Speck told residents of Memphis, “The biggest insult to your city is the MLGW headquarters.  Who would think to take a suburban office park and drop it in the middle of the city?”

It seems some in Oklahoma City are determined to make the same mistake.

From Joy in Mudville

This is in response to a post by Casey Cornett at Joy in Mudville concerning Jeff Speck and the Chamber building.  Here are a few of the key take-aways…

One of the great things about being at [the Jeff Speck] presentation was that I was there as a pedestrian, an urbanite, a downtown worker, a downtown walker (even though at times it seems i’m the only one) and also a downtown dreamer. I get excited about our future plans as a city and I get even more excited reading about core-to-shore.

And later continues:

The sad thing i’m starting to notice is that all the people who are strongly for greenspace are still focusing their efforts towards the 1 square block of privately owned [actually a portion of the land contributed by a public body - Urban Renewal] and privately funded Chamber building going in at 4th and EK Gaylord. Hasn’t that already been approved and moved on? Sure, there is still another (I believe just 1) date set on the beautification aspect of that space…but the building is still going there, let’s move on. The core-to-shore project will be bring roughly 20-square blocks of greenspace. Why can’t greenspace lovers and journalists focus on what has yet not been decided on instead of still arguing over the 1-square block to argue over.

In response,

Hey Mudville –

I share your excitement for Speck and his recommendations for walkability in OKC! I especially appreciate your enthusiasm for where the city is headed…it is great to hear native OKCers referring to themselves as urbanites!

Props to Mayor Cornett

I have said it before, but again, huge props to Mayor Cornett – not sure whether to say “your dad” or Mayor Cornett, so we are going to keep it formal – who brought in Speck to consult the city.  I think that this will have an extremely positive impact on the future quality of life in our city, especially the urban character of downtown.  Mayor Cornett deserves all of the credit for taking this step and I am really excited to experience OKC when these ideas have been  implemented.

“Move On”? But…

I am curious about the position you take on the Chamber Building, telling everyone to “move on”. It seems like someone enthused by Speck’s ideas wouldn’t be so quick to look past a project that will permanently hinder walkability at a critical connection in a burgeoning area of downtown. Speck himself has commented on the poor site layout of the Chamber proposal and every OKC urbanist that has expressed a position on the issue either questions the design and/or the way it was ushered through review despite violating the downtown design guidelines.

Simplifying the matter as being only about the quantity of green space doesn’t seem fair. Ultimately the underlying issues have more to do with walkability and good urbanism than green space, and the current Chamber proposal fails to deliver either.  Still, even within this simplistic framework, the idea that the Central Park will benefit the people in NE downtown the way a properly designed Chamber site would is certainly not true.  Quantity matters, but surely location is still a variable worth considering.  How will a new Central Park over 1/2 mile away serve people in the same way that a park across the street would?

Public Works is to Blame

That said, the Chamber DOES NOT deserve the majority of the blame for the resulting plan. I think it is worth noting that the same Public Works Department that has regularly been called into question by Speck when it comes to aspects of good urban design, walkability and Indy 500 like downtown traffic capacity, also played a major role in the design of the Chamber site. The Chamber actually attempted to do a siteplan that dealt directly with pedestrian issues: re-establishing the grid, improving pedestrian connections, and providing a terrific public space to serve the surrounding neighborhoods (not really pure green space so much as an urban square). But Public Works knowingly exaggerated the traffic challenges presented by this scheme, whipped up a flawed traffic analysis, and subsequently told the Chamber that the design was a “bad idea”.  So in truth, the Chamber deserves credit for their initial attempt, even if the continued commitment to good urban design was ultimately lacking. Public Works on the other hand has some explaining to do.

OKCers Deserve Better Than Okay

The Chamber may legally have all the approval they need to build the building as designed, but the people of OKC don’t owe them their added blessing, not on a project and process that falls short on so many levels. If the Chamber wants to do what best for the current and future users of Downtown Oklahoma City they will use the current delay to reconsider the design.  They should call into question the soundness of the advice they received from a Public Works department that – while doing an excellent job for most of the city – does not know much of anything about good urbanism.  Oklahoma City is better than an okay city – its a GREAT CITY, with great people that deserve a great downtown.  So why do we have to settle for something that falls short of this measure?

Okay, lets get down to it. In the first post I argued that the current Chamber building proposal is flawed and requires a new approach. Part II laid out some basic information on the site and hopefully convinced you of its importance to downtown as the nexus between multiple urban districts.

Now, lets establish what the Chamber site should be; laying out what the plan for the site needs to accomplish and what elements must be incorporated into this plan.

WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH

It is impossible to plan the site without a clear understanding of what we are trying to achieve. Here, two things matter. First, there are the objectives of the Chamber, made up of their needs and desires for the building and site. But these objectives cannot be established in isolation; they must relate to the broader goals we are pursuing within downtown and the areas surrounding the site. An understanding of these broader goals combined with the requirements of the Chamber should give us the information needed to put forth a realistic proposal that meets the objectives of all parties.

One element the Chamber hopes to incorporate into their plan is a public space to honor OKC business leaders.

CHAMBER BUILDING OBJECTIVES

The Chamber has expressed a number of goals for the project that are specific to their needs, mission and prominent role in Oklahoma City. Based on the information about the project that has appeared thus far, I have created this list of objectives and requirements:

• building of approx. 50,000 square feet
• maintain views of historic Oklahoman Building
• create a “front door” for the community
• allow people to walk from convention center
• an iconic design
• includes a public space/plaza to honor business leaders
• convenient parking

BROADER DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES

It requires a lengthy process, collaborating with multiple stakeholder groups, to establish a set of broader goals for a community, a process that this blog has neither the time nor capacity to take on. Thankfully though, such a process has already taken place and provides an acceptable framework to guide the broader objectives of our plan.

One of the most repeated goals stated by leaders of the OKC community is to make Downtown more pedestrian-friendly.

The Downtown Design District (§ 59-7200) guidelines have these five stated objectives:

(1) promote the development and redevelopment of the downtown area in a manner consistent with the unique and diverse design elements of downtown;

(2) ensure that a DBD use is compatible with the commercial, cultural, historical, and governmental significance of downtown;

(3) promote the downtown area as a vital mixed-use area;

(4) create a network of pleasant public spaces and pedestrian amenities in the downtown area, and;

(5) enhance existing structures, preserve and restore historic features, and circulation patterns in the downtown area.

It is probably not fair to judge by legal language alone. However, the message from the downtown community has been very consistent in supporting these goals across the board. For instance, a quick scan of the internet found quotes from city leaders, real estate professionals, planners and more; all reaffirming that #4 – making the city more “pedestrian-friendly” – is not only one of the codified objectives, but a genuine goal of people from across the downtown community.

Here are a range of quotes from across the city that echo the priorities of the Downtown Design guidelines:

…The city is trying to change into a city that is less sprawling, has more density and is more pedestrian friendly…

- Mick Cornett, Mayor of Oklahoma City

Pedestrian traffic has to be addressed. For two years, I have been a downtown walker from West Main to Midtown to Bricktown all the way to the river. We need to improve our core to make it more pedestrian friendly. This also includes bicycles now. The new bike rack plan for Bricktown is a step in the right direction…I am a proponent of walking outside. I think it creates energy on the streets. Although the Underground is a nice alternative for very windy or cold or rainy days, I like to see people on the streets. This is also good for our tourism. We need to encourage people to walk … might help their health, too….improving our pedestrian traffic needs to be on the agenda for further discussion including input from urban neighbors and downtown workers.

- Judy Hatfield, Downtown Developer

Pedestrian issues are very big on our priority list.

- Jeff Bezdek, Urban Neighbors (Downtown’s Neighborhood Association)

Pedestrian flow is the real key to the overall success of not only Core to Shore, but also the sustained viability of the other points of interest our city has to offer to locals and out-of-towners as well. We have the ability in Oklahoma City to mitigate a lot of the horror stories other markets have seen by learning from their mistakes and being proactive. Our CBD is small enough that if you’re a tourist and coming into town for an NBA game, or an NCAA event, you could conceivably take in everything from Bricktown to Midtown to Core to Shore on foot over the course of a weekend.

- Brent Conway, CB Richard Ellis

We want to create more of an urban feeling. – Framing the streets and providing for a more secure sense of a pedestrian life. It’s not suburban in style.

- Terry Taylor, formerly of the Oklahoma City Planning Department

ELEMENTS OF THE PLAN

Reading through the objectives of both the Chamber and the broader downtown community, you see that at a base-level there is not much conflict. The requirements for the building do not indicate that it would have to, in anyway, detract from the type of downtown we desire. In fact, the Chamber is more or less the ideal partner, hoping to create a high quality building, include public space, provide for pedestrian connectivity, and preserve historic assets. The only element that there is not a conclusive agreement on is the mixture of uses within the building. The city rightly encourages “mixed-use” because it contributes to a thriving downtown and creates opportunities for urban retail. However, the Chamber building is in some ways a true civic building – not dissimilar from a courthouse or city hall. So perhaps the absence of a mixture of uses in the Chamber building is not only acceptable, but appropriate.

Now that we have identified the objectives of all parties and established that there are no conflicts to resolve, it is fairly simple to construct a list of what the Chamber site plan should include.

Designed by Layton & Smith and constructed in 1909, the Oklahoman Building remains one of OKC’s most beautiful buildings.

THE CHAMBER SITE PLAN SHOULD:

(1) Provide for a prominently positioned “iconic” building – 50,000 sf in size – welcoming visitors to the city

(2) Preserve views of the historic Oklahoman Building on the northeast corner of 4th and Broadway

(3) Create suitable pedestrian connections, especially along Broadway between the CBD/Bricktown areas and the Automobile Alley/Memorial area, and between the residential neighborhoods east of the site and the rest of downtown, along 3rd and/or 4th street

(4) Serve as the impetus for additional development adjacent to the Site to create a vital mixed-use area. Opportunities include the redevelopment of the drive-thru bank south of the site, the development of the parking lot northwest of the site, and the potential enhancement of Automobile Alley as a retail/mixed-use corridor.

(5) Provide convenient parking that is appropriate within the urban context of the site

(6) Allow room for a great public space that not only provides an opportunity to honor Oklahoma City’s business leaders, but significantly enhances the civic quality of life for the entire community. Its a place to congregate, to celebrate, to relax, or to play. It should be a great urban public space – an outdoor community living room!

Oddly enough, Oklahoma City once had just such a public space – our first downtown park – and it was located at 4th and Broadway.

Continue reading: Oklahoman Park: OKC’s First Great Public Space!

—

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

Discovery of the Chamber building’s new name got me to thinking, 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 initial urban design review and I hoped to contribute to the dialogue, or more accurately, initiate a dialogue about the proposal and the constraints placed on the project by the flawed planning of the I.M. Pei Plan. But then, after receiving advice that it would damage my future job prospects in OKC, I chose to stay silent.

It is a tough deal because I love Oklahoma City. I have always dreamed of helping to shape the future of the city and want to make it great – that is why I left development to pursue a career in planning. As a student of history I appreciate and respect the vital role the Chamber has played – and continues to play – in Oklahoma City’s rise from train depot, to State Capitol, to Big League City. However, I have never felt right about the way I stayed quiet on this issue. From now on, I will not back down from contributing my thoughts on contentious issues, but I will try to do so in the most respectful manner possible.

So, is it even worth talking about now?…yes, I think so! While the Chamber has all of the necessary approvals to move forward, construction has yet to start and still looks to be months away, providing an opportunity to reconsider whether the current proposal is the best we can do. While this conversation begins much later than it should have…perhaps it is not too late!

Continue to Re-visioning the Chamber Proposal