Wheeler Park

[Just the facts]

An aquarium on that site would be too far away from anything else. To keep downtown walkable and build synergy (and promote time-diversity) things need to stay as compact and close together as possible.

[Dubya61]

I think an aquarium that interacted with the river would be great, though.

[Just the facts]

I would rather see it interact with the canal; but that boat already sank. If an aquarium was in the works it should be located along the streetcar route.

[OKCRT]

A Grand Casino/Hotel resort would fit perfect at this spot. That would bring people/money to the area and keep them from taking those millions out of the city limits.

[jedicurt]

I would rather see it interact with the canal; but that boat already sank. If an aquarium was in the works it should be located along the streetcar route.

why would you rather see it interact with the canal?? that idea just doesn't make sense to me. And i do agree that an Aquarium (if one were to be built) should be located along future street car routes...

[Fantastic]

why would you rather see it interact with the canal?? that idea just doesn't make sense to me. And i do agree that an Aquarium (if one were to be built) should be located along future street car routes...

I could see it along the canal, between, the southend and Rocktown, but I favor the Wheeler Park idea. As far as the street car goes, future development will dictate future routes, since nothing beyond the MAPS3 phase is set in stone, should there be quality development in the area, I could see a future route street car route cuting through Wheeler along 10th connecting to other future routes along Western and Walker. An idea for the future.

[Fantastic]

On a more on topic note. Remember the old drawings for C2S that showed low density suburban neighborhoods south of I-40 (including Wheeler Park)... who else thinks that is a TERRIBLE idea? I would think the area should be higher density Deep Duece style (with different architecture, of coarse) residentual.

Thougts?

[Just the facts]

I agree Fantastic. The rendering of C2S have always bothered me. The only thing that made me feel better about C2S was reading the study, because the rendering were disappointing.

[jedicurt]

On a more on topic note. Remember the old drawings for C2S that showed low density suburban neighborhoods south of I-40 (including Wheeler Park)... who else thinks that is a TERRIBLE idea? I would think the area should be higher density Deep Duece style (with different architecture, of coarse) residentual.

Thougts?

I agree as well. If it is going to be developed, it should be higher density residential... There should be no low density residential development anywhere near C2S, in my opinion

[CaptDave]

I think (hope?) C2S will likely have a mix of row houses and small lot bungalow type homes. There will be a demand for single family homes in the area but I don't think likely buyers will want huge yards to keep up. I hope the city requires alleys to access garage on the rear of the homes. I absolutely would not want to see the typical massive garage door dominating the front of C2S homes as in subrgatory.

[RickOKC]

Just the Facts, could you explain why you think the combination of Promenade Park and Wheeler Park means too much park space? It's not that I disagree; I would actually like to understand what standard is used to measure such a thing.

[Just the facts]

RickOKC - I am not sure I can explain but let me try. One of the large attractions to an urban park is the social interaction, both planned and unplanned, that it affords. Park space should be small enough that people don't feel alone and unsafe, but large enough to support multiple activates at the same time, while at the same time providing for the chance encounter.

A sparsely populated park will result in illegal activity and the presences of undesirables, especially at night. Nothing in worse than taking your kids to a playground on Saturday morning and finding a used condom draped on a swing. By minimizing park space we can help to ensure that the park is used more hours per day and at night there are more eyes on the park to identify and report suspicious activity.

Parks should also be the social node of residential areas. Too many nodes and the surrounding neighborhoods and the people have a hard time being defined as a cohesive unit. I know several people who live in Center City Philadelphia and it is amazing how they identify with their parks. Ask one of them where they live and they don't give you the building name or the street - they tell you what square they live near. You see that in NYC as well with Central Park West and Central Park East.

For every acre of park space that is one less acre of residential. If Wheeler Park is kept, who is going to use Promenade Park? As with anything, there is an economy of scale with parks. The more people that go to a park the more amenities that park can have and support. For example, a hotdog or ice cream vendor could earn enough money to serve one park, but spread the users across two parks and the vendor can't survive at either of them.

Parks, and the areas around them, need time-diversity as much as a shopping center does. This is one of the reasons MBG can't attract a restaurant. One might be able to make enough money to be open M-F from 8AM to 5PM, but would have to close at 5PM and probably not open at all on weekends. It is going to take a lot more people focused like a laser beam on one park for that park to reach its full potential.

On a higher society level; despite what multiculturalists tell us, it is what we have in common that makes us strong. The more we have in common with each other the stronger our social bonds become and nothing brings adults together more than watching their kids play together. The same is true of the businesses that build up around the park. It is hard to hold ill feelings about someone based on race, income, etc… when they hold the door open for you while entering your favorite hang-out or wait in line with you at Starbucks, or sitting on the same park bench feeding birds or playing chess.

If you don’t already have it, pick up a copy of The Death and Life of Great American Cities by Jane Jacobs. She has a great chapter on urban parks. If you ever get the chance go to Philadelphia and hang out in Rittenhouse Square. It is one of my favorite places on the planet and even at midnight it is full of users and totally safe. This is due in part to all the restaurants that line the buildings just across the street from it and the local Barnes and Noble book store. Anyhow, those are just some rambling thoughts off the top of my head.

[CaptDave]

I am glad you elaborated on your view on this JTF. I was trying to figure out where you were coming from by stating Wheeler would be too much park. Definitely need to think about this - you made several good points.

[RickOKC]

Agreed on your sentiments, CaptDave. Thanks, JTF, for taking the time to explain. That wasn't just reasonable and informative; it was well-written, too. I'm an avid reader, and I will genuinely chase down Jacobs' book.

Could you entertain a couple of follow-up questions? I know that, according to your density standard, both parks could not adequately supported in the short term. But what about in the long term? If the C2S area is eventually packed with high-density residential, could they not both be supported - even needed - then? In other words, could we ever find ourselves desiring to have that land back for public use after it has irrevocably been re-purposed for residential use? Second question: would An idea like Fantastic's be an adequate solution? Keep the land in public use, but alter it's use?

[Just the facts]

Consider Center City Philadelphia. It has the 3rd highest number of downtown residents in the US and can only support 3 parks of any significant size (and one of those is inhabited by bums). If you look at the park space that already exist in downtown OKC I don't see any way OKC would have the population to absorb more. This list is just off the top of my head:

MBG
Sandridge Commons (even bigger than it was before)
Bicentennial Park
The park across from the federal building
City Hall Park
Central Park
Promenade Park
Stars and Stripes Park
Wheeler Park
Nearly all of Lower Bricktown
The river (on both sides for miles)

Plus all the impromptu/unofficial parks and open space like the chamber triangle, canal corner, Oklahoma Ave dead end in Deep Deuce, the lawn at Stage Center, in front of the garden wing at Devon Tower, the new little park in front of OMA, etc...

Honestly, downtown OKC could probably stand to lose half of its existing park space. We already have more park space than can be patroled and monitored which is why graffiti is already on the Skydance Bridge. More than can be used is a waste of resources and those parks don't maintain themselves for free.

BTW - you can pick up the Jane Jacobs book at Barnes and Noble in the Cultural Studies section. Mine has a price of $16 on it.

[RickOKC]

So, would you have preferred not to have had the Central Park or Promenade Park as part of Maps 3 in the first place?

[Snowman]

which is why i think putting something on the land that would act as a location for tourists to visit, then it would be a good re-use of this land and hopefully encourage and stimulate development around it. A large Aquarium sitting right off the walking trail along the river, i think would be a beautiful thing that would attract tourism. I'm not sure what you do with the rest of the park ( i would like for part of the Aquarium, if it is a project of the OKC Zoo, to also include something to recognize the history of this area as being the original zoo location... something similar to what is in the tiny Zoosuem building they have now at the zoo). perhaps that idea of turing it residential or something would be a good idea. that part i'm not sure about

I am still trying to figure out a compelling reason for an independently located Aquarium verses adding whatever funds it would take to the OKC Zoo's aquarium remodel in 2019. It likely will not be built before 2019 and likely will have a smaller and less stable revenue supply if it were constructed. I doubt the OKC Zoo would be involved in this unless it is a requirement of a large donation to be in the area, it would be a logistical pain and more costly to operate verses on their land. If it is being done by someone who wants more tourists in the area then that is one thing but if it is someone who wants an aquarium to succeed it seems to be adding unnecessary obstacles for long term operations.

[Just the facts]

In retrospect the Central Park was not a good idea. In addition to losing valuable boulevard frontage it steals visitors from MBG. Here is a quick run down of how the parks should be done in my opinion.

1) Keep MBG as it is today
2) Devon shouldn't have been allowed a large setback and park in front of their building. If their employees want to sit in a park they should have gone to MBG to do it
3) Bicenntenial Park should have been a concrete plaza with planters. That would keep bums from sleeping in it.
4) Sandridge Forest should have never been approved and Couch Drive returned to 2-way traffic.
5) Central Park shouldn't be built. Once again it will steal visitors from MBG and would have allowed infill between the boulevard and I-40.
6) Promenade Park should be built, but not as big as planned.
7) The riverfront should have been urbanized, not turned to park space
8) Wheeler Park should be converted to residential with an urbanized waterfront
9) Wiley Post Park should be reduced by 66% and then use that land to build a mixed-use development (maybe include aquarium) that would be on future streetcar route to Capitol Hill.
10) The Federal Building park should be developed and 7th St reopened
11) Lower Bricktown (south of the old I-40) should be developed
12) Lower Bricktown (north of the old I-40) should be bulldozed and done again making it much more dense

[kevinpate]

Not sure why Stars and Stripes Park (South shore of Lake Hefner) would be a part of a DT park discussion.
Is there more than one?

[Just the facts]

You're right. I meant Wiley Post. I fixed it.

[RickOKC]

JTF, all of what you're saying makes sense; it just definitely runs counter to my current paradigm of urban development. I mean, I'm definitely on board for high-density, defining spaces, urban canyons, etc. But prior to what you've explained, saying we have too much park space was akin to saying we have too much money.

In order to stay somewhat on topic (do we have a thread devoted to "development philosophy"?), what is the actual likelihood of Wheeler Park being turned over to residential development?

[Just the facts]

... saying we have too much park space was akin to saying we have too much money.

If land is money it is like spending all the money on hamburger buns and none on hamburger. You can still have a picnic but most people will leave hungry.

[jedicurt]

I am still trying to figure out a compelling reason for an independently located Aquarium verses adding whatever funds it would take to the OKC Zoo's aquarium remodel in 2019. It likely will not be built before 2019 and likely will have a smaller and less stable revenue supply if it were constructed. I doubt the OKC Zoo would be involved in this unless it is a requirement of a large donation to be in the area, it would be a logistical pain and more costly to operate verses on their land. If it is being done by someone who wants more tourists in the area then that is one thing but if it is someone who wants an aquarium to succeed it seems to be adding unnecessary obstacles for long term operations.

I wasn't saying it was something that needed to be done, or even should be done... just something i had always hoped would be done... and as for it having a smaller and less stable revenue supply, that is just someones opinion, and not actually known. I think that Wheeler Park is a part of OKC's history, and this is just an idea that i had been kicking around for awhile to help preserve some of that history and help spur up development in the area at the same time. I don't know if it is feasible, or if anyone else would want to do it. I just think that it is an option, and i personally am going to try and look into the feasibility of it for my own reasons.

I guess the history of Wheeler Park being the original home of the OKC Zoo is my stage center... I know i'll never be able to convince most of the people on this forum that saving that history is a worthy project, but it is a project that i am going to look into.

While i agree with JTF on his idea that we might have too much park space, i think this park should be saved in some shape or form as a memory of what it once was. OKC has one of the best zoo's in the country and it's history started right there on that spot, i think that is a part of our history that is worth commemorating. I don't know whether i posted it on here or not, but i don't even think we need to keep the whole park they way it is. and i don't know if the OKC Zoo would be interested in the idea of separating out the Aquarium. but i just know that they are putting a lot of money into their Zooseum, and it doesn't have much space at the current zoo location, and they are looking at rebuilding the Aquarium, perhaps moving both of these items to Wheeler park or somewhere else downtown, could or could not, be a good idea.

P.S. very good post on Park Space and Usage, JTF. i learned where you are coming from now!

[Popsy]

I thought the reason for the Central park was to get rid of a large blighted area which was attached to the Central Business District, but if someone from Jacksonville, FL that gets off telling Oklahomans what that are doing wrong then maybe we should do away with at least half of our parks. But, I guess we could also consider that we might be building these for our future children or grand children.

[catch22]

Often we need outside perspective to help guide us along. Locals are often too close to the action to see the big picture sometimes and it is good to have someone not so close who can see a more distant picture since there is little direct involvement. I appreciate his comments, ideas, and views on what we are doing in Oklahoma City. Whether he live in Boston, Jacksonville, or Tulsa. Having outside perspective is nothing but a good thing.