OK Kids Korral

[Rover]

Not to disrupt your egalitarian pontificating, but what exactly has urban development done to harm grieving families? I'm not going to get into a contest with you to write the most touching poem about the building.

I actually expected more and better of you than mocking. You seemed like a better person than that.

[Rover]

What a load of crap. Bad design even for that right reason is still bad design. Urban development is a far more "people" oriented design philosophy than parking lots and 6 foot fences.

You still don't get it. What is IN the building is more important that what is outside the building. This is why I knew and kidded in my earlier post that something really, really humanly positive would soon get attacked for pretty superficial reasons. Guess it wasn't a joke after all. If there was a design discussion I would have hoped it centered around the kids and what could be done better in the design to help them feel safe, protected, calm, etc. not how close it is to the street and whether it creates an urban canyon or if it is nice to walk by. The designer was trying to create the best possible environment for the occupants.

[BrettM2]

If you guys detest this design so much, why don't you contact the Toby Keith Foundation and offer some input? Until you do something constructive, can we just appreciate that a local celebrity is doing something amazing for our community and the kids at OU Hospital? A little perspective would go a long way.

[Rover]

What a load of crap. Bad design even for that right reason is still bad design. Urban development is a far more "people" oriented design philosophy than parking lots and 6 foot fences.

I love urban settings...in fact spending a week in NYC now... but this idea that urban is necessarily more "people" oriented is hogwash. It may be more efficient and sustaining. If may be more convenient for some. It may be a preferred lifestyle for some. But this superiority complex that certain urbanites have exhibited here is pretty narrow minded. Large numbers of people prefer space and privacy, nature and calm, private ownership, etc. Some of us like various lifestyles which includes elements of urban and nature. The arrogance of assuming everyone else is stupid if they don't subscribe to your own narrow view is pitiable.

[Just the facts]

Check out the Ronald McDonald House in Austin. It is a far superior design for the patient, the parents, and the neighborhood.

[Just the facts]

I love urban settings...in fact spending a week in NYC now... but this idea that urban is necessarily more "people" oriented is hogwash. It may be more efficient and sustaining. If may be more convenient for some. It may be a preferred lifestyle for some. But this superiority complex that certain urbanites have exhibited here is pretty narrow minded. Large numbers of people prefer space and privacy, nature and calm, private ownership, etc. Some of us like various lifestyles which includes elements of urban and nature. The arrogance of assuming everyone else is stupid if they don't subscribe to your own narrow view is pitiable.

That's great. OKC has about a million places just like that which you can select from. The urban core should not be one of them. And heaven forbid a sick child should have easy access to a streetcar or a pedestrian friendly environment to walk in. Honestly - talk about a superiority complex.

[zrfdude]

You still don't get it. What is IN the building is more important that what is outside the building. This is why I knew and kidded in my earlier post that something really, really humanly positive would soon get attacked for pretty superficial reasons. Guess it wasn't a joke after all. If there was a design discussion I would have hoped it centered around the kids and what could be done better in the design to help them feel safe, protected, calm, etc. not how close it is to the street and whether it creates an urban canyon or if it is nice to walk by. The designer was trying to create the best possible environment for the occupants.

No, you don't get it. This is a development forum. It IS about the buildings.

And what exactly is supposed to make them feel safe and protected about a cabin? Something modern, futuristic, and imaginative seems like it would be a great distraction for kids with cancer. To me it seems it was designed less for the kids and more for Toby Keith.

[Rover]

No, you don't get it. This is a development forum. It IS about the buildings.

And what exactly is supposed to make them feel safe and protected about a cabin? Something modern, futuristic, and imaginative seems like it would be a great distraction for kids with cancer. To me it seems it was designed less for the kids and more for Toby Keith.

Wow. So now it is turned all around that this is about Toby is being selfish because the structure isn't what a true "urbanist" would like.

[Just the facts]

No, you don't get it. This is a development forum. It IS about the buildings.

And what exactly is supposed to make them feel safe and protected about a cabin? Something modern, futuristic, and imaginative seems like it would be a great distraction for kids with cancer. To me it seems it was designed less for the kids and more for Toby Keith.

+1

[Just the facts]

Wow. So now it is turned all around that this is about Toby is being selfish because the structure isn't what a true "urbanist" would like.

Are you saying Toby Keith didn't have a hand in the design and maybe selected a design he liked, even if it might be out of place? Because I'll be honest, I think that is what happened.

And once again, everyone is in favor of the hotel for families of sick children. That isn't the issue even though you keep hiding behind it.

[Rover]

That's great. OKC has about a million places just like that which you can select from. The urban core should not be one of them. And heaven forbid a sick child should have easy access to a streetcar or a pedestrian friendly environment to walk in. Honestly - talk about a superiority complex.

Keep on with the personal attacks please.

I doubt after the cancer treatments the kids and parents are focused on urban canyons. I don't see many hospitals who create "wall and window gardens" for their patients to go sit in to get a sense of calm and peace. Maybe they should. LOL

[Rover]

Are you saying Toby Keith didn't have a hand in the design and maybe selected a design he liked, even if it might be out of place? Because I'll be honest, I think that is what happened.

Yes, Tony's objective was to suburbanize OKC. I am sure that is what he was focused on and thinking. It had nothing to do with the kids.

[Just the facts]

Yes, Tony's objective was to suburbanize OKC. I am sure that is what he was focused on and thinking. It had nothing to do with the kids.

Whether he set out to do it or not - that is what his project does. I am sure he didn't concern himself with it, but he should have taken the urban location into consideration. Instead of hotel for sick kids he could have a hotel for sick kids that also enhances the area for everyone else. A two-for if you will.

[SkyWestOKC]

Wow....just wow.

Frankly I'm disappointed, not with the development, but with this attitude on here. Wow.

[MDot]

Wow....just wow.

Frankly I'm disappointed, not with the development, but with this attitude on here. Wow.

Agreed.

[Just the facts]

To make this debate easier - try leaving the sick kids out of it. If it was just a regular hotel would the design be appropriate?

[ZYX2]

To make this debate easier - try leaving the sick kids out of it. If it was just a regular hotel would the design be appropriate?

No, but it's not a regular hotel. I do agree that the layout is bad, but it's not that big of a deal. This project will do way more good than harm upon completion.

[SkyWestOKC]

I don't know where the idea comes from that the HSC is urban. It is dense, but I never see people walking.....it is also extremely single use. Even with a few hotels and restaurants....it's still basically a single use.

Given the nature of the project, we can lay off the design a bit. It takes up an empty lot...that's a positive.

[Pete]

This property is part of the Presbyterian Health Foundation PUD but I'm not sure of the particulars that were set forth in that document.

Here's what was on the property before (now razed):

[Just the facts]

So this project sets the standard for everything that comes after it.

[Spartan]

This is a suburban design. The building is fine, it is just the location on the site. It should be moved closer to the street with parking in the back. Spartan knows what he is talking about. This is a simple fix that will add to the district and make it feel/be more walkable for the people working and staying at the hotel. This hotel is supposed to be walkable to the children's hospital. That is the point of the hospital. So, make the emphasis of the hotel walking instead of the car.

That's what I was also thinking. Why can't a medical district at the very least encourage healthy habits? I get it that some people have medical problems preventing them from walking the 2 blocks to the front door of the cancer center, or the 3 blocks to the children's hospital, but they can use the extremely easy auto entrance in the back. Not only should urban design encourage everyone else to walk, but that hospital and the other medical organizations in the district should outright tell all the families they should walk. That's what's wrong with health in America, why everybody's health is so ailing, and so obese. And then look at the response when somebody attempts to challenge it: "(Wind being sucked out!!) You're against the children!! Shame on you, you miserable person you.."

This project is also missing on other fronts that I just think this district should have. Why are we settling so low just because it's a charity? Sustainable development? Worthwhile design? I think that the built portion of this project is something that deserves a shot at being a 100-year building. If you're surrounding something with this parking around all sides, it won't be a 100-year building, and that's a shame.

[Spartan]

I actually expected more and better of you than mocking. You seemed like a better person than that.

Well and likewise, I am shocked that you would stoop so low in your latest argument against proper urban standards, by side-tracking from the real issue by such a wide margin and painting it as a moral issue rather than a planning one.

I propose that we leave the kids out of it, and then maybe get on with a respectable discussion over this project.

[Rover]

Of course, we know that the ONLY thing that is important is proper standards of development and thanking someone for a gesture like this is not allowed on this board. The only thing allowed is criticizing and sniping I guess.

[Questor]

First of all I think this is a wonderful addition to the OUHSC and think Toby Keith is a really great guy for supporting this.

I am a little confused about some of your comments along the lines of a lack of design consideration in this project. When I look at this project I think there actually was a lot of thought that went into the design... your beef is more with the aesthetic elements of the design right? I tend to think it is an argument of aesthetics vs. functionality.

For example, anyone who has spent time in hospitals with sick families knows how horrible your typical hospital parking lot is on the sick family members, or the healthy but elderly family members who come to visit them. Pick just about any hospital in the metro and the parking is a veritable sea out behind the hospital (usually because the ER entrance is up front, which has some parallels to the desired design that many of you are talking about). I think the design of this center is clearly very patient friendly in that parking is right up against the building... limiting the amount of walking that has to be done. Yes this is probably in direct conflict with an urbanist's view that walking is a good thing, but good grief people consider the users of this building... many are in such poor health they can barely walk... all probably have family members who are older and would have trouble walking. And yes I realize there's got to be some sort of loading area up front, but that doesn't matter it's still a problem. If you don't believe me go set in front of an ER for a few hours and watch how many people still have to walk the distance for whatever reason. Along those sames lines of considering the building's users, consider the fact that they are children. It would seem to me if you're a parent you wouldn't necessarily want this building budding right up against a street, with no buffer zone whatsoever. The way this facility is designed you have a green space buffer, then parking lot, and then what looks like a tree line or fence perimeter around that. Stop to consider for a moment the building codes that are in place everywhere in the metro for day cares... lots of lot and green space requirements right? Well those same kinds of concepts seem to be in play here. The enclosed playground in the back also seems very secure... and in addition to that I noticed that it is noted that the play area floor is made of rubber. Stop to consider that many people with compromised immune systems are never supposed to go play out in the dirt, and this is clearly a well thought out feature. There was a comment made that there should be an atrium or such inside the building... the truth is we don't know whether or not that will be the case since interior renderings are not present here, but I did notice that there is a stream that seems to bisect the entire building. It wouldn't surprise me if that carries-through to the main foyer interior. Finally, aesthetics really are something that impacts a sick person. Personally I am a big fan of modern design, but I don't know that such design would be appropriate for something like this... even the best modern design on some levels tend to be more cold than say a place with a deliberately cozy feel. Even if you disagree with this realize that 90% of Oklahomans are going to agree with my statement. I usually agree with many of you but on this issue I think you guys are going way overboard in the wrong direction.

[kevinpate]

I propose that we leave the kids out of it, and then maybe get on with a respectable discussion over this project.

It's a project for kids and their families, where the children are cancer patients. Here's an idea. Leave the needs and comfort of the patients and their families front and center of this project rather than fretting over the building's skin, parking placement or set back from the street.

Leave the kids out of it? poppycock, hogwarsh and balderdash.