Comments on: Comments?

By: GenghisKDuck

GenghisKDuck — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 12:47:25 +0000

Well I guess that counts us out.

By: MikeN

MikeN — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 21:29:50 +0000

David you did. Apology tentatively accepted. I would in the future be very careful of using anything in Norman as a benchmark for good. Those with living brain cells know all about Normans lousy planning.

I am curious if you are an educated urban planner or just another opinion?

By: Larry OKC

Larry OKC — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 15:50:51 +0000

Nick: I agree with your Couch comments 10,000%

By: david ball

david ball — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 15:17:32 +0000

my comments are directed at the clearcutting in putting up the new park, and always consistently have been. the park was not a flooding, failed piece of infrastructure. rather, it had come to be considered unfashionable and i felt that utilizing mature trees in the new design was both possible and desirable. norman has old neighborhoods lined with mature trees, both on lindsay and intersecting with it. old photos of norman reveal it to have been a treeless grassland. i believe that if the city fathers of norman were to suggest clearcutting those neighborhoods to install, say, new sidewalks and curbs, there would be an outcry against it. perhaps i’m wrong. maybe nichols hills will also get on the modern bandwagon and eliminate its tree-lined streets, as well. to characterize my statements as being a complaint about the appearance of a construction area either shows a lack of comprehension about what i DID say, or a deliberate lack of candor. i will assume that i failed to state my position clearly.

By: Nick Roberts

Nick Roberts — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 11:54:48 +0000

Tbh, I really think Norman is a very poorly ran city as well. Norman isnt even attempting the magnitude we are, or even anything audacious for their city size, and the demands of sprawl won out in the end there. And the unp fiasco still has me angry and unhappy about anything Norman does.

But I stand by everyone’s criticism of this park redesign however. Yeah, it’s the construction phase, very keen observation. However the point is everybody thought at least SOME mature trees should be incorporated. Then the unthinkable happened and they were all turn down and no plan for reusing the monuments elsewhere. And as a last and most vital point to morons who think its too soon to judge: actually, it’s too late. We all saw the renders, that was the time. City Council tried stopping this bad idea, but somebody got to them the next week. This was FORCED through. So what are we doing now? All we can, bitching as loud as possible. This is sad that civic engagement has been diminished to this.

Oh and fire Couch (yeah right) if you ever want this to change. This guy has either lost his edge or never had it to begin. The incompetence and poor execution in last 4 years, MAPS mishandling, now this among countless other horrible projects. He needs to leave. I just don’t see how he masterfully escapes all of the blame for all of this. You’ve got to start looking at the top. Stop attacking mid level folks just working for a living. Attack the dude making more than anyone, ruining and corrupting our city, and taking all the credit and none of the blame.

By: MikeN

MikeN — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 01:19:27 +0000

Now it looks ugly. It is called CONSTRUCTION!!! david have you ever seen a construction location that looked nice in the construction phase…NOPE.

It is hypocryisy/illogical to say tree removel for aesthetis is wrong but to do it for infrastructure failure is okay. Consistency in thought david.

By: GenghisKDuck

GenghisKDuck — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 23:53:41 +0000

1. Do you mean the flooding on Flood or on Lindsey/Lindsay?
2. What old part of Norman?
3. A little worried about the xeroxing Dubai thing.
Is that really possible?
4. Are any of these questions going to be answered?

By: david ball

david ball — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 23:34:22 +0000

you mean where it’s been flooding and they’re trying to stop the flooding? that’s not the same thing at all. furthermore, they’re not removing ALL the trees to give norman a “new look”. they also aren’t going outside of what is absolutely necessary, like mowing down the side streets. this project is about aesthetics, not some type of infrastructure failure.

By: GenghisKDuck

GenghisKDuck — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 23:25:17 +0000

How about the elms and oaks they’ve cut down because
of the construction on Lindsey/Lindsay in Norman?

By: Nick Roberts

Nick Roberts — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 21:47:39 +0000

You would NEVER see someone get away with any of this in other cities. It’s insane. The oiligarchy couldn’t build a city even if they xeroxed Dubai.