Here are some pics of some of the Core to Shore models. Sorry for the quality of the pics. There are 4 models in all, here are 3 of them. I will hopefully get to take some more and better quality pics soon. Let the haters begin their rants! :whiteflag


http://www.okctalk.com/gallery/data/500/medium/Core_To_Shore_1.jpg

http://www.okctalk.com/gallery/data/500/medium/Core_to_Shore_2.jpg

what you made it blurry for a reason, why would you do this, just to keep more things from us that you know first!!!!!! jk metro

yeah, it's part of my "ego problem", I sabotaged my phone as part of my evil disguise to take over the world..........ehh I mean OKC.

Not to pile on, but what use are those pictures? Are you trying to give us the inside scoop or prove that you can get the inside scoop? Come on... seriously.:LolLolLol

Seems like an awful lot of discussion and interest on this board about C2S to me. Just look at the countless threads with multiple pages all of people wondering what Core To Shore park is going to look like...Maybe you can provide us some "wisdom" TSThird. And seriously, do the models above seem even remotely close to what you are invisioning our "grand park" to be? All I can say is a lot of people are going to be disappointed.

I can't tell from the models. The pictures are blurry and the features too small. I can't tell what anything is supposed to be.

All I can say is that I hope there's room for a soccer field or two, maybe a softball field. That'd be nice to have in this area and it'd be in high demand.

Is the Red Bull can supposed to be our "iconic statement," perhaps on the riverfront? That could be our claim to fame: "Visit OKC, home of the giant Red Bull (can)!" :wink:

Is it to scale?

LG has seen these models before, in high contrast, in a presentation that Hargreaves Associates Design Team made to the Core to Shore Steering Committee on June 17, 2009. I have the Powerpoint to this, but won't share it because LG has ethics.

i like the idea of a small pond or lake, maybe a downtown fishing hole, it would be nice if there was a nature trail area with horse drawn carriages in the day and evening.. area where bands can play vendors etc. the movie enchanted where she sings through central park new york is my vision for okc central park lol.. seen the movie to many times with my kids

LG has seen these models before, in high contrast, in a presentation that Hargreaves Associates Design Team made to the Core to Shore Steering Committee on June 17, 2009. I have the Powerpoint to this, but won't share it because LG has ethics.

So you're saying I have no ethics? If I didn't then why didn't I post these back on June 17th, as well as the powerpoint?

Is this the park? It is awfully small. What is the point of having the can there? Is that the Devon Tower? Why is the 3 pieces broken up and not all together? Is that a hint that there will be streets going thru the park?

As I have said, it looks very small, not much to put anything there.

LG has seen these models before, in high contrast, in a presentation that Hargreaves Associates Design Team made to the Core to Shore Steering Committee on June 17, 2009. I have the Powerpoint to this, but won't share it because LG has ethics.

Is the Core to Shore Steering Committee under the Chamber of Commerce or the Municipal Government? A quick search of the city's website makes it look like a municipal committee. If that's the case, then your powerpoints, if they're in the custody of the city or any of its offices, are public property and subject to the Oklahoma Freedom of Information Act. I could send you a request for them right now and all you could do would be to charge me .25 per page.

-- so how again does non-disclosure give you "ethics"?

ETA: In fact, I might just do that, scan it and post the pics on here just to prove my point. Next week of course [unless I'm on vacation which is a real possibility], but just be expecting my FOIA request form, m'kay? If not next week, then the week after for sure. If any of those documents are in city custody, I'll get 'em.

I have to say though, it really chaps my ass to see someone who is supposed to be performing a service for the public acting so absurdly nervous about public disclosure of information which ought to be made public in the first place. If I'm mistaken and this isn't in the custody of anyone working for the committee or the records keeper of that committee, I'd be interested to know why that is and why you don't think the public has a right to know.

Myriad Gardens II: The Wrath of Khan

Is this the park? It is awfully small. What is the point of having the can there? Is that the Devon Tower? Why is the 3 pieces broken up and not all together? Is that a hint that there will be streets going thru the park?

As I have said, it looks very small, not much to put anything there.

3 different "models", only one is the size of the park, yes it is a small park, only 40 acres.

we haven't enlarged the park at all? ugh. . .

3 different "models", only one is the size of the park, yes it is a small park, only 40 acres.

One is the park and the others is of what?

I can't seem to grasp the size of 40 acres. How many acres is the rides-filled at FC, 25?

Does not look good to me at all.

Thunder, same park, three different "versions" or "proposals." There is actually a newer 4th concept, but I didn't get a picture of that. If I get permission to post the slideshow I will.

Thunder, 40 acres is very small.

Frontier City is 55 acres.

Will Rogers Park is 160 acres.

Central Park in NYC is 843 acres.

Yes, 3 options shown, and one more not shown, options if you will or "evolutions" of concept, all exact same size and location.

1 acre = 4 046.85642 m2

40 acres = 4,046.85642 m2 * 40

= 16,1874.2568m2

To get an idea as to what a square meter might look like, stand in an imaginary square, stick your arms out straight. Everything beyond your elbows is outside of the "square."

Now multiply that imaginary square times 16,000.

-- or look at the University of Texas' campus.

Thunder, same park, three different "versions" or "proposals." There is actually a newer 4th concept, but I didn't get a picture of that. If I get permission to post the slideshow I will.

Okay. It was hard to see with the pix quality. One seem to have the option of more trees, but no pond, and the other seem to have a pond with less trees and more cement.

I do not think that I like those designs.

Is the Core to Shore Steering Committee under the Chamber of Commerce or the Municipal Government? A quick search of the city's website makes it look like a municipal committee. If that's the case, then your powerpoints, if they're in the custody of the city or any of its offices, are public property and subject to the Oklahoma Freedom of Information Act. I could send you a request for them right now and all you could do would be to charge me .25 per page.

-- so how again does non-disclosure give you "ethics"?

ETA: In fact, I might just do that, scan it and post the pics on here just to prove my point. Next week of course [unless I'm on vacation which is a real possibility], but just be expecting my FOIA request form, m'kay? If not next week, then the week after for sure. If any of those documents are in city custody, I'll get 'em.

I have to say though, it really chaps my ass to see someone who is supposed to be performing a service for the public acting so absurdly nervous about public disclosure of information which ought to be made public in the first place. If I'm mistaken and this isn't in the custody of anyone working for the committee or the records keeper of that committee, I'd be interested to know why that is and why you don't think the public has a right to know.

Haha. How do you know LG is a public servant?

Judging by the size of the can, those models are tiny.

But they are probably made to drop into a larger model of all of downtown.

Haha. How do you know LG is a public servant?

He said the reports were for a municipal committee. It doesn't matter whether he is or not. I'm not going to fill out a FOIA request to "Lord Gerald of the Internet." If those reports are part of the record or in the files of that committee, they're open records. And if not, there might be some other issues to look at. The public has a right to know about the development process of these ideas. In fact, as transparent as OKC.GOV has become, I'm pretty surprised that something as interesting as this wouldn't be posted.

Is that a baseball field in the corner of all three? IMO that would be a waste of space when the park is so freakin small.

What is this....a C2S for ants!??!?!! How can we enjoy C2S if we can't even fit inside the park!??! It must be at least......3 times bigger!!!

http://www.amoeba.com/dynamic-images/blog/zoolander-school.jpg

The park needs to be no less than 80 acres. Anything less would be a waste.

Coming to a tabletop near you ....
A new near beer .. Core to Shore Lite

He said the reports were for a municipal committee. It doesn't matter whether he is or not. I'm not going to fill out a FOIA request to "Lord Gerald of the Internet." If those reports are part of the record or in the files of that committee, they're open records. And if not, there might be some other issues to look at. The public has a right to know about the development process of these ideas. In fact, as transparent as OKC.GOV has become, I'm pretty surprised that something as interesting as this wouldn't be posted.

Prophecies of Metrodamus:

A lad in Town Middle,
Along with his faithful partner Met-row,
Will make veiled threats and egregious claims in the City of Oak,
The citizens will roll their eyes in unison.

Lol

Said Lord Gerald of the Internet,
"I am against open government!"

The FOIA notice soon displayed,
His hidden files, betrayed!
He'll find his "ethics" quite illegitimate.

The park needs to be no less than 80 acres. Anything less would be a waste.

I'd even go so far as to say that anything less would be uncivilized.

yeah, it's part of my "ego problem", I sabotaged my phone as part of my evil disguise to take over the world..........ehh I mean OKC.

Well luckily you're past the denial phase of your little problem. :tiphat:

Is that a baseball field in the corner of all three? IMO that would be a waste of space when the park is so freakin small.


No, there is not a baseball field in those models, or any formal sports field.


Well luckily you're past the denial phase of your little problem. :tiphat:

Pot, this is Kettle, you're black.......

I really think this core to shore should be more open to the public. Obviously the people doing this don't have a clue as to what they are doing. We have a chance to really change this city, and instead we are building a litle park. What makes you think that a little park will bring development to a city. We have the Myriad Gardens, we don't need another little park. WE need a massive park that unites the Myriad Gardens to the River Parks.

These designs if to scale (using the size of the trees) is pathetic! It is tiny! We need a park larger enough that when you are in the center, that you don't feel like you are in a city. Central Park is an oasis in the middle of the city. An oasis will draw development around it, and provide an oasis environmentally for the city. The "green" surface area will cool the city 10 degrees!

The Boston Common is 50 acres and the Boston Public Garden is 24 acres, for some perspective. Is my understanding that this is a change from the prior C2S plans correct? If they remove the retail/business block that was supposed to take the place of the auto dealerships on Reno (which I thought one picture showed was gone) then the park will run into the Myriad Gardens, visually expanding that space. If we actually get the park on the south side of Union Station, accessible via bridge, then our park will ultimately be bigger. I'm wondering if this is the size we can afford to do well at this point in time. As long as it doesn't make extending the park to the river impossible in the long run, I'm OK with a smaller park to begin with. This is the part of the park I'd like to see have more structure, and then perhaps the park on the south side of the Crosstown could be more open and natural.

The past city leaders and planners of Oklahoma City have used the planned parks for expansion of the highway system... It still going on today with the demise of
Topping park and the bird sanctuary along the broadway extension. Look at what has happen to all four of the original grand parks of Oklahoma City. Parks have historically in Oklahoma City been looked at as a storage location for future developments. Till there is a mind set of the community that parks are an integral part of urban living development of parks and the continued maintenance and improvements will all be just a fantasy.

I really think this core to shore should be more open to the public. Obviously the people doing this don't have a clue as to what they are doing. We have a chance to really change this city, and instead we are building a litle park. What makes you think that a little park will bring development to a city. We have the Myriad Gardens, we don't need another little park. WE need a massive park that unites the Myriad Gardens to the River Parks.

These designs if to scale (using the size of the trees) is pathetic! It is tiny! We need a park larger enough that when you are in the center, that you don't feel like you are in a city. Central Park is an oasis in the middle of the city. An oasis will draw development around it, and provide an oasis environmentally for the city. The "green" surface area will cool the city 10 degrees!

Yeah, Hargreaves and Assoc. have "no idea" what they're doing. They've designed some of the most noted parks in the US.

Hargreaves Associates - Projects – Public Parks & Plazas (http://www.hargreaves.com/projects/PublicParks/)

Despite that, I'd still like to see more from C2S "Central Park". We need more land in the park. Maybe you can lend you're expertise to the design.



The Boston Common is 50 acres and the Boston Public Garden is 24 acres, for some perspective. Is my understanding that this is a change from the prior C2S plans correct? If they remove the retail/business block that was supposed to take the place of the auto dealerships on Reno (which I thought one picture showed was gone) then the park will run into the Myriad Gardens, visually expanding that space. If we actually get the park on the south side of Union Station, accessible via bridge, then our park will ultimately be bigger. I'm wondering if this is the size we can afford to do well at this point in time. As long as it doesn't make extending the park to the river impossible in the long run, I'm OK with a smaller park to begin with. This is the part of the park I'd like to see have more structure, and then perhaps the park on the south side of the Crosstown could be more open and natural.

The "picture" or rendering you're referring to was made by a member of this site, Spartan I believe. It is in no way even remotely related to any official drawings, although does warrant some merit as an idea to consider. The idea of having "mixed-use" buildings along the boulevard, across from the Myriad Gardens was to provide high quality retail as a drawing point to the boulevard and parks to have enough foot traffic in the area. From the Myriad Gardens to Central Park would be a small strip of park continuing the "Harvey Axis" from Devon Tower to the River.

I am afraid that we are going to build a little park that looks good, but not that many people will visit. It will just be a superficial park and not a functional part of the city.

> It will just be a superficial park and not a functional part of the city.

Like so many other parklands locally and elsewhere. Hopefully it won't become merely relegated to being a small field of broken dreams for toe taps

Is the Red Bull can supposed to be our "iconic statement," perhaps on the riverfront? That could be our claim to fame: "Visit OKC, home of the giant Red Bull (can)!" :wink:

The Red Bull can is a stand-in for the Devon Building and it is to scale.

The tiny little models go nicely with the tiny little can, showing just a tiny little information about the tiny little park....

THIS IS HUGE!

I am afraid that we are going to build a little park that looks good, but not that many people will visit. It will just be a superficial park and not a functional part of the city.

In other words, another Myriad Gardens.

In other words, another Myriad Gardens.

Maybe not... the redevelopment plan for Myriad Gardens is really going to "activate" the gardens.

... with a restaurant, cafe pavillion, childrens park, and dog park... new entrances at all four corners... and leveling most of the mounds.... I think the Myriad won't be so dead in a couple of years.

I really hope you're right, Platemaker. It could only get better.

It's great for photos but that park has been essentially dead for it's entire 30 year life.

I hope we've learned the necessary lessons from that experience.

I've seen the plans for the Myriad Gardens renovation. We are talking complete overhaul. 100% improvement.

Any estimated time on when the common folk get to see the plans? You have piqued my interest.

I haven't chimed in to OKC talk for a while, but thought this might be a good opportunity to do so. Recently I returned from Copenhagen, Denmark, home of Tivoli Gardens and the inspiration for Myriad Gardens. If Core to Shore and indeed Myriad Gardens itself could capture even a small bit of the charm of this wonderful place, both would be a huge success. Tivoli is unique in that it is one of the oldest amusement parks in the world and continues to draws crowds after more than 100 years. C2S and Myriad should incorporate many more 'human' elements, just like Tivoli, to ensure their success. I am talking about unique features; illuminated park-land (year-round and not just at Christmas), many unique restaurants (not chain restaurants), a cafe-terrace like in Bryant Park, NYC behind the public library, carnival-like and family-friendly games, boat rides and row-boats that (eventually) connect to the bricktown canal: on and on it should go. Whereas park-like space sound attractive, this is an urban space and ANYTHING suburban should be avoided.

You conspiracy theorists crack me up!

As the person responsible for posting C2S info on the Chamber site (until I left a couple weeks ago), I can assure you that there is no grand conspiracy of Core to Shore secrecy. Much information has been shared with the public, there have been open presentations, etc. If there is some new info or presentation not on the web site it is probably because it is just preliminary brainstorming or somebody has been too busy to say "hey, let's put this on the site." You want to have input? Put together coherent, professional input and send it to the city - go to the meetings.

The immaturity of snapping blurry pics on your phone in order to scoop some detail and cause Internet buzz is ridiculous.