Widgets Magazine
Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst 12345678910 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 346

Thread: Broadway Park

  1. #101

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    The makeup of that group rotates and they are generally civic minded types who are volunteering their time to help make OKC a better place.

    They are often put in a tough position and these issues are usually more complex than most realize.

  2. #102

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    Anybody who wishes to deny this application based on how it fits into the overall makeup of Automobile Alley should be rightfully accused of overly-pedantic hubris and hystrionics based on this reality right here:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Sin título.jpg 
Views:	152 
Size:	354.8 KB 
ID:	12709

    This being right across the street ends all rational arguments about a development like this. Sure if this were a 20 story office tower, or a CNG fill up station with an ATM, or a snow cone stand. Fine.

    We're talking about a quality urban proposal (by OKC standards) in a place that even if it were a carbon copy of some building that was the objective definition of Automobile Alley would still not feel like Automobile Alley. Why? Because look above.

    And let's forget the fact that a quick trip on Google street view from Park Place to NW 4th demonstrates at least 4 or 5 other buildings that don't remotely look like they belong in the district.

    I simply don't care where Rand or the Committe's hearts are. Their collective heads are anywhere but where they ought to be. Rationality is what we're looking for and what we need. Many of us could pick apart the design and urbanism issues till the cows come home, but this is respectable development in the majority of US cities and a step up from a lot of stuff that has been approved in OKC's urban core in the last 5 years.

  3. #103

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    I believe it is a red herring to suggest people should have to drop what they do -- or skip work -- to do what these appointed individuals should be able to do without huge public protest. Keep in mind most of us aren't independently wealthy, with the luxury to set our own schedules -- or not show up at work at all -- as most people appointed to boards in this good ole boy city can.

  4. #104

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    Quote Originally Posted by Urbanized View Post
    Also, the Oklahoma Contemporary comparison is a total red herring; they might be right across the street from one another, but they are in different design districts. This project is DBD (downtown business district), while OC is in DTD-1 (downtown transitional district). As such, this project is once again supposed to draw its design cues from the neighborhood it is in (Automobile Alley), while DTD-1 transitions between the urban and the suburban, so has much more design latitude. This is very much on purpose, and founded on longstanding principles of urban planning.
    Obviously, we're knee deep in subjective, but as for Contemporary being in a "transitional" district, it fails at that as well. It's a complete departure from what's to the south. I'm really not advocating either way, but if the DTD-1's objective it to be transitional, then either Contemporary should be denied based on that criteria, or the district should better rewrite their guidelines to better reflect that objective.

  5. Default Re: Broadway Park

    ^^^^^^^^
    Criticism of Oklahoma Contemporary is totally fair...and so is criticism of Broadway Park. I'm saying they are subject to different guidelines, which is fact.

    And using bad decisions on Chase and Dowell stuff to justify a wrong decision here is not good logic. Two (or three) wrongs don't make a right.

  6. #106

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    Perhaps Elliot has interest in this corner and is using his position on the committee to influence a sale.

    [/tinfoil]

  7. #107

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    Quote Originally Posted by Urbanized View Post
    ^^^^^^^^
    Criticism of Oklahoma Contemporary is totally fair...and so is criticism of Broadway Park. I'm saying they are subject to different guidelines, which is fact.

    And using bad decisions on Chase and Dowell stuff to justify a wrong decision here is not good logic. Two (or three) wrongs don't make a right.
    The issue seems to be, that no one other than Rand and a few board members see this is as a wrong. It looks like a very attractive development to me, and does not seem so different to the rest of the area to warrant a denial. We're not talking about a Taco Bell with a drive thru here, we're talking about a dense 4-story mixed use development.

  8. Default Re: Broadway Park

    Quote Originally Posted by Anonymous. View Post
    Perhaps Elliot has interest in this corner and is using his position on the committee to influence a sale.

    [/tinfoil]
    It's fine to disagree with his design opinions or his approach to this issue, but he is a pillar of the community who committed to downtown WAAAY before it was cool to do so, who has volunteered thousands of hours to our community, and who is in my experience a thoughtful, decent person. I think unsubstaniated suggestions of impropriety just because someone disagrees with someone else's opinions should be way out of bounds on this board. JMO. Disparaging individuals just because someone disagrees with them is a very bad look for OKCTalk. I think we should be above that.

  9. Default Re: Broadway Park

    Quote Originally Posted by catch22 View Post
    The issue seems to be, that no one other than Rand and a few board members see this is as a wrong. It looks like a very attractive development to me, and does not seem so different to the rest of the area to warrant a denial. We're not talking about a Taco Bell with a drive thru here, we're talking about a dense 4-story mixed use development.
    I think in this particular case it is a question of appropriate district-sensitive architectural style rather than attractiveness (which is very subjective), land use or adherence to urban principles. That's how I read it, anyway. And it seems to be the best leg to stand on if opposing it.

  10. #110

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    Urbanized, if you were on the committee how would you have voted?

  11. #111

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    Quote Originally Posted by Urbanized View Post
    ^^^^^^^^
    Criticism of Oklahoma Contemporary is totally fair...and so is criticism of Broadway Park. I'm saying they are subject to different guidelines, which is fact.

    And using bad decisions on Chase and Dowell stuff to justify a wrong decision here is not good logic. Two (or three) wrongs don't make a right.
    Just saying that particular standard that they seem to be applying in this instance has been the most loosely enforced of them all.

  12. Default Re: Broadway Park

    Quote Originally Posted by HHE View Post
    Urbanized, if you were on the committee how would you have voted?
    It's a tough question. I don't really think I can find fault here with the architect, the client, or even necessarily with committee member for voting in EITHER direction. I really think the problem here is that City staff (who generally does a good job) didn't seem to give a whole lot of direction. If you will go back to page one of this thread, you will see that within the first several posts I predicted that it would get design review pushback. That was just a gut feeling, because I understand the boundaries and general intent of the ordinance, and the building is a bit of a sore thumb if you look at the rest of the district, which is overall quite consistent in historic architectural style. This building would be straight-up MURDERED if it were proposed for a true HP district. But of course, AA is NOT an HP district from a design ordinance standpoint.

    I think the thing that is important here is that Planning should invest some time in some more comprehensive design recommendations for sub-districts of the larger design districts. Especially places like AA and Film Row, which have very cohesive existing fabric. I'm not suggesting creation of new districts or committees, heaven forbid; only saying there should be more guidance available up-front. In AA's case it should emphasize scale, window openings, retail windows, street relationship, etc.

    When Automobile Alley was a Main Street program there actually WERE such guidelines available from Planning. As in, you could go in and get a booklet that almost looked like a coloring book, with a breakdown of the district's history, its overall design characteristics, and recommendations. For instance: "Automobile Alley's existing architecture emphasizes the horizontal rather than the vertical. Buildings between __________ stories and _________ stories would be encouraged; buildings above that height would be discouraged." or "Automobile Alley's historic use emphasized large retail windows that related to the sidewalk. Therefore first story retail windows would be encouraged, while windowless walls would be discouraged..." Brick encouraged, tilt-up prohibited, etc. etc. There were some for other districts too.

    Such resources let the architect or developer know where they stand up front. If they deviate too far they can be sure they will have issues. If they have questions they consult staff before ever submitting. It also gives committee members more guidelines to stand on besides a staff recommendation, a gut instinct, or "taste," which is a SUPER slippery slope.

    There were similar books for other districts. I mentioned them to someone from Planning the other day, and I think they have gone by the wayside. This was 20 years ago, of course. But I think I still have one somewhere. Would be interesting to find it, and to share here and/or with Planning staff if they don't still have them or know about them.

    Anyway, not sure how I would have voted. Committee members were really put in a tough spot by other people, I think. Sometimes things are not as cut and dried, black/white as we think they are when we read about them or post about them.

  13. Default Re: Broadway Park

    Interesting that Rand's Oklahoma Contemporary was also on the same docket (right?) as this proposal. If this is true, then it is clear what Rand's motives are in speaking against this development.

    Assuming this is true, then it is the same good ole boy type of system in that someone developing/approval or is seen as a good ole boy (RAND) and civic person can control what gets developed or not given his stature and that alone. Since Rand spoke, then the committee followed without providing any true or real fact that this development would go against a Downtown or Automobile Alley Master Development plan. Seems eeriely similar to Larry's oversight of the CC (and that part of downtown) as well as the streetcar - although I am fine with it not being so on-the-wire since that is new (and now) cheap technology (but in the beginning it seemed like he didn't want wires near Devon tower exclusively).

    As was said a million times, I don't see anything wrong with this proposal that would pro-port it from being approved by the Downtown Design Review committee. I hope we can get a group of folks to make these meetings to ENSURE that there's a reasonable counter to the good ole boy protectionism or at least get more transparency on the process and why the committee would deny an otherwise acceptable project.
    Oklahoma City, the RENAISSANCE CITY!

  14. #114

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    Quote Originally Posted by Urbanized View Post
    It's fine to disagree with his design opinions or his approach to this issue, but he is a pillar of the community who committed to downtown WAAAY before it was cool to do so, who has volunteered thousands of hours to our community, and who is in my experience a thoughtful, decent person. I think unsubstaniated suggestions of impropriety just because someone disagrees with someone else's opinions should be way out of bounds on this board. JMO. Disparaging individuals just because someone disagrees with them is a very bad look for OKCTalk. I think we should be above that.
    Don't care, RE is a dinosaur. OKC needs another or several more architectural visionaries, doesn't this city have more architectural firms or individuals from which to receiver building design ideas. Tired of Rand Elliot running roughshod over OKC design options

  15. Default Re: Broadway Park

    Again, I think assigning clear, self-interested motives borders on reckless character assassination. I've known Rand for a long time and believe it's pretty likely that he was wearing his Automobile Alley hat here rather than his Oklahoma Contemporary one. There is little he is more passionate about than Broadway Avenue. I also believe that calling this "good ole boy" politics is not correct. Rand himself has been on the wrong end of good ole boy politics. Again, just because you don't agree with someone's opinion or their decisions doesn't make it fair to go straight for the juglar and start denigrating them personally.

  16. #116

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    Quote Originally Posted by Urbanized View Post
    Again, I think assigning clear, self-interested motives borders on reckless character assassination. I've known Rand for a long time and believe it's pretty likely that he was wearing his Automobile Alley hat here rather than his Oklahoma Contemporary one. There is little he is more passionate about than Broadway Avenue. I also believe that calling this "good ole boy" politics is not correct. Rand himself has been on the wrong end of good ole boy politics. Again, just because you don't agree with someone's opinion or their decisions doesn't make it fair to go straight for the juglar and start denigrating them personally.
    It is preposterous to think about the numerous horrific developments that have been green lighted in this city over the past few years, the historic buildings that have been razed without firm replacements. Then, you have someone outside the club propose a quality development that would add life and value to a district that frankly needs more energy, and he is shot down by insiders. Not a good look.

  17. Default Re: Broadway Park

    ^^^^^^^^
    Again, two wrongs don't make a right.

  18. #118

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    Quote Originally Posted by Urbanized View Post
    ^^^^^^^^
    Again, two wrongs don't make a right.
    I think many are counting this projects disapproval as the second wrong.

    Honestly, I don't understand the disdain for the balconies. I know that new buildings are supposed to take their cues from the surrounding architecture, but does that really mean it shouldn't have any new design elements. Why are balconies such a sticking point? Seems to me they are an extension of the intent to create a vibrant district through design, so, imo, it's the example of a justifiable variance. Are they afraid some will try and add them to existing structures?

    I think that's why the other approvals get brought up. Some of what they approved didn't even try to integrate the design into the district or follow guidelines, They actually kind of fly in the face of them. This one clearly was a good faith effort to be more conforming, but it's getting picked apart. So that's kind of frustrating.

  19. #119

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    I agree. Like I said, I don't think the balconies will be an issue at all. I don't think anyone is going to look at this amazing building and think "hmmm, this building has balconies and others don't." Yet I bet people have looked at the parking garage by Dowel and thought it was ugly.

  20. #120

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    I am going to comment in both the Oklahoma Contemporary thread and on this subject.

    We are a close neighbor to the areas affected as our office is half a block down in 1015 where Coffee Slingers is located. Our company has been there for many years at this point and our group of employees and friends has had the chance to be exposed to what is right and what is wrong with Auto Alley.

    The big problem with Auto Alley is scale and the lack of architecture which generates activity. The street itself is too wide, the sidewalks are excessively sloped in areas. The front forward angle parking instead of back-in parking is incredibly dangerous. At night, activity is only stimulated by restaurants. There are no 'eyes on the street' due to the absence of residential building frontage.

    This building proposal is in a unique location because it is essentially transitional. The street goes from no vertical frontage due to the park and the vacant land to fairly consistent vertical frontage all the way south to fourth street.

    I believe that balconies would help facilitate energy in the area and help enable 'eyes on the street'. Quite frankly they are needed there with the park potentially being more activated than it currently is. Plus, the balconies break the building down more and the massing becomes more transitional from a visual standpoint.

    The trouble with the DDRC is it is made up with a great many egos who want to legislate design and demonstrate their social influence from the bench. Auto Alley design guidelines (if they exist in legal form) should be reevaluated to help stimulate urbanity and energy. Many of the buildings have been renovated or restored. Perhaps it's time to move our neighborhood into the next phase of development... one that is welcoming to the human scale.

  21. #121

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    Also.. what sorts of design precedents do all of these car dealerships and empty lots set in the section of AA being debated? What will Oklahoma Contemporary set? Using that as your case for denial is a complete, laughable canard.

  22. Default Re: Broadway Park

    ^^^^^^^^
    The car dealerships are north of the DBD/DTD-1 diving line, predate urban design standards, and as far as I know are not being used as a measuring stick for either Broadway Park or Oklahoma Contemporary.

  23. #123

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    Thanks for the clarification. At the same time, this also demostrates why the entire issue of standards needs to be reevaluated. There should be some flexibility on design in what is essentially a boundary of transition from one area to another.

  24. #124

    Default Re: Broadway Park

    Yes, it's a little ridiculous to be super strict here when on all sides but one, there is nothing even approaching urban design standards and in fact are the absolute opposite of those principles.

    It's not like this is in the middle of the district... It borders one building at the far north end and everything beyond looks like Memorial Road.

  25. Default Re: Broadway Park

    couldn't have said it better UP. Looks like one is using ones 'weight' and 'insider status' to push away a development that many may argue is better than his.

    To me, it appears Rand doesn't want this development because it will outshine his; he wants the entire area to be bland and outdated so it fits his 'contemporary' building and he's using his 'friends' on the DDRC to get what he wants (since it appears nobody at the meeting offered a counter argument that this new building offers OKC's true, best, new infill building in AAlley common-sense urban design).


    .... ....

    Personally, I think the OK Contemporary museum needs to be in the Arts District to feed the OKC Arts Museum

    but hey - we just randomly name districts in OKC based on some magazine, organization, or other city anyway so why bother. .. (ie, the NOW called Innovation District, which I think is the dumbest most small time thing - to name a 'working OHC after innovation because the org said it can be an innovation district'). ....
    Oklahoma City, the RENAISSANCE CITY!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Broadway 10
    By Pete in forum Restaurants & Bars
    Replies: 278
    Last Post: 03-13-2024, 04:26 PM
  2. 33rd and Broadway
    By Charlie40 in forum Edmond
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-16-2012, 03:35 PM
  3. Commons on Broadway
    By Pete in forum Development & Buildings
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-27-2012, 11:09 AM
  4. One Broadway Center
    By Pete in forum Development & Buildings
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-27-2012, 10:58 AM
  5. The Shoppes at Broadway
    By Tomfoolery in forum Suburban & Other OK Communities
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-21-2007, 02:46 PM

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