Comments on: A Journey: Part Two

By: Going Back to the Journey

Going Back to the Journey — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 03:51:50 +0000

[...] few weeks back I traveled to Dallas and had this to say: Downtown Dallas is missing something. None of it really links together. The streets aren’t [...]

By: slackmeyer

slackmeyer — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:34:22 +0000

Craig, very good question! More to come….

By: Craig

Craig — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:16:26 +0000

What’s wrong with putting the new convention center where the cotton gin is now? When it is completed, tear down the cox center if that’s what needs to happen. At least the new convention center would still be walkable from Bricktown & the hotels. That would be true Core to Shore. The more I read, it sounds like Shore to Core.

By: Casey Cornett

Casey Cornett — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 16:39:08 +0000

Well written, Steve. Great comments from all as well. Interested in your, \More to come.\

By: Kris Bryant

Kris Bryant — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:44:30 +0000

Good observations James, but I know for a fact that Devon CEO Larry Nichols is pro-density. He is advocating for the Devon Tower TIF dollars to go towards enhancements of downtown street life (streetscapes, public art, public entertainment, enhancement of Myriad Gardens). As far as wanting a “big park”, that is a must for any urban environment. But it has to be done right in order for people to actually use it.

By: james evans

james evans — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:17:36 +0000

By the way, I don’t think the city leaders (including corporate leaders like CHK and Denton) want a dense urban core. That sort of liveable urbanism is not the cultural value of the conservative capitalists running the show around here. Instead, a big park, a big skyscraper, a big convention center, a big whatever, with their names on it, is likely a better outcome for them than a dense walkable core, public transportation, etc. The focus isn’t on the masses, it’s on the edification of the leaders.

By: james evans

james evans — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:11:42 +0000

I love how the city leaders bring in Jeff Speck to provide consultation on making downtown more walkable and then ignore all of his recommendations because they contradict what Cornett et al have in mind. Good use of city money.

By: Colin

Colin — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 07:15:49 +0000

Core to Shore cannot and should not become Bricktown II. The city can’t support that, period. It should only involve development that complements downtown…mixed use residential and retail, with a well planned and reliable transit system to link it to downtown, bricktown, midtown, and OUHSC. If we’re dead set on a new convention center, I say knock over Bass Pro and put it there. I know it’s hard to imagine an urban entertainment district where you can’t readily obtain wolf urine, but we have to make some sacrifices.

By: LJ

LJ — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 04:41:35 +0000

What would be wrong if the city were to acquire enough land in the Core to Shore area to make the park 20 times the size of the intial plans?

Core to shore could be one enormous sized nature park, no other development needed or permitted. The city would own all of the land and then it could sell off pieces as needed and only after the city felt other key areas were complete.

I am saying that after I-40 moves something needs to be done with all of the area between the new I-40 and downtown, but it does not need to be developed right away. We are not ready for all of the planned development in the Core to Shore area, other than a park that needs to be at least 10 times the size that is being planned.

By: Kris Bryant

Kris Bryant — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:23:19 +0000

There’s nothing wrong with having multiple districts, neighborhoods, villages in the downtown area. Think about New York…Tribeca, SoHo, Greenwich Village, Upper East Side, Little Italy, Chinatown, etc. What ties them together are walkability and a superb public transit system…two things that OKC is majorly lacking. But it’s not impossible to make it work successfully.

I think city leaders need to remind the public of why Core to Shore makes sense…if it does make sense. My vote is just to make the whole stinkin area south of I-40 into the new central park, then build housing/retail all around it like a square, gradually working outward towards the river and the already existing core.