Galleria Parking Garage

[Karried]

You may have seen this because I'm not sure when this article came out but thought it was interesting; Giving downtown 1000 more parking spots.

http://www.okc.gov/query.html?calendars/chamber.html

Final designs are in place for the expansion of the Galleria Parking Garage
The Galleria garage is currently a mostly-underground facility whose 'roof' is at street level. The expansion will add four stories above ground in two sections, and give downtown 1,000 additional parking spaces.

Contractors are being asked to bid on the basic garage, plus separate bids that include some optional features, such as the pedestrian bridges connecting the two above-ground structures.

The base project will cost about $22 million.

When the expansion is finished, Harvey Avenue will be extended south between the two sections

Construction is expected to begin in September, and be completed in about a year.

[Patrick]

Phase I is nearing completion. Drive by sometime...it's not your typical drab parking garage. I actually like it.

[Midtowner]

I park down there all the time when visiting the court house. Parking is definitely one major step in improving our downtown.

[floater]

Phase I is nearing completion. Drive by sometime...it's not your typical drab parking garage. I actually like it.

I does like nice. I'm crossing my fingers that a mixed-use development fills out the rest of the block and complements that design.

[jbrown84]

I agree. I believe when the garage was originally built, it was intended to be the substructure for a mall--thus the name, but that was right before the 80's bust and it never happened.

My dream for that property is a four to five story retail center with sidewalk fronted stores facing the Myriad Gardens, and then a tower right in the middle of it with a Hyatt Regency. Why the heck does Wichita have a Hyatt Regency and we don't? That would be a great location for a fancy hotel with it overlooking the Myriad Gardens. Basically how I see that is something like Union Square in SF.

[HOT ROD]

I would like to see twin towers developed, one on the SW parcel and one on the SE parcel, with the new Parkade towers on the NE and NW parcels (as designed).

One tower could be mixed use, with Hotel on the top (floors 5 and higher). The other could be a residential condo tower on top. Retail would be on the lower floors. The towers would follow the same architecture as the Parkade towers, which would be a breath of fresh air for OKC's rather unimpressive offerings.

In between the twins would be a courtyard plaza (with the current fountain) similar to Union Sq in SF, Westlake Centre in Seattle, Pioneer Courthouse Square in Portland, Robson Square in Vancouver BC, Water Tower Centre in Chicago, (crying) the former WTC in NY.

We need a CENTRE of downtown OKC and that should be it. But by all means, put something on top of that garage. There is nothing worse than to see a pic of downtown OKC with that four square blocks of parking "LOT."

To me, it is not a garage but a large multi level parking lot!!!

I see a new campaign coming here, TOP the LOT!!!!!!!!

[Patrick]

Unfortunately, the city is gradually turning it into a larger parking structure. I bet that will be it's only use. Still, I'd at least like to see a strip of retail stores built right on Sheridan Ave.

[BDP]

Parking is definitely one major step in improving our downtown.

Doesn't every study show that we have more than ample praking downtown? Do we really have a parking problem or a walking problem?

I agree though, this is about as nice as a parking lot gets. It's nice to see some paying attention to aesthetics..

[fromdust]

Doesn't every study show that we have more than ample praking downtown? Do we really have a parking problem or a walking problem?

I agree though, this is about as nice as a parking lot gets. It's nice to see some paying attention to aesthetics..

nice point. there are too many lazy people.

[floater]

I'm glad we've realized that garages don't have to be plainjane. The new county garage is also a looker.

[BDP]

there are too many lazy people.

Which I think has hurt our attempts at urbanizing the downtown area. The whole point of an urban downtown is that within a couple of blocks you can be exposed to many types of businesses and services, maximizing convenience for the consumer and maximizing exposure per square foot for the merchants. This synergy is negated if people won't even walk a block. Not to mention the amount of space a large parking lot puts between attractions. Some feel they add to the convenience, but they really work against it and ultimately make downtown a grouping of single destinations rather than an urban community, sort of like much of downtown LA.

Of course, over 99% of OKC needs a car if they want to get to downtown, but, imo, the point of downtown should not be how close you can park to your primary destination, but how many things you pass on the way there once you've parked. It's not that exciting to walk down blocks of parking lots, even if they look as good as the Galleria.

It's sort of a moot point in terms of the Galleria, I know, becuase it's not taking up more space, just building on top of space that was already parking. But the attitude of having to park at the front door is inconsitent with urbanization and ultimately diminishes the value of such design.

Often, public transit can address these issues, but we know that ain't happening anytime soon and, in some ways, building mega-lots only pushes that farther into the future.

[Pete]

I worked downtown in Leadership Square for seven years in the 80's, when there were probably more people working in the area and certainly less parking garages.

Parking wasn't a problem at all, apart from having to walk a block or two.


I also worked in downtown LA and the large majority of our employees walked several blocks from the various parking structures.


It seems to me we have more than enough parking structures in the area, even if a few new large buildings were to be added.

[floater]

Which I think has hurt our attempts at urbanizing the downtown area. The whole point of an urban downtown is that within a couple of blocks you can be exposed to many types of businesses and services, maximizing convenience for the consumer and maximizing exposure per square foot for the merchants. This synergy is negated if people won't even walk a block. Not to mention the amount of space a large parking lot puts between attractions. Some feel they add to the convenience, but they really work against it and ultimately make downtown a grouping of single destinations rather than an urban community, sort of like much of downtown LA.

Of course, over 99% of OKC needs a car if they want to get to downtown, but, imo, the point of downtown should not be how close you can park to your primary destination, but how many things you pass on the way there once you've parked. It's not that exciting to walk down blocks of parking lots, even if they look as good as the Galleria. ... Often, public transit can address these issues, but we know that ain't happening anytime soon and, in some ways, building mega-lots only pushes that farther into the future.

Amen, BDP. It will just take time for that suburban mentality to change.

[BDP]

It will just take time for that suburban mentality to change.

I agree and I hope it does, as well. I just feel like there is no consciousness amongst developers to give people using downtown any incentive to change that mentality. The mentality is that people don't want to walk downtown. Instead of saying, hey we'll give you a reason to enjoy walking a couple of blocks, the developers just say 'ok, here's your parking space and 500 more just in case'.

The reality is that in OK most people who work downtown walk farther to get from their car to their favorite store at the mall than they do from their car to their office. For some reason we'll walk 4 or 5 blocks at the mall, or even in a single Wal-Mart, but the idea of walking around downtown turns people off. It kind of blows my mind, actually.

So, I'll keep up the optimism with you, floater, but I really do think the chicken and the egg equation lies with developers, as most people still view a 45 minute stop at the convention size Wal-Mart on the drive home as more convenient than a 5 minute stop off at the corner store on the way to their car after work. It's hard to say now that, with all the parking, if a corner store would get enough foot traffic to warrant locating downtown. I guess we'll see...

[Pete]

Great points, BDP.


I always hear lots of people griping about parking in Bricktown, either having to pay $5 or walk a block to two to free spaces. I never ceases to amaze me because when I'm in town I marvel about the convenience of it all, considering it's an urban entertainment district.


Unfortunately, many of the restaurants and movies in Bricktown are available elsewhere so we need to continue to build on the uniqueness of the area. All the various festivals and conventions certain help in this regard.

[mranderson]

Great points, BDP.


I always hear lots of people griping about parking in Bricktown, either having to pay $5 or walk a block to two to free spaces. I never ceases to amaze me because when I'm in town I marvel about the convenience of it all, considering it's an urban entertainment district.


Unfortunately, many of the restaurants and movies in Bricktown are available elsewhere so we need to continue to build on the uniqueness of the area. All the various festivals and conventions certain help in this regard.

Complaining about having to walk a block or two. That is sickening. Just laziness.

[BDP]

I never ceases to amaze me because when I'm in town I marvel about the convenience of it all, considering it's an urban entertainment district.

I hear you. Sometimes I wonder why these people are going to bricktown at all if they are not interested in walking around a bit. And then when you compare it to any other entertainment district it loses all meaning. Then consider that many of these people are the same ones that shop in the most inconvenient of shopping corridores ever invented, Memorial Road, and it becomes outright confusing. I'll never understand how looking for parking 6 times is easier than doing it once, but, oh well...

Oh, and then there's those that drive around the parking lot for 20 minutes to get a spot up close when they could have taken the first available spot they drove by and been in and out in less time. There defiantely is something cultural about it, but I can't figure out where it comes from. It's kind of like LA's 'valet' culture. Often times you have to do it, like in West Hollywood, but people valet automatically even when there's a parking space 20 feet away.

[Pete]

The cultural part is due to the heavy orientation to the car in that part of the country and the spread-out nature of the population, even in the city.

Growing up in OKC, I never walked anywhere and I don't remember anyone else doing it, either.


People bag on California in this regard but I've lived in several communities where I (and almost everyone else) walked everywhere.


Apart from the all griping, a community has no soul when people don't congregate in public areas. If you think about it (apart from Paseo and small parts of downtown) OKC has never had this possibility until very recently and that's why so many people don't understand.

[BDP]

People bag on California in this regard but I've lived in several communities where I (and almost everyone else) walked everywhere.

"Nobody walks in LA".

Yeah, LA is a huge car culture, but many neighborhoods do have a sort of main street within walking distance with a drugstore, coffe shop, breakfast place, burrito place, local pub, etc. I think it would surprise most people how many well defined neighborhoods there are in LA with their own services which they can walk to.

I also find it interesting that many of the ingrediants that people say they hate about LA are ingrained in the culture here as well.

[Pete]

The biggest difference is that there are very few places in OKC that have any kind of population density.

LA is extremely dense in many areas.

[BDP]

LA is extremely dense in many areas.

Very true. Which takes us back to the draw back of sprawling parking lots that inhibit the possibility of reaching that critical mass which allows small merchants to make a living off the core business of their neighborhood. For us to truly create an urban neighborhood somewhere in OKC, even if it's not downtown, a density of people, rather than cars and living space, has to first be achieved.

-tangent alert-

The five cities above us and below us in population for the city proper as of 2000 are Seattle, DC, Denver, Nashville, and Portland above us and Las Vegas, Tucson, Long Beach, Albuquerque and New Orleans below us. Instead of talking about creating an urban environment in OKC in terms of New York, Chicago, San Francisco, etc. I think it would make more sense to look to these cities and find where pockets of urban living are coexisting amongst a sprawling landscape and use those as our models.

Obviously, some may never apply. DC's situation is one that is hard to translate into OKC and Seattle and Portland face geographical restrictions the likes of which are non-existent for hundreds of miles from OK. But I know that Portland (which in addition to its geographic boundaries has also implemented its own boundaries), Nashville, Denver and New Orleans offer some form of urban neighborhoods in their landscape, even when some sprawl may be present. Las Vegas is even beginning to build up as much as out. Long Beach kind of has its main drags, but I am not sure how they translate into actual urban living for its residents. I am not familiar enough with Tucson or Albuquerque to comment, but it wouldn't hurt for us to check it out.

Again, I don't really think that we're talking about needing a wholesale culture change. I think that a population of 500,000+ can create and support a couple of pockets of urban living on its own, given the proper visionaries with checkbooks. If for nothing else, simply to catch up to those on the above list in terms of lifestyle offerings, and possibly move past those that are not offering such living. It's not like the city has to burn down the suburbs or force people into high-rises, it just simply ads to its marketability to offer low maintenance high density living in addition to large sq footage sprawling living.

To me, at this stage in Oklahoma City's development, it makes sense for city leaders and the community to actively pursue and encourage expanding its product mix in terms of living choices. To date, it often seems more like words than actual application. I don’t think it’s too restrictive for the city to look at some developers who wish to fill in large areas of downtown with parking lots or sprawling condos or large big box venues and say, “well, we were really hoping to use those resources to expand what OKC has to offer, however, you can go anywhere else in the city and do whatever you want”. We have over 600 square miles of city land. Is it really that imposing to try and implement strict civic planning in a few of them?

[Pete]

I believe The Triangle has the potential to be OKC's first real urban neighborhood and that others will evolve with time.

As far as visionaries with checkbooks, Anthony McDermid and his group seem to fit the bill. Hopefully, others will follow their example.

[jbrown84]

Good point about comparing us to places like Portland, Denver, and Nashville rather than Chicago and New York. I have a lot of experience with Albuquerque and I can tell you that we are way ahead of them as far as urban development and increasing cultural and lifestyle amenities. They are just as sprawled as we are but have fewer suburbs and therefore don't seem as sprawled. They don't have much of a downtown, and haven't seen any major projects that I know of other than an expanded racetrack-casino.

I haven't been to Nashville but from what some friends have told me, we have a better downtown as far as thing to do go. They definetely top us on skyscrapers, but from what he said, there's a lot more going on here after dark.

I really think we should look to Portland. They are just a little ahead of us in their own renaissance and have done some great things for conservation and urbanization that have really attracted a lot of new, young residents. That's what we need to remember. More options for housing are going to attract NEW people to our city. We can't expect everyone living out on NW Highway to move into The Classen and The Montgomery, but we can expect that as we increase urban housing and develop new urban parks and basic retail and service needs downtown, we are going to attract young workers to the area as well as new jobs for those workers. Right now, companies and workers are passing us up because they want options for living downtown and we don't quite have it yet.

[HOT ROD]

I totally agree with the above post. Portland has experienced a downtown renaissance that OKC should follow.

Portland has an upscale downtown residential district known as the Pearl District that has really become the hottest place to live in the city. Once a blighted industrial and warehouse district near the Union train station, the Pearl is now the jewel of the city - complete with mid rise upscale apartment and condo towers, urban plazas and parks, upscale retail and restaurants - and is still expanding. It looks like they took a look at Vancouver BC downtown and chose to build dense low and mid rise (instead of Vancouver's plethora of highrises), which works for Portland.

I recently visited Portland (given that it is only 160 miles South) and was totally amazed with downtown. Just five years ago, I did not see much about Portland other than their MAX light rail system that we DIRE-LY need in Seattle (as we have NO mass transit system here). downtown Portland used to be just several mid rise office towers with lots of copy cats but nothing much to talk about. Today, they are actually doing better than us (Seattle) in terms of downtown residential development and urban living.

I can tell you what really helped start the renaissance in Portland. It is something they built long ago, that used to run through the blighted area but promised the future to the city - a light rail system through downtown!!!

Known as Portland Streetcar, http://www.portlandstreetcar.org/ this light rail network uses light streetcars and vintage looking cars (which is different from the intercity MAX light rail system http://www.trimet.org/max/ which uses "heavy light rail cars") on tracks from Portland State University through western downtown through the Pearl district, then over to NW Portland and back. A recent expansion of the system took it from PSU east through downtown CBD over to the riverside. Hence, a new upscale residential district came there as well though not as big or developed as PEARL, known as Riverside (I think).

Key message here, Portland brought the Streetcar years (decades) before the arrival of the Pearl District development - but the Streetcar was the catalyst for the district!!!

I think the same should be done in Oklahoma City. Perhaps (in addition to Park/Tree expansion and neighbourhood beautification) MAPS III should include a true light rail trolley or streetcar similar to Portland Streetcar - which would run in the downtown districts ONLY and maybe over to the HSC and Capitol. This system would replace the Heritage trolleys we currently have (or add to them) and would provide DOWNTOWN transportation!!!

For long range transit, we could follow Portland with MAX (a much heavier rail car [but still electric surface light rail]) at a later date to connect downtown to the suburbs and airport. I believe the Downtown (OKC) Streetcar [as it might be known] would spur development and provide the glue to keep downtown active and attractive to tourists, residents, and business alike.

Also, the Downtown Streetcar would not need Union Station as a hub, as Portland's Streetcar does not have a "train station" but has little stops all along its routes - can we emerge from the I-40 fiasco with the realization that we really dont need the Union Station rail yard for a light rail system?????? - the Streetcar would only need a maintenance and storage hub which could be built in the flatiron district (Portland's is under the I-405 freeway bridge).

If you read nothing more from this message, please understand that Oklahoma City is very similar in nature to Portland and therefore we should really look to them for ideas in creating a truly urban and more happening city in the midst of a much larger rival - OKC's is Dallas, Portland's is Seattle and Vancouver BC.

I like the renaissance of Portland's downtown and would even strongly consider living there if I took an employment opp in Portland (a statement I would have never made before). OKC, let's get going here with the Downtown Streetcar!!!

[hipsterdoofus]

Yeah the galleria should be nice. I work right next to it so I get to see the daily progress. Kinda funny, from what I understand, OKC has the most parking spaces per capita in the country, and we still need more. Pricess keep going up too!