Page 10 of 76 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213141560 ... LastLast
Results 226 to 250 of 1898

Thread: Scissortail Park

  1. #226

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    I guess step 1 would be to not build 16 soccer fields in one location. I did a quick search around the world and I can't find any place outside the US that have more than 4 soccer fields in one place.
    Well, if you searched it on the internet than it means it is true.

  2. #227
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    5,437
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Central Park

    Two minute google searches is definitive research.

  3. #228

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    Just posted on Urban Neighbors FB page:
    Sweet, that's my birthday!

  4. #229

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by sidburgess View Post
    My oldest daughter was enrolling in soccer to play here: https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Queen...ashington&z=18


    BoulderSooner, for some reason you have completely bought into the notion that what isn't done here in OKC, isn't possible, or at least extremely rare. If I am wrong, what is your position again?
    i have lived all over the world ..... my notion is not close to what you stated ....

    my position is reality .. not idealism

  5. #230

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by sidburgess View Post
    I showed you a map. I don't know how much more "reality" I can get.
    okc is not seattle

  6. #231

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by BoulderSooner View Post
    okc is not seattle
    This is the second time you've switched arguments instantly when it suits you. First you say you've lived all over the world and imply that it is fanciful idealism to think that we could have a city that is built to foster something as natural and common as walking. Then Sid refers you back to his map of Seattle to demonstrate that it is, in fact, practical. Now you're back to saying it's just not possible in OKC. Because...you know...OKC is OKC, not Seattle. I'm not trying to attack you or belittle your input, but we're just trying to have honest discussions about improving our city in very real and achievable ways. I'm sure everyone would be welcoming of actual constructive input and criticism of ideas being discussed, but I personally am annoyed and put off by your whining and nay-saying. It's not helpful and it stymies the pursuit of a productive discourse.

  7. #232
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    5,437
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Central Park

    It isn't impossible to adequately size the facilities for current or expected use.

  8. #233

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by sidburgess View Post
    Is this building mentioned as being "safe"?

    https://maps.google.com/?ll=35.45457...01321&t=h&z=20
    Do you mean: is there any possibility of the Little Flower Church being torn down? I have never heard a discussion about the Little Flower Church that didn't support it as an important part of the fabric of that area. I do not believe there is any possibility of it being torn down.

  9. #234

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by sidburgess View Post
    I never said it was.


    Moving on, since we have Wheeler so close, I think that adding additional sports options there might make more sense. Then eventually adding a small amount of sports facilities to the north of the CBD as that area increases density.

    Very curious to see what they come up with at the meeting later this month. Excited to see this park moving forward!
    I agree with you about expanding options at Wheeler. That seems perfectly logical. I'd like to see it as an important destination for community sports.

  10. #235

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by ethansisson View Post
    This is the second time you've switched arguments instantly when it suits you. First you say you've lived all over the world and imply that it is fanciful idealism to think that we could have a city that is built to foster something as natural and common as walking. Then Sid refers you back to his map of Seattle to demonstrate that it is, in fact, practical. Now you're back to saying it's just not possible in OKC. Because...you know...OKC is OKC, not Seattle. I'm not trying to attack you or belittle your input, but we're just trying to have honest discussions about improving our city in very real and achievable ways. I'm sure everyone would be welcoming of actual constructive input and criticism of ideas being discussed, but I personally am annoyed and put off by your whining and nay-saying. It's not helpful and it stymies the pursuit of a productive discourse.
    haven't whined at all ... comments that compare a south side okc soccer complex to being in dallas ... is not close to productive ..... and at the current time there is not a place in okc that you could build a soccer complex where even half of the teams could walk to the field ... is that possible in the future? i hope so but that is not going to happen for a long long time

    new urbanism is a great thing in the right context .. but a lot of the problems that it solves we simply don't have in OKC and might not have in our lifetimes ...

  11. #236

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by betts View Post
    Do you mean: is there any possibility of the Little Flower Church being torn down? I have never heard a discussion about the Little Flower Church that didn't support it as an important part of the fabric of that area. I do not believe there is any possibility of it being torn down.
    Yeah, it's not going anywhere. If you look at the Core 2 Shore plan, it's shown on renderings as remaining in place.

  12. Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by BoulderSooner View Post
    new urbanism is a great thing in the right context .. but a lot of the problems that it solves we simply don't have in OKC and might not have in our lifetimes ...
    I have come to the conclusion you don't know what the problems are.

    Segregation of society (which degrades race relations, income envy, poverty, government dependency, etc)
    Obesity
    Heart disease
    Diabetes
    Wasted infrastructure
    Inefficient land use
    Crime
    Social isolation of teens - which leads to depression, drug use, suicide, etc
    Suspended childhood for pre-teens
    Lonely (abandoned) senior citizens
    Water shortages
    High taxes (at least higher than they should be)
    Pollution
    etc....

    OKC has most of these problems, and many more, in droves.

  13. #238

    Default Re: Central Park

    I would add energy dependence to that list. Many people fail to make the connection between our development patterns and the energy resources and cost required to build and maintain them.

    "American Urban Development and National Security" - that would make a heck of a master's thesis.......

  14. #239

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by BoulderSooner View Post
    haven't whined at all ... comments that compare a south side okc soccer complex to being in dallas ... is not close to productive ..... and at the current time there is not a place in okc that you could build a soccer complex where even half of the teams could walk to the field ... is that possible in the future? i hope so but that is not going to happen for a long long time

    new urbanism is a great thing in the right context .. but a lot of the problems that it solves we simply don't have in OKC and might not have in our lifetimes ...
    I'm sorry. You had not whined.

    I think this points out a difference in approach to this between you and some others here. New Urbanism isn't at the heart about solving existing problems practically. It's not about finding where new Urbanism can benefit the city in its current contexts. It is about shifting the perspective and changing the context, not acting within the current context. The problems we have now are not problems we want to have (e.g. figuring out where to provide ludicrous amounts of parking for a downtown that people travel to, instead of live in/near). But the problems that new Urbanism solves are problems we desire to encounter and overcome because of the benefits that they endow on our city. So instead of having thousands of parking spots downtown, we can say "let's just create an environment downtown that people want to live in (while providing some parking and public transportation for those who don't)."

    New Urbanism is about changing the context. Not acting within it.

    For the record, I think building a 16-field soccer complex anywhere near downtown would be a ridiculous waste of money and property.

  15. Default Re: Central Park

    That too CaptDave. How about a $16 trillion debt - nearly all of it accumulated since 1950 trying to solve the problems created by sprawl, or worse, making more sprawl possible.

  16. #241

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    I have come to the conclusion you don't know what the problems are.

    Segregation of society (which degrades race relations, income envy, poverty, government dependency, etc)
    Obesity
    Heart disease
    Diabetes
    Wasted infrastructure
    Inefficient land use
    Crime
    Social isolation of teens - which leads to depression, drug use, suicide, etc
    Suspended childhood for pre-teens
    Lonely (abandoned) senior citizens
    Water shortages
    High taxes (at least higher than they should be)
    Pollution
    etc....

    OKC has most of these problems, and many more, in droves.
    Exactly. New Urbanism doesn't try to address those problems directly, as BoulderSooner suggests, but works toward a new context in which those problems atrophy. We don't need a soccer complex within walking distance of a dozen teams, but that doesn't mean we don't need New Urbanism. And someday because of New Urbanism we may need (or, more appropriately, desire) a soccer complex.

  17. #242

    Default Re: Central Park

    duplicate post. sorry.

  18. Default Re: Central Park

    Bingo - addressing the problems directly is what we spent the $16 trillion we don't have on - and it isn't working becasue we are creating the problems faster than we can treat the symptoms - while never even touching the actual root of the problem.

    And I didn't even touch on the number of people who are directly killed or injured in auto accidents - who are forced to drive because for 99% of the people there is no alternative. For those of us who do walk or ride bikes - our number 1 cause of death while doing so - being hit by a car.

  19. #244

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    Bingo - addressing the problems directly is what we spent the $16 trillion we don't have on - and it isn't working becasue we are creating the problems faster than we can treat the symptoms - while never even touching the actual root of the problem.

    And I didn't even touch on the number of people who are directly killed or injured in auto accidents - who are forced to drive because for 99% of the people there is no alternative.
    For that matter the woman I see multiple times a week on my way home from work rolling down Penn in a wheelchair hugging the curb and praying, I'm sure, that she doesn't get run over as she just tries to get to Aldi and back home on a street with no sidewalks. Every time I see that I'm outraged that we don't provide an environment in our city where a woman can simply get groceries without literally risking her life.

  20. #245

    Default Re: Central Park

    You and me both! I see her daily and worry that she's going to be crushed. All because of no sidewalks. What a damn shame!!

  21. #246

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    That too CaptDave. How about a $16 trillion debt - nearly all of it accumulated since 1950 trying to solve the problems created by sprawl, or worse, making more sprawl possible.
    very little of that debt has anything to do with trying to solve problems created by sprawl ...

  22. #247

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by BoulderSooner View Post
    very little of that debt has anything to do with trying to solve problems created by sprawl ...
    I wouldn't say very little, but certainly not most of it. Probably between 10% and 20% via infrastructure, wars for oil, auto/energy subsidies, etc.

  23. #248

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by catcherinthewry View Post
    We already have that at South Lakes Park. City of Oklahoma City | South Lakes Park
    No, we really don't have that, nor does any other city except for Overland Park...This is a world class facility not just flood plains turned into soccer fields.

    Why regurgitate the Myriad Gardens on a bigger scale?

    Why divert development away from the CBD and Bricktown, which has not seen it's potential?

    Why the build it and they will come mentality?

  24. #249

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by architect5311 View Post
    No, we really don't have that, nor does any other city except for Overland Park...This is a world class facility not just flood plains turned into soccer fields.
    South Lakes is not like lightning creek or the fields at 89th & Santa Fe. It is a very nice facility that hosted a national tournament 2/3 years ago.

  25. #250

    Default Re: Central Park

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    That too CaptDave. How about a $16 trillion debt - nearly all of it accumulated since 1950 trying to solve the problems created by sprawl, or worse, making more sprawl possible.
    1950... also the beginning of the military industrial complex. There are many complex reasons. Let's not act like new urbanism fixes everything, but I agree that society it better off with urban living as a prominent lifestyle choice. In OKC, it's just now being considered as one by a very small portion of the population. There is still a long way to go before most people actually consider living in an urban environment.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Map of Potential Infill Sites in Central OKC
    By shane453 in forum General Real Estate Topics
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 01-22-2012, 10:14 PM
  2. The Lincoln at Central Park / Gardner Tanenbaum project
    By metro in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 12-16-2011, 10:58 AM
  3. First MAPS 3 Project (70 Acre Central Park)?
    By G.Walker in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-17-2011, 09:31 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO