Kd's Restaurant / Legacy Grill

[Just the facts]

I like the idea of adding side retail between the canal and parking. Heck, even a side enterance to the restraunt wouldn't be bad, especially if it had a covered canopy leading out to the canal.

[Rover]

Only partially true. Asside from the organized break dancing, I have seen other activities (mostly music related) on that little stage area. True these events are few and far between, but they do happen on occasion. I would like to see that area put to more use for entertainment.



Again, only partially true. Yes the majority of people enter from the parking lot side. But there is a large number of people (tourists and locals alike) that enjoy walking the Canal from end to end. Usually they complain about the parking lot only entrance. As far as Water Taxi passengers go... you are DEAD WRONG on that one, friend. The Toby Keith's dock is BY FAR the most popular drop off point along the tour (and it's not because that's where they parked). There is a very large number of people who ask to be let off there. When asked if they are eating there or if this is where they parked, a vast majority say are eating there, and will eventually be picked up there again with to-go boxes (either that or they are going up the ramp to Earl's)

I think rather than catagorizing is as "partially" true, it is more accurately "mostly" true. There is nothing that creates continuous foot traffic at the bottom end. There is no energy and excitement created along the canal itself. Nobody wants to sit outside in marginal weather and watch water in a concrete ditch. It is the activity and the liveliness that people want to see and be a part of. Otherwise, you may as well be grilling burger on your backyard patio in the burbs. The outdoor store might have helped if it would have been on the west side of the property with the parking lot on the south and east sides with the main entrance abuting the corner of the canal. People exit their cars and walk away from the canal. And, there is nothing to attract that clientel to the upper part of the canal where the restaurants, etc. are. People just get back in their car and drive away. The anchors need to be ON the canal.

[Rover]

The Residence Inn does not funnel their clientel onto the canal, but rather onto the parking lot OPPOSITE the canal. They even created their own barrier on the backside, something you RARELY see occupied.

Even Sonic failed to create a connection to the canal.

And the theater creates traffic above the canal, not on it. It almost makes the canal something to be overcome, not something that feeds it and it feeds the canal.

Red Pin...well, you have to know it is there and it doesn't create any substantial traffic or great interaction with the canal.

All in all, it is no wonder that there is no great rush to put another "patio" on the canal in an area that is woefully underutilized.

[CuatrodeMayo]

Attention Architects, Designers, Architectural Students! | OKC Central

I'll repost my comment from the blog here:

While I doubt “they don’t know how to design this building differently”, the blame for this must fall on the developer. The architect can’t make his client spend more money or “do the right thing” from an urban design standpoint. Ultimately the developer is the client of the architect and unless the developer is asking for something illegal, the architect will design what his client desires within the constraints of budget. As an employee of Rees, Jason Wint does not have much say in the decision to take the job. His directive from his firm is to design a building to meet the requirements of their client. If he did make that statement about lacking the ability to design the building any other way, then that is unfortunate. However, his responsibility is to his client and it is unfair to call him out this way. The portions of the design that are in question are 100% the results of client requirements and not a lack of skill or understanding on the part of the design team. I realize this is frustrating, but to throw blame around wherever it will stick is reckless.

I’d love to take a crack at this design problem, but I don’t want to step on the toes of a fellow architect. I have no doubt, that if Mr. Wint didn’t have the constraints of budget, client requirements, etc., he could design a building that would make all of us happy.

If I am going to spend my time designing a better OKC, I'd rather devote my effort to other places. I'm particularly excited about some ideas for the Plaza District, but that is a discussion for another time and thread...

[Fantastic]

I think rather than catagorizing is as "partially" true, it is more accurately "mostly" true. There is nothing that creates continuous foot traffic at the bottom end. There is no energy and excitement created along the canal itself. Nobody wants to sit outside in marginal weather and watch water in a concrete ditch. It is the activity and the liveliness that people want to see and be a part of. Otherwise, you may as well be grilling burger on your backyard patio in the burbs. The outdoor store might have helped if it would have been on the west side of the property with the parking lot on the south and east sides with the main entrance abuting the corner of the canal. People exit their cars and walk away from the canal. And, there is nothing to attract that clientel to the upper part of the canal where the restaurants, etc. are. People just get back in their car and drive away. The anchors need to be ON the canal.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutly agree with you, I was just pointing out that there are things going on, and people walking around in that part of the Canal. But it is true and you are 100% correct when you say that the anchors need to be on the Canal, and that would bring more activity.

If we put parking at the ends and the primary entances and exits on the canal side with destinations in between, would it not help? The boulevard will see the back of the theaters and the parking lots....pretty bad.

Using the exiting opening as a passage/plaza might encourage funneling more foot traffic from parking and walking in bricktown and less that just drives into the backside and goes ONLY to a single destination.

Very much agree.

[Fantastic]

The Residence Inn does not funnel their clientel onto the canal, but rather onto the parking lot OPPOSITE the canal. They even created their own barrier on the backside, something you RARELY see occupied.

Even Sonic failed to create a connection to the canal.

And the theater creates traffic above the canal, not on it. It almost makes the canal something to be overcome, not something that feeds it and it feeds the canal.

Red Pin...well, you have to know it is there and it doesn't create any substantial traffic or great interaction with the canal.

All in all, it is no wonder that there is no great rush to put another "patio" on the canal in an area that is woefully underutilized.

All true

[dankrutka]

I'll repost my comment from the blog here:


If I am going to spend my time designing a better OKC, I'd rather devote my effort to other places. I'm particularly excited about some ideas for the Plaza District, but that is a discussion for another time and thread...

OKC needs this area and others to develop positively. A tourist is 100 times more likely to see Bricktown than the Plaza District...

[onthestrip]

OKC needs this area and others to develop positively. A tourist is 100 times more likely to see Bricktown than the Plaza District...

A city has to focus on things for its residents too, not just worry about tourist districts.

[bluedogok]

The problem is that 'entertainment districts' aren't sustainable. Bricktown either needs to evolve or die.

Say what? (this will be a shock to folks in several decades-old entertainment districts across the country)

Practically the only "new" buildings being built on many of the existing surface parking lots in Denver's LoDo area is residential, most with ground floor retail and this areas life as an entertainment district is almost 30 years old. On our street there are many office/residential in many of the original buildings, an apartment on the top floor of our building and in the building next to us. Most vibrant entertainment districts morph into a mixed use district. The Dallas West End is a prime example of an entertainment district that stagnated because it stayed mainly an entertainment district. There were a few offices, my former company in Dallas was located next to Dick's last Resort and moved out because of the issues of being located down there, many of the same issues we face being located in LoDo. I would actually prefer being in another part of Downtown Denver rather than right in LoDo.

[dankrutka]

A city has to focus on things for its residents too, not just worry about tourist districts.

Agreed. That's why I said "AND." We need both and more...

[Praedura]

A nice shot of where the restaurant will go:



Taken from this blog entry:
The Fantastic Adventures Of Oklahoma City: Cha-Ching! A Lower Bricktown Moneyball!

That blog post is from April, long before the current controversy, but still a good read.

[Fantastic]

A nice shot of where the restaurant will go:



Taken from this blog entry:
The Fantastic Adventures Of Oklahoma City: Cha-Ching! A Lower Bricktown Moneyball!

That blog post is from April, long before the current controversy, but still a good read.

Hmmm... I was about to delete that (didn't feel it was well written).

[Praedura]

Ah, so that's you!

No, don't delete that -- it's a good read. Informative and funny. Especially like your description of the spousal disagreement on the tastiness of Mickey Mantle's food, and the attempt by water taxi guides to draw away attention from the dull/empty sections of the canal.

[Fantastic]

Ah, so that's you!

No, don't delete that -- it's a good read. Informative and funny. Especially like your description of the spousal disagreement on the tastiness of Mickey Mantle's food, and the attempt by water taxi guides to draw away attention from the dull/empty sections of the canal.

Thanks! That's the best compliment I've recieved in a while! And for the record... when I said in the blog that I had no problem with the development, I was more focused on the idea of it shielding the parking from the canal (I don't want anyone confused by what I ment there)... I would have gone further into detail in future blogs about how the development could be better, but I quit writing the blogs due to a summer long crisis (I plan on writing again soon)

[Pete]

Revised plan for restaurant building to be considered by OCURA on Wednesday:

[CaptDave]

An improvement over the original and relatively easy reconfiguration. Not sure why this wasn't the design submitted from the beginning. I would prefer more height - at least 3 floors - but what would occupy that space? Is it cost prohibitive to build that space as a blank slate that could be configured as commercial, residential, or retail eventually? I know it would only add to the large amount of upper floor empty space in Bricktown, but that location should be in demand for something in the relatively near future.

[Praedura]

That is much, much better!

Love the sign and the patio deck.

[Pete]

Big Improvement but why not make the deck bigger?

I wonder if there is some reason they can't extend it further to the west. Seems strangely truncated.

[dankrutka]

Definitely an improvement. I also wish it were taller, but I appreciate the interaction with the canal.

[Just the facts]

oops - never mind. Looked at it backwards.

[BoulderSooner]

An improvement over the original and relatively easy reconfiguration. Not sure why this wasn't the design submitted from the beginning. I would prefer more height - at least 3 floors - but what would occupy that space? Is it cost prohibitive to build that space as a blank slate that could be configured as commercial, residential, or retail eventually? I know it would only add to the large amount of upper floor empty space in Bricktown, but that location should be in demand for something in the relatively near future.

i agree i wish the would build it taller .. but this is much better than the origional ... as to why this wasn't the original this ... remember it is a negotiation, if they presented this first there is a good chance that people would have wanted more ...now they come back to this and people are happy

[BoulderSooner]

An improvement over the original and relatively easy reconfiguration. Not sure why this wasn't the design submitted from the beginning. I would prefer more height - at least 3 floors - but what would occupy that space? Is it cost prohibitive to build that space as a blank slate that could be configured as commercial, residential, or retail eventually? I know it would only add to the large amount of upper floor empty space in Bricktown, but that location should be in demand for something in the relatively near future.

i agree i wish the would build it taller .. but this is much better than the original ... as to why this wasn't the original this ... remember it is a negotiation, if they presented this first there is a good chance that people would have wanted more ...now they come back to this and people are happy

[Praedura]

Love the hallway allowing visitors from the south side to walk straight through to the canal side (or at least see the canal from that side even if they don't walk through).

Love those exterior lights. This looks so much better than the original submission.

[kevinpate]

Big Improvement but why not make the deck bigger?

I wonder if there is some reason they can't extend it further to the west. Seems strangely truncated.

Maybe to make it easier to wall it in after a year or so?

[soonerguru]

Much improved. Can't believe they wanted to face the parking lot in the first place.