attractive to decision makers. Public support obviously will help it's scoring. But it will sever future direct connectivity as it's currently proposed in the future.
This is one of those times in which OKC has a chance to actually plan for its future prudently. We have continually created obstacles for ourselves with a lack of planning, or a public cave-in to developers and other interests, in the past. Please OKC, don't let these people bully us into making a horrible decision that will undermine our future.
It would be the height of absurdity and foolishness to destroy a rail corridor that would enable us to expand our connectivity options for a convention center for which there are multiple other alternative locations (albeit none of them perfect).
The Skirvin Hotel was subsidized by the taxpayers of this city. Its ownership has no right to dictate the citizens name them the "headquarters hotel." For one thing, the hotel is not large enough to serve as a convention hotel. The people at Marcus Resorts seem like total aholes. Don't forget, they don't live in OKC nor do they care about OKC. They care about profit, period. This is not a locally owned hotel (despite the fact the citizens of OKC helped pay for its renovation).
Last edited by swilki; 04-10-2011 at 02:38 PM. Reason: typo
How is it mudslinging? They're trying to bully the citizens of this city into naming them the "headquarters hotel." That's not reasonable. Furthermore, it's true that this is a company that has no local ties and exists to make a profit. Personally, I love the Skirvin and have spent many thousands of dollars there. But I think of the Skirvin as what it is, a dearly important building to the citizens of this city, and one which the citizens helped pay to renovate. I will be furious if this group is successful bullying local officials into forcing a convention center into this location for their own self interest, and against the future interests of the citizens of this city.
I wonder, do the discussions folks have on here have any real impact on what decisions actually get made, or is everyone merely spectators hoping for the best?
Sooner and Urban
I certainly do not see Skirvin trying to bully anyone. They made a proposal and the fate of that proposal will be determined by the process. What I am concerned about is the viability of the rail transportation effort is to go forward. In following the budget debates going on in Washinton right now the liklihood of future rail funding is very much in doubt. Perhaps Urban could bring us up to date on the future of rail funding when the country is technically bankrupt.
Thank you okcboy. Protesting this is going to come at some kind of cost I'm sure. if anything, we'll get blamed for it going somewhere where people don't like it. Lol
This past Friday 47 billion dollars was removed from this years budget. Do you have knowledge that rail was not affected?
There are currently 17 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 17 guests)
Bookmarks