Comments on: Oops… SandRidge’s Architects Give Us a Glimpse…

By: david ball

david ball — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:16:42 +0000

jeffrey is half right. there is no reason to hang on to empty structures that aren’t significant. on the other hand, the idea of downtown parks is totally overdone. far better to encourage sandridge to build new buildings that encourage the preservation of the streetwall than to try to pretend that downtown is a good place to launch your next FFA project. park space seems to take on a “holy grail” status, thanks to the u.s. supreme court, regardless of whether or not it is GOOD park space. newsflash: oklahoma is still a rural state. i live in the country. i want a real city when i go to town, not one that tries to be something it is not.

By: Jeffrey

Jeffrey — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 03:49:53 +0000

Someone really needs to explain to me how empty, dilapidated buildings somehow trump usable green space. Jake and others really need to think about this and come back with some type of logical response. The density argument is a falacy because what you’re proposing is “faux” density in the fact that these buildings haven’t been used (or maintained for that matter) in several decades. They’re outhouses that you’re trying to convince people are palaces. It’s silly to say we need these horrible buildings to maintain “the look” when all they are going to do is get older, require more work and eventually fall down, burn down or be torn down. These buildings will never serve a profitable puropse, if they could something would have been done with them long ago. The way to build density now is the Devon model, new construction, not irrationally holding on to the worst of the past. Houston has downtown parks everywhere and they seem to be doing OK.

By: Jake

Jake — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:36:09 +0000

Haven’t we learned from “urban renewal” already? Downtown should be full of architecture and buildings. We are destroying our past and replacing it with parks? Cities with vibrant downtowns that attract people and businesses aren’t filled with parks, but buildings and smart design of green spaces. Why cant we model around downtowns that are already successful and beautiful. Bryant Park in NYC is absolutley gorgeous and you can feel the city, its not huge, but built by park designers years ago. There are enough plazas and parking garages in OKC. Lets not forget and repeat our past and regret it later….Biltmore, Baum, etc.

By: Reggie Jet

Reggie Jet — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 22:22:47 +0000

The real question is: will the park space be a dynamic people place with lots of activities, or will it be dead space that sucks the life out of that part of town. (Not that there is much life on those blocks now.)

By: Kris Bryant

Kris Bryant — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:35:15 +0000

I agree with Kent, and so would the folks from the Project for Public Spaces.

By: Michael Herndon

Michael Herndon — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:20:40 +0000

That is just horirble. If they’d just keep some of those buildings, or at least replace what they tear down it wouldn’t be half bad. There’s not a single building fronting the north side of the street. Why the heck do they want to put a park around their DOWNTOWN campus? There’s already a park across the street that’s about to be doubled in space since they’re closing the street to through-traffic.

This really upsets me.

By: kent

kent — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:03:02 +0000

The question is really are we ever really going to be a dense downtown? I don’t think so. So maybe its time to explore a different type of downtown. With all the park plans from the river parks, core and shore and the medical center parks connection maybe its time to rebrand our thinking and to start thinking of a truely green approach to downtown. Trees, plaza, space, artworks, public use spaces, etc. All the plans I have seen are really bringing out all those features. Maybe we should become the city of parks. Wouldn’t that be a change from where we have been.

By: slackmeyer

slackmeyer — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:01:41 +0000

For what it’s worth, Bob Blackburn, who is the most respected historian in the state and is director of the Oklahoma Historical Society, has reported to SandRidge the buildings proposed for demolition would NOT be eligible for the National Historic Register. I’ve just asked the tough questions of Tom Ward and the project architect, and I’ll be interested in seeing whether their comments change views expressed to date.

By: Kris Bryant

Kris Bryant — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:53:30 +0000

As much as I like a streetwall, I’d rather have a usable green space than a vacant building. I agree with the rest of you, let’s find a way to redevelop the historic buildings. But this rendering doesn’t scream the end of the world to me.

By: justin

justin — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:15:30 +0000

What a step backwards.