NewsOK (http://newsok.com/bringing-fresh-eyes-to-huge-downtown-oklahoma-city-project/article/3442802?widgetOffset0=0&custom_click=lead_story_title#comment)


Bringing fresh eyes to huge downtown Oklahoma City project (Oklahoman, 2/28/10)

• Where should Promenade Park be located?

In the Core to Shore report the Central Park was only 40 acres with the narrower 30 acre, Promenade Park connecting the Central Park to the River (thus the 70 acre Park mentioned in MAPS 3). The Promenade Park is shown on pages 38, 40, 55 & 57 of the Core to Shore Report (think you can still download it from OKC.gov). But this article makes me wonder even more as the Park was one of the few things in MAPS 3 where we knew its location (Convention Center, Senior Aquatics, Streetcars and even the Kayaking, all unknowns). If the connecting Promenade is in doubt, does that mean the location of the Central Park is questionable too? After all, there are only so many places you can put the connecting Promenade Park if the Central Park and River locations are known. From looking at the C2S report there really seems like there is only 2 possibilities along the Harvey alignment (where it shows it against Robinson, or shifting it 1 block to the west). Thought one of the whole points of building the parks there was to dramatically improve the impression made on those coming into downtown from the new I-40. Hide the park?

NewsOK (http://newsok.com/bringing-fresh-eyes-to-huge-downtown-oklahoma-city-project/article/3442802?widgetOffset0=0&custom_click=lead_story_title#comment)



In the Core to Shore report the Central Park was only 40 acres with the narrower 30 acre, Promenade Park connecting the Central Park to the River (thus the 70 acre Park mentioned in MAPS 3). The Promenade Park is shown on pages 38, 40, 55 & 57 of the Core to Shore Report (think you can still download it from OKC.gov). But this article makes me wonder even more as the Park was one of the few things in MAPS 3 where we knew its location (Convention Center, Senior Aquatics, Streetcars and even the Kayaking, all unknowns). If the connecting Promenade is in doubt, does that mean the location of the Central Park is questionable too? After all, there are only so many places you can put the connecting Promenade Park if the Central Park and River locations are known. From looking at the C2S report there really seems like there is only 2 possibilities along the Harvey alignment (where it shows it against Robinson, or shifting it 1 block to the west). Thought one of the whole points of building the parks there was to dramatically improve the impression made on those coming into downtown from the new I-40. Hide the park?

Even if the exact location isn't decided, why do you think it would be hidden or put it a location that wouldn't make a good impression coming into downtown. Why would any sensible planner do that and what would be the chances that would ever happen?

I agree, "why would any sensible planner...?" But look no farther than the current "planning" by the City and the lack of integration of Project 180 and MAPS 3. Specifically the tearing up of the streets twice instead of doing it once and being done with it (for the Streetcars).

If you look at the maps, in its current proposed location it is fronting Robinson (one of the main exits). If it gets moved 1 block west (to the other side of Harvey) it won't be fronting either of the main roads. Thus hiding it. The article seems to indicate that may be what happens.

I agree, "why would any sensible planner...?" But look no farther than the current "planning" by the City and the lack of integration of Project 180 and MAPS 3. Specifically the tearing up of the streets twice instead of doing it once and being done with it (for the Streetcars).

If you look at the maps, in its current proposed location it is fronting Robinson (one of the main exits). If it gets moved 1 block west (to the other side of Harvey) it won't be fronting either of the main roads. Thus hiding it. The article seems to indicate that may be what happens.

I see the Promenade Park area as being more for pedestrians than for people in automobiles to look at. I don't think someone who just happens to drive into downtown is necessarily going to be looking for this park as a reason to stop and, if they are looking for the park, going a block further won't matter. As long as it functions well for the walking public, being located a block one way or the other shouldn't be a big deal.

We seem to have a failure to communicate...LOL

I agree, the parks (Central, Promenade etc) are designed for participants. However, the specific location of the Parks in MAPS 3/Core to Shore was purposefully designed to create a better overall impression to visitors. No one really cared about it before because no one saw it. With the relocation several blocks to the south, all of that previously ignored area is suddenly put in the spot light. Or under the magnifying glass as the graphic in the Oklahoman article showed (not sure if it was by accident, but the area within the glass was the Promenade Park area).

One of the reasons for the Central Park to front the Convention Center. One of the reasons to have the parks fronting nearly the entire length of probably THE main access point from the new I-40. Apparently one of the numerous trees and medians along the Boulevard (with the Central Park fronting part of it). The common theme is impression, impression, impression. Moving the Promenade Park 1 block west wont change those who are wanting to use the park, but it removes the impression impact for those coming in on Robinson (the park will end up being hidden by buildings of some sort eventually). In the mean time, run down structures or vacant lots are going to be what is greeting your visitors.

Just as there have been upgrades/streetscapes along 23rd and Lincoln Blvds (both leading to the Capital). These are THE main routes to anyone doing State business. Just think of the impression left on our State and Capital City by these run down areas.
All of the above seems logical and well thought out. That is why I am wondering why there is even a question of where the Promenade Park is going to be located.

We seem to have a failure to communicate...LOL

I agree, the parks (Central, Promenade etc) are designed for participants. However, the specific location of the Parks in MAPS 3/Core to Shore was purposefully designed to create a better overall impression to visitors. No one really cared about it before because no one saw it. With the relocation several blocks to the south, all of that previously ignored area is suddenly put in the spot light. Or under the magnifying glass as the graphic in the Oklahoman article showed (not sure if it was by accident, but the area within the glass was the Promenade Park area).

One of the reasons for the Central Park to front the Convention Center. One of the reasons to have the parks fronting nearly the entire length of probably THE main access point from the new I-40. Apparently one of the numerous trees and medians along the Boulevard (with the Central Park fronting part of it). The common theme is impression, impression, impression. Moving the Promenade Park 1 block west wont change those who are wanting to use the park, but it removes the impression impact for those coming in on Robinson (the park will end up being hidden by buildings of some sort eventually). In the mean time, run down structures or vacant lots are going to be what is greeting your visitors.

Just as there have been upgrades/streetscapes along 23rd and Lincoln Blvds (both leading to the Capital). These are THE main routes to anyone doing State business. Just think of the impression left on our State and Capital City by these run down areas.
All of the above seems logical and well thought out. That is why I am wondering why there is even a question of where the Promenade Park is going to be located.

I concur that leaving the location alone might be best unless there are considerations I'm not aware of financial or otherwise. I'm hoping this decision won't be made in a dark closed room with no input from interested parties.