Re-visioning the Chamber Proposal

January 30th, 2009

By Blair Humphreys
August 2008
(for an explanation of the delayed posting, see here)

In 1939 Angelo C. Scott, an ‘89er and early civic leader, wrote in his book The Story of Oklahoma City:

“The Chamber of Commerce is the heart that pumps the life blood into the veins of the city. It is the hand-maid and the agent of the city, as vital to its progress as the city government is to its protection and control.”

These words are as true today as they were the day they were written. Following in the footsteps of men like Anton Classen, John Shartel, and Stanley Draper, today’s Chamber leadership has helped push Oklahoma City to new heights. The Chamber has been at the forefront of the City’s dramatic renaissance over the last fifteen years and now hopes to contribute directly to the revitalization of downtown by building a new headquarter’s building at the corner of Fourth and N. Broadway. Their vision calls for an iconic design capable of elevating the status of the Chamber and the City alike, while utilizing a site plan and layout that integrates the project into a rejuvenated downtown and provides for the growing needs of a 24/7 urban community.

The successful development of the new chamber building is critical to the sustained success of Oklahoma City’s ongoing renaissance. For many visitors to Downtown, the new Chamber building will shape their initial impressions of the City, as pointed out by civic leader and current Chamber Chairman Larry Nichols:

“The chamber is often the first place a new company comes when they look at investing in Oklahoma City, and the Convention and Visitors Bureau welcomes tourists from all over the world.  The new chamber building will truly be a front door to our community, a way to make a lasting first impression of this dynamic and vibrant city.”

More importantly, the Chamber building will be a model for future downtown development. This is one of the first major projects to be implemented under the City’s new Downtown Design Guidelines and will establish precedents responsible for shaping the future of Downtown’s urban environment. While the soon-to-be-constructed Devon Tower will certainly have a more noticeable effect on the City’s skyline, the new chamber building’s potential to positively influence the experience of pedestrians downtown is unmatched. The building will sit in a pivotal location at the nexus of multiple centers of downtown activity and the project presents a rare opportunity to improve downtown mobility by mending the historic urban fabric that was severed nearly four decades ago by the Pei Plan.

It is clear that improving the pedestrian experience downtown is now a major priority of the city. The aforementioned Downtown Design Guidelines were adopted with the intention of making OKC’s downtown a “vital mixed-use area” containing “a network of pleasant public spaces and pedestrian amenities.” The Chamber has thus far embraced this idea; Chamber President Roy Williams has indicated that he wants this project to be the start of a discussion on how to make the area more pedestrian friendly.

“The reality is that’s a troublesome intersection there,” Williams said. “When Gaylord was put through (in the early 1970s) it created unusual pieces of property and an unusual traffic configuration. It’s not pedestrian friendly. It’s not friendly for crossing. And we see where people might want to walk to us from their offices downtown or from the convention center.”

The Chamber has gone out of their way to ensure that the design for the site would live up to these lofty expectations. They reviewed design concepts from a handful of architects before selecting Allen Brown with Frankfurt-Short-Bruza. Brown’s architectural talent has already been demonstrated by his design for the Donald W. Reyolds Visual Arts Center. The project, which was completed in 2002, is home to the Oklahoma City Museum of Art and can be credited with helping to rejuvenate the city’s Arts District.

Despite the best efforts of the Chamber, the recently released designs for the new building (see below) do not meet their stated expectations, nor are they in keeping with the spirit of the city’s Downtown Design Guidelines.

The proposal calls for a 50,000 square foot building to be positioned away from the street, near the center of the three-acre site, and flanked by an expansive surface parking lot. The resulting density is problematic. With a floor area ratio (FAR) less that 0.40, the site will be less dense than a typical two-story suburban office complex. Further, the area’s need for pedestrian amenities and usable public space are not effectively met. The lack of density seemingly leaves a significant amount of area for this public space, but instead the land is either utilized for surface parking or is rendered useless to pedestrians as one of the small landscape buffers, each isolated by retaining walls that will prevent pedestrian use.

While the “Commerce Circle” appears to represent a significant pedestrian improvement, it is little more than an attempt to dress-up the six lanes of traffic that pedestrians will still be forced to cross. [Note: This aspect of the original plan is not present in the most recent site plan (shown above) and what remains of the circle has been renamed "Commerce Plaza".]  In the end, the proposal does little to improve pedestrian friendliness in the area and may even be seen to exacerbate the existing problems for persons walking to downtown from the Flatiron District by adding more surface parking and creating new barriers.

In truth, the majority of the responsibility for the current proposal’s problems belongs to neither the Chamber nor their very capable architect, rather it is a result of the fundamentally flawed planning done by I.M. Pei all those years ago. Pei’s plan was focused on making the central business district car-accessible. He never imagined that pedestrians would be attempting to cross what is now E.K Gaylord, so while he envisioned a pedestrian friendly central business district, the area east of Broadway was planned for cars. Fred Kent, the Founder and President of Project for Public Spaces, who spoke at Oklahoma City’s 2007 Mayor’s Development Round Table says:

“If you plan cities for cars and traffic, you get cars and traffic. If you plan for people and places, you get people and places.”

This has certainly been the case with this area of Oklahoma City. The only way for the objectives of the Downtown Design Guidelines to be met and the full vision of the Chamber leadership be realized is for I.M. Pei’s planning for “cars and traffic” to give way to new planning for “people and places.” The Chamber cannot be expected to fix these problems alone, but requires the partnership of the City – and the support of all those that desire a vital urban center – in boldly re-visioning this portion of downtown. Time is certainly an issue, and such a re-visioning will require some delays, but the new chamber building is of such importance that we must take whatever time is necessary to ensure that it is done right!

Continue reading: Re-visioning the Chamber Proposal, part II

For more on the planning of the Chamber site:

1. Re-visioning the Chamber Proposal
2. Re-visioning the Chamber Proposal, part II
3. Re-visioning the Chamber: Defining Objectives
4. Oklahoman Park: OKC’s First Great Public Space

7 responses

  1. Jason comments:

    Blair, I applaud you for posting this despite advice against doing so. As far as I’m concerned, the city should be clamoring to hire you as soon as you graduate, not blacklisting you because you pointed out flaws in the Chamber’s design.

    To address the issue at hand, the argument against reconfiguring the streets that EK Gaylord/Broadway is the primary north-south artery in downtown, and thus couldn’t be severed by having Gaylord run into 4th and dead end. What if Gaylord kept the same path but went underground for a couple blocks, thereby allowing for a park space above it?

    The easist fix though is to put structured parking and mixed use structures in the place of the surface lots.

  2. Shane comments:

    Great post. I don’t see them changing anything considering the craziness that surrounded the building’s approval, but we can hope. It really is strange when so many people in the city’s leadership are being spokespeople for pedestrian friendly design, but won’t push for it.

  3. Blair comments:

    Jason – Interesting idea about taking E.K. Gaylord underground. That would certainly solve the problem, but may be an overly expensive solution.

    As for the argument against reconfiguring the streets; this is something we are going to have to talk more about. I am still not sure who suggested dead-ending Gaylord into 4th street. I was part of the team that proposed placing a public square – along with the Chamber Building – at that corner, but our proposal did not include dead-ending Gaylord into 4th street. We had envisioned other solutions which I will share with everyone soon.

    Shane – I know what you mean, but it would be unfortunate if anyone – no matter their take on the issue – would move forward with the design if they knew it to be flawed in some way. We know planning staff feels the design is flawed. We know that at least one well respected architect/urban designer who spoke out – and believe me there are many more who kept similar opinions to themselves – feels the design is flawed. And I have to think that even the people that were pushing for its approval have doubts as to whether or not it is the best we can do. Hopefully everyone will be willing to expend the extra time and effort necessary to do something we can be proud of. Otherwise, we will have to live with this mistake for another 30 years!

  4. Blair Takes a Stand pings back:

    [...] and I now realize that I made a mistake last August, one which I wish I could have back. I wrote “Re-visioning the Chamber Proposal” on August 3rd, 2008, but never released it. At the time, the proposal was still weeks away from [...]

  5. Ernest comments:

    Blair,

    Thanks for at least revisiting this unfortunate episode of downtown OKC development. You’ve outlined very well why the chamber is so important to the city, which is why it’s so disappointing that it should go forward with a design its leaders know isn’t the best.

    The chamber understandably wants to meet prospective businesses in rooms that wonderfully face the skyline, but surely there must be a design that affords those views while still having a presence that fits its surroundings and maintains a sense of great public space.

    There is another flaw. I believe the plan was to house the Convention and Visitors Bureau there, and for this purpose, the site is not ideal. You should always place CVB offices in the thick of visitor (pedestrian) traffic; its present site is fine, and somewhere on Park Avenue would have been better. But on 4th and Gaylord, nobody walks there, except during events taking place on Auto Alley. People can stay at the Skirvin and not know that site exists.

  6. BatesLine tracks back:

    Applying imagiNATIVE thinking…

    Last September, the Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce won approval under that city’s downtown design guidelines for a new headquarters building at 4th and Gaylord, where Gaylord jogs left to connect to Broadway. Approval was controversial, because of …

  7. Guest Blog: Blair Humphreys pings back:

    [...] my first post on the new Chamber building, I argued that the Chamber’s current proposal is wholly inadequate given the objectives of the [...]

Leave a comment