Eyesores on Every Block
I’ve covered downtown development for more than a dozen years. In that time, I’ve heard one discussion after another about various eyesores downtown and potential solutions. Not once have I heard mention of the most obvious eyesores to be found pretty much everywhere downtown – our parking meters. To the left is what we see right now. They’ve not changed much – regular old meters on ugly poles installed decades ago. Maybe, just maybe, city crews brushed on a new coat of silver paint on the poles. And that’s it.
Ward 7 Councilman Skip Kelly has been challenging the status quo with these meters. He asked a good question over the summer – why is parking banned at some meters between 4 p.m. and 6 p.m.? The restrictions were placed years, if not decades ago. City staff did an analysis of traffic patterns and guess what? The restrictions weren’t needed at all.
This sort of thinking must be spreading because someone has tackled another pretty obvious question involving parking meters: why must they be so ugly?
The photo on the top of this post shows a parking meter along Dewey Avenue just south of Main Street. The photo to the left shows another parking meter on the same block with a new cover on the pole. Is there any question as to which one looks better?
I don’t know who is installing these covers, but I’m curious as to whether we might see these covers added throughout downtown?
And is there any chance of painting the meters black so they match the poles? I’ve got more questions coming soon.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
I do not consider parking meters eyesores. While they are usually quite utilitarian, they serve an important purpose in any urban area. There are many pieces of the urban fabic that taken together, establish a big-city-like character.
Speaking of eyesore, take Chicago’s “L” for example. Ask anybody in Chicago if they would like to move the L underground. Odds are 9-out-of-10 will say “heck no”.
People associate parking meters with big cities…which is what we are going for here. Painting them or installing new poles is fine…but not necessary.
I can see both sides of this issue. On the one hand, our parking meters could be spruced up a bit. On the other hand, what separates big cities from suburbia is the fact that not everything is expected to look pristine all the time. I think there’s a kind of psychological tolerance for “dirtiness” that comes with living in a big city. New York is a prime example of a dirty city that people love. Urban life is messy, and people like that for some reason.
I agree with Andrew and Kris. I’ve never thought of them as eyesores, and the base on the second one feels very suburban, like something you’d see in a lifestyle center that was trying to look urban by putting in parking meters. I’ve seen that in Colorado Springs.
I do agree that closing them completely or from 4-6 needs to be addressed, though.
I like the idea of doing the “credit card” meter like in front of the Civic Center and a few other places. It makes it way easier and they look nice.
I agree with many above, I do not mind the meters or paying to park..
These parking meters are antiques. All of the parking meters will eventually be multi-space kiosk that allow credit card and cell phone purchases. (www.parkingokc.com/images/parkingmeters_qanda.pdf)
The sidewalks have much bigger – more fundamental – problems, like the lack of ample width, lack of properly planted street trees, lack of transparent building facades…lack of people, etc.
I can think of many other things in the downtown area that are more of “eyesores” than the parking meters.
I agree parking meters need to be spruced up a bit and not look so utilitarian. However, I have another complaint other than parking meters. Has anyone but me noticed when driving across town on the expressways how many rusted, tin roofs and buildings you see? I.e., west bound on I-40 where it intersects with I-35 & 235 on the north. Those unsightly Quonset huts you see going south on I-235, looking toward Bricktown–what a view! Everywhere you look, you see these ugly, ugly eyesores. I’d like to see a city ordinance passed that requires property owners clean up vacant property–either tear it down, landscape it, paint, up, fix it up, and they have a reasonable amount of time to do it or the city will and charge the owner, plus interest, to do it.
Beth,
A lot of the issues you mention ARE against code violations, etc. It’s amazing what happens when people start reporting code violations, the city has to either enforce it, or work towards a solution. I encourage you to use the City’s Action Center. You can report violations and stay completely anonymous and even get back an update as to what the outcome was if you want.
Eyesores?? The biggest eyesore downtown is that monstrosity of a cotton seed oil mill (I believe that’s what is is) on the south side of I-40. Pictures I’ve seen of the “Core to Shore” project show the hideous thing still there. I hope it is gone LONG before the core to shore is completed. I would support a MAP tax just for the purpose of razing it. LOL
What’s even more ridiculous is how the city “closes” so many of the parking meters (i.e. they put the bags over them stating out of use or whatever). I’ve noticed plenty of them out of service in high foot traffic areas, Museum of Art/City Hall area, Robinson Ave., Over by the hotels Renaissance and Sheraton, Bricktown and other various places, just blocked from being used. It’s like they are forcing us now to pay more and use the parking garages to rack up revenues, even if we just need a space for 15-20 minutes.