Scissortail Park

[Just the facts]

Yes, the military industrial complex whose primary selling points were to protect the suburban dream and insure the flow of oil at market price.

[Rover]

Yes, the military industrial complex whose primary selling points were to protect the suburban dream and insure the flow of oil at market price.

Someone has lost touch with reality if they believe that suburbs are the reason for the military. Credibility is GONE.

[CaptDave]

All the economic, development, resource use/security, and military industrial complex issues are related - but none are THE reason for the mess we created. Urban sprawl is a component of the problem primarily due to the energy it requires to maintain and perpetuate.

But how about that new park in downtown OKC??!!

[kevinpate]

... But how about that new park in downtown OKC??!!

A park, a park, what a great idea for a topic.

[dankrutka]

Someone has lost touch with reality if they believe that suburbs are the reason for the military. Credibility is GONE.

Just the Facts is an ideologue. Everything must fit the narrative... Facts be damned.

[Urbanized]

I'd disagree with JTF that "the rise of the military-industrial complex" originally had much to do with protecting a suburban lifestyle. First of all, prior to WWII there barely WAS a suburban lifestyle, and what little was in place was accessed largely (and well) by streetcar in most cities.

The end of WWII marked the real BEGINNING of the suburban lifestyle (and yes, the government was and still is complicit in pushing that "choice" over others).

There are quite a few interesting reads that document everything from highway construction to sneaky streetcar system dismantling to government subsidized mortgages for returning vets - but only if they bought suburban single family dwellings - as government-sponsored initiatives to drive more home-building, automobile manufacturing and consumption, all more-or-less innocently designed to drive the post-war economy. The unintended consequences of suburbanization were not felt until decades later.

For a long, long time everything from military spending to the space race was dedicated to stifling the growth of communism, not protecting suburbanization. It wasn't until the 1970s that we really began directing much money and military effort towards protecting a flow of cheap oil, and only then because we saw the first glimmers that it might not be an endless, uninterrupted supply. But JTF is right in that since the Soviets fell, a HUGE amount of our military might, diplomatic and intelligence efforts are engaged basically in protecting our oil supply. It's simply too critical to leave perhaps the most important element of our economy - transportation - to the whims of an extremely instable region. The foreign oil stops, America stops. And it shouldn't be that way.

We've painted ourselves into this corner in large part because of poor city planning for the past six decades, but we can change it. Fortunately there is also a technological boom that it appears would allow us to extract most if not all of our needed energy here - thanks to folks who include our own neighbors and friends in OKC - but we need to also keep working on improving the ways we move ourselves and our goods around. So while JTF seems to have a one-track mind at times, he's dead-on about much of it, and I appreciate hearing someone regularly championing the subject.

[HangryHippo]

I'd disagree with JTF that "the rise of the military-industrial complex" originally had much to do with protecting a suburban lifestyle. First of all, prior to WWII there barely WAS a suburban lifestyle, and what little was in place was accessed largely (and well) by streetcar in most cities.

The end of WWII marked the real BEGINNING of the suburban lifestyle (and yes, the government was and still is complicit in pushing that "choice" over others).

There are quite a few interesting reads that document everything from highway construction to sneaky streetcar system dismantling to government subsidized mortgages for returning vets - but only if they bought suburban single family dwellings - as government-sponsored initiatives to drive more home-building, automobile manufacturing and consumption, all more-or-less innocently designed to drive the post-war economy. The unintended consequences of suburbanization were not felt until decades later.

For a long, long time everything from military spending to the space race was dedicated to stifling the growth of communism, not protecting suburbanization. It wasn't until the 1970s that we really began directing much money and military effort towards protecting a flow of cheap oil, and only then because we saw the first glimmers that it might not be an endless, uninterrupted supply. But JTF is right in that since the Soviets fell, a HUGE amount of our military might, diplomatic and intelligence efforts are engaged basically in protecting our oil supply. It's simply too critical to leave perhaps the most important element of our economy - transportation - to the whims of an extremely instable region. The foreign oil stops, America stops. And it shouldn't be that way.

We've painted ourselves into this corner in large part because of poor city planning for the past six decades, but we can change it. Fortunately there is also a technological boom that it appears would allow us to extract most if not all of our needed energy here - thanks to folks who include our own neighbors and friends in OKC - but we need to also keep working on improving the ways we move ourselves and our goods around. So while JTF seems to have a one-track mind at times, he's dead-on about much of it, and I appreciate hearing someone regularly championing the subject.

Urbanized, since I can't seem to "like" posts in this forum, I thought I'd let you know that I really liked this post.

[shawnw]

since we have Wheeler so close, I think that adding additional sports options there might make more sense. Then eventually adding a small amount of sports facilities to the north of the CBD as that area increases density.

I'm with you on this big time. As you know I've long felt Wheeler's existing sports facilities should be leveraged and complemented by the central park, not competed against.

[Just the facts]

In the Core to Shore plan Wheeler Park goes away and becomes a residential area. Prominade Park becomes the new Wheeler Park.

[soonerguru]

I'd disagree with JTF that "the rise of the military-industrial complex" originally had much to do with protecting a suburban lifestyle. First of all, prior to WWII there barely WAS a suburban lifestyle, and what little was in place was accessed largely (and well) by streetcar in most cities.

The end of WWII marked the real BEGINNING of the suburban lifestyle (and yes, the government was and still is complicit in pushing that "choice" over others).

There are quite a few interesting reads that document everything from highway construction to sneaky streetcar system dismantling to government subsidized mortgages for returning vets - but only if they bought suburban single family dwellings - as government-sponsored initiatives to drive more home-building, automobile manufacturing and consumption, all more-or-less innocently designed to drive the post-war economy. The unintended consequences of suburbanization were not felt until decades later.

For a long, long time everything from military spending to the space race was dedicated to stifling the growth of communism, not protecting suburbanization. It wasn't until the 1970s that we really began directing much money and military effort towards protecting a flow of cheap oil, and only then because we saw the first glimmers that it might not be an endless, uninterrupted supply. But JTF is right in that since the Soviets fell, a HUGE amount of our military might, diplomatic and intelligence efforts are engaged basically in protecting our oil supply. It's simply too critical to leave perhaps the most important element of our economy - transportation - to the whims of an extremely instable region. The foreign oil stops, America stops. And it shouldn't be that way.

We've painted ourselves into this corner in large part because of poor city planning for the past six decades, but we can change it. Fortunately there is also a technological boom that it appears would allow us to extract most if not all of our needed energy here - thanks to folks who include our own neighbors and friends in OKC - but we need to also keep working on improving the ways we move ourselves and our goods around. So while JTF seems to have a one-track mind at times, he's dead-on about much of it, and I appreciate hearing someone regularly championing the subject.

Very well done.

[Larry OKC]

In the Core to Shore plan Wheeler Park goes away and becomes a residential area. Prominade Park becomes the new Wheeler Park.

It doesn't go completely away, but it does look like a lot of land area is proposed to be repurposed for residential, but how much of the useable space is that (soccer fields etc)?
click on thumbnail for larger image, for full sized, go to the City's site and download the PDF (http://www.okc.gov/planning/coretoshore/index.html)


Even if it is going away, we are probably talking decade(s) before it does.

[shawnw]

In the last year I've spent a lot of time in Wheeler Park for softball and kickball and I don't see how a "suburban-style neighborhood" (which is what that looks like) could go in there like that given the inaccessibility of the place from the roadway (Western) post-new I-40. There is one way out (not including the neighborhood route which I'm not sure will always be there) and it's a very steep grade. Plus the Western Bridge would get in the way of any other attempted access points. I'm probably very wrong as I don't know enough about this stuff, but it seems to me that maybe reality will prove very different from that idealized master plan (e.g. it was probably drawn before it was learned I-40 couldn't go as deep as intended so the area isn't as flat as expected).

Also, given Wheeler Park's history (as our first zoo), there should be some amount of preservation of the place, to include some new public art to indicate its place in OKC's history. Don't get me wrong, I think riverfront housing is a good idea. I just don't think this is the place for it (my opinion is that the south shore with skyline views would be best), and definitely not in the suburban style that appears in that drawing.

[ljbab728]

It appears from the diagrams that the major access to this area would be from Walker rather than from Western. It also depicts what may amount to row houses instead of anything resembling surburban type development.

[shawnw]

If that's the case (row homes), I'd be better with that, though I still think we should keep Wheeler.

[Plutonic Panda]

Architects Reveal Newest Plans For Downtown OKC Park - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |

[UnFrSaKn]

The search feature has always seemed to be pretty useless. I swear I looked for this thread.

[betts]

I like the fact that none of them look very programmed at this point in time.

[Praedura]

Ah... if only we would get such a beautiful structure as Eaglevale Arch in our new park...

[Fantastic]

Of these three, I prefer the 3rd alternative (the one without the water).

However, this design illustrates part of my concern with using a landscape architect firm and not a planning firm as the primary. (let me know if I am just wrong on this).

This park doesn't appear (at least in these renderings) to have a strong tie to the neighborhood. The pathways have no orientation with any of the roads. Access into the park shouldn't just be accommodation but should be massively obvious and comfortable.





I love the paths and the cozy areas, but they need to connect to the grid in friendly ways. You don't want to have to approach the park and walk through trees, grass, or go a long way before you can go into the park and use it.

This park looks like it intends the user to come from the north or the south and go through the park pretty strictly in a N/S direction. To me, that doesn't leverage the 6 or 7 E/W roads that terminate at the park.

The best parks use a mini, meandering "grid" that allow pedestrians to easily 'come in' but are not too ridged so that the bulk of the park can still be very flexibly laid out.

I'm optimistic that this concern will be voiced by planning.

Couldn't agree with you more, Sid!

[Spartan]

Damn. So much for preserving anything.

[wsucougz]

Damn. So much for preserving anything.

Preserving every building worth keeping down there should be a top priority. I feel another wasted opportunity coming on. If this entire area of downtown has nothing historic to tie it together with the rest of the city, it's going to feel like lower bricktown part II. Leave some of the buildings on the periphery of the park, and it will weave right in.

[kevinpate]

Other than Union Station, what buildings within the park boundaries would be worth a save?

[LandRunOkie]

I think the city should just document the existing architecture, taking a lot of pictures. Then try to incorporate some of those styles into the park. Historic preservation is extremely expensive and it would be hard to incorporate those buildings into the park itself. If you are talking about the larger c2s, some buildings might be saveable.

[ABryant]

As strange as it sounds, I prefer the original conceptual renderings of the central park. I liked the angles and straight lines of the lake. Nothing irritates me more than humans trying to make something that imitates nature. I'm sure whichever deign they pick will be satisfactory, but I'm a little disappointed.

[HangryHippo]

Why don't they just place the cafes and things that they want in the park (the orange spaces in their designs) in the historic buildings that are already there? They could include visitor centers, cafes, restrooms, drink stands, anything they want really in these beautiful existing buildings. This could also probably help with Sid's mention of keeping the park tied in with intersecting streets at the periphery of the park depending on which buildings they save and use. I cannot believe there's not a stronger urge by those in charge to preserve what's already there... Perhaps it makes too much damn sense?