Kd's Restaurant / Legacy Grill

[Richard at Remax]

No it doesn't. Because you bring logic and thought into your arguement. I grew up in Edmond, live in Edgemere Park now, and I and the people I know from Edmond could give two craps about how close parking is.

And you are right and the point I wanted to make, WHO CARES what the suburbs think of an urban parking situation. Adapt or don't come. I just think it was a weak excuse on Hogans part to scale back the size of his building due to the size of the parking lot.

[Just the facts]

Anyone who says he can't build high density because of the size of the parking lot was lost before he even got started.

[BDP]

Anyone who says he can't build high density because of the size of the parking lot was lost before he even got started.

Ha! Good point!

[CaptDave]

Anyone who says he can't build high density because of the size of the parking lot was lost before he even got started.

Indeed.....I have an extremely difficult time taking seriously anyone who complains about a lack of parking in Bricktown. Just look at an aerial photograph for crying out loud. Urbanized nailed it when he stated we need more parking structures to open up land for development. Just take the horizontal parking vertical, add some capacity to account for more businesses, then get the earthmovers moving on those huge surface lots ASAP.

[catch22]

Unfortunately, it will be a long time before Lower Bricktown gets fixed the right way. The only way for that to happen will be organically, and the current design will make that a slow and complicated process. A big part of the problem, IMO is the fact that south of Reno, the canal turns into a winding and wandering moat. When it is straight on the north side, it defines the pedestrian environment. And makes walking distances shorter (a perception issue). For all intents and purposes for design around the canal, the canal must be considered a street. Wandering streets (without a purpose such as terrain, etc.) don't make good pedestrian environments or set off an urban vibe. And the buildings that build along it, will follow the lead of suburban architecture created by the wandering 'street'.

[onthestrip]

The idea that he has to have structure parking to build 2 story is bogus. If he were to build 2 story it would be 90% likely that the top floor would be office. A) office space would require much parking and B) parking demand is obviously low during the day and thats when any office would need parking.

[Bellaboo]

He's lying. He would have the same footprint no matter how tall, 1, 2 or 3 floors. He's just being cheap. The email campaign needs to go to whatever group approves or nixes the current plan.

[Just the facts]

The idea that he has to have structure parking to build 2 story is bogus. If he were to build 2 story it would be 90% likely that the top floor would be office. A) office space would require much parking and B) parking demand is obviously low during the day and thats when any office would need parking.

This is called 'time deiversity' and should be one of the goals of any urban development. If you are going to spend money building a parking space ideally you want it used as many hours during the 24 cycle as possible. As one group of users move out of an area a second group of users should move in (and preferabbly of the same numerical size). This allows businesses to have more customers spread across a longer time period which make for sustainable retail.

[Richard at Remax]

No apologies necessary, I overreacted myself, but it just can be frustrating from someone from edmond to to be on a pro-urban forum to always hear about lets not be like edmond. I mean its a suburb, like any other one. And there are some entitled bad apples that live there too, also like any other ones.

But back to the main problem, until we have a transportation system that encourages us to not use our cars in the urban center then there will always be parking issues down there. But until then tastefully designed parking structures should be encouraged. LIke the Sonic parking lot between the sonic building and the Rensaissance Hotel, there could be a parking garage there on the north side and on the south side could be a multilevel hotel/apartments with retail on the bottom.

[jn1780]

I always see that parking lot south of Bass Pro half empty. Even on a Friday night. People going to the baseball game were paying for parking even though this lot was practically empty. Only on Thunder game nights does it fill up.

The parking problem is cultural.

[Pete]

Look at the acres of surface parking surrounding this site:

[Just the facts]

...and you didn't even capture the north Bricktown lots.

[Rover]

We can gripe all we want, but it is simple economics. There is too much supply of cheap surface sites. The higher the demand/cost of the land, the higher the density of the development and better roi. No one will voluntarily build structured parking if low cost land or cheap existing parking is close. We are simultaneously expecting to grow high density in multiple areas of downtown and it will take time. You don't see 2,000 ft one story homes built in Nichols Hills...not on lots costing $200-500,000. You see structures that are in balance with the lot costs, and almost all are at least 2 story. But, it is a catch 22 for downtown. We have made Film Row, Midtown, SOSA, Bricktown, Automobile Alley, Deep Deuce, core to shore, Medical District, the cotton gin site and the river, ALL development areas. That is a lot of area and it will take time to develop density. If we had tighter focus and built demand one area at a time then I believe high density would happen quicker, but in smaller neighborhoods. Just look at what is happening in DD now. Lots are disappearing, rates are increasing, and higher density development isn't as much a risk so money is really starting to pour in.

[Just the facts]

You don't see 2,000 ft one story homes built in Nichols Hills...not on lots costing $200-500,000. You see structures that are in balance with the lot costs, and almost all are at least 2 story.

Good point, but that is the arguement the urbanist have been making. Hogan got free land, so what does he care if 80% of it is parking - it isn't like he had to buy it. He got it for free so any crap development will do - for him. I'll bet my a$$ if he had to shell out true market value there wouldn't be acres of surface parking.

[catch22]

Red: Current buildings
Blue: Future buildings

1. 4 story mixed use. First floor retail/restaurant. Floors 2-4 office.
2. 8 story hotel
3. 2 story mixed use. Ground floor retail, top floor office. (see Auto Alley)
4. 5 story mixed use. Ground floor retail/restaurant/office. Floors 2-5 Residential or office. Approx 25,000 sq. feet ground floor.
5. 5 story mixed use. Large ground floor restaurant space. Floors 2-5 Residental.
6. 4 story mixed use. Large ground floor restaurant or retail space. Office above.
7. 5 story mixed use. Restaurant/retail ground floor. Residential above.
8. Parking garage with ground floor retail and restaurant.
9. 4 story mixed use. Ground floor restaurant/retail. Top floors office.
10. 10 story residential tower. Ground floor grocery space/retail.

That was just about a 30 minute sketch. I'm sure the creative minds at okctalk could improve that drastically. Obviously, probably would not happen anytime soon. But even with the planning failures, it can still be corrected without demolition (would be easier to just demo everything and start over though, not cost efficient though).

[Just the facts]

I would prefer to start over and put in a proper street grid.

[catch22]

I would prefer to start over and put in a proper street grid.

I would too. But I doubt we can expect that anytime in the future with the way our planning works. See the boulevard debacle.

[Rover]

Good point, but that is the arguement the urbanist have been making. Hogan got free land, so what does he care if 80% of it is parking - it isn't like he had to buy it. He got it for free so any crap development will do - for him. I'll bet my a$$ if he had to shell out true market value there wouldn't be acres of surface parking.

At the time that deal was done there was very little value to the land. The incentives are ways to try to create value.

[BoulderSooner]

Good point, but that is the arguement the urbanist have been making. Hogan got free land, so what does he care if 80% of it is parking - it isn't like he had to buy it. He got it for free so any crap development will do - for him. I'll bet my a$$ if he had to shell out true market value there wouldn't be acres of surface parking.

if you wanted tenets .. he would have lots of parking

[Just the facts]

At the time that deal was done there was very little value to the land. The incentives are ways to try to create value.

I understand that. which is why the City was promised a development that didn't reflect the value of the land.

[Just the facts]

if you wanted tenets .. he would have lots of parking

In a parking garge yes, but even at the lower end of urban population densities there could be housing for 2000 to 3000 people on this property, in addition to everything that is there now. This is where Bricktown missed the boat and will be problematic when other urban districts around downtown take off.

[Rover]

Maybe as a part of the incentives packages, the subsidized business could be made to disclose the financials on the project to see if there is inordinate profit taking on the transactions. If the financial reality is that even with $0 cost of land that the rest of the cost has to be returned at a fair rate. If the subsidized party is making an exceptional profit either through operations or appreciation due to the city's investment, then that is a different story. To require developments that will be doomed to financial failure isn't smart either. Unless we know the particulars then we don't really know whether what is proposed is fair or not.

[Spartan]

We can gripe all we want, but it is simple economics. There is too much supply of cheap surface sites. The higher the demand/cost of the land, the higher the density of the development and better roi. No one will voluntarily build structured parking if low cost land or cheap existing parking is close. We are simultaneously expecting to grow high density in multiple areas of downtown and it will take time. You don't see 2,000 ft one story homes built in Nichols Hills...not on lots costing $200-500,000. You see structures that are in balance with the lot costs, and almost all are at least 2 story. But, it is a catch 22 for downtown. We have made Film Row, Midtown, SOSA, Bricktown, Automobile Alley, Deep Deuce, core to shore, Medical District, the cotton gin site and the river, ALL development areas. That is a lot of area and it will take time to develop density. If we had tighter focus and built demand one area at a time then I believe high density would happen quicker, but in smaller neighborhoods. Just look at what is happening in DD now. Lots are disappearing, rates are increasing, and higher density development isn't as much a risk so money is really starting to pour in.

The free market created all of those areas. How do you suppose were we to prevent cool urban development in areas like SoSA or far Midtown because it's too far from the core?

[Rover]

The free market created all of those areas. How do you suppose were we to prevent cool urban development in areas like SoSA or far Midtown because it's too far from the core?

First, Urban Renewal/Government and the then "correct" view of urban planning created many of the huge gaps. And yes, free enterprise contributed. And if you believe JTF then GM and the government colluded to do the damage along with Satan. Second, no one is saying that SOSA, Midtown, etc. shouldn't develop and I agree they are cool and fresh. But that doesn't change the economic catch 22 that exists - way more supply than demand. It is why this is a long term development project to urbanize OKC. It is changing and in some areas it is happening quickly as demand increases and supply decreases.

[Spartan]

Rover... Your posts are seeping with venom more than usual these days. Kerry is a little crazy but there is a lot of truth to what killed downtowns everywhere.

But did you just say way more supply than demand? What universe are you on? Also I'm not sure what this has to do with LB...