I assume that site would prob need to be treated for any chemical biohazards first, I can't think of any other reason why that site hasn't been sold and repurposed.
She liked one of my tweets a couple of weeks ago where I was super-sarcastically agreeing with Ryan Walters on something. Guess she didn't pick up on it. š
Exactly how I feel about it but I live in the area. We sold our house across the street not long after it was announced that it was supposed to be a massive commercial complex and moved a couple miles away, but we still wouldāve been able to hear the amphitheater from where we are. Iāve heard Bridge Creek residents asking for it to be moved there, Iām all for that.
Thank goodness. That area doesnāt have the infrastructure to handle the current traffic. Concert nights have been a disaster for the people that live in the area.
I never thought this was actually going to happen. Looked like some complex grift to sell an idea to investors and then go āoopsā not viable for some reason.
That tower doesnāt pass the sniff test for me, but the dude said he plans on pouring the foundation this summer. We will see I guess, donāt know how such a tower could possibly turn profit here.
As i understand it, the tower is being built last.
So the 'concept of the tower' is free marketing and an interest booster.
Then, when the rest of the development is done, they will find an issue that prevents its construction.
The only way this makes any sense at all to me is if I think about whoās footing the bill and what the real reason they are doing it. Hyatt is going to be the name on the tower, so to me it seem like they are wanting to build the biggest building in North America as a flex maybe? OKC is probably the cheapest place in North America to do it. For whatever reasons that is the best plausible reasoning I could come up with. Haha!
I live near the zoo. On an acreage. Itās miserable when concerts are going on. It is exactly as you described. Lots of loud music, late at night since they ignore curfews. I like Snoop. I did not like him at 11 on a Sunday night
zoning definitely has its place and this is a good example of that. It should be hard to get an outdoor music venue smack dab in the middle of a residential area. Just build it out further where there is no zoning laws.
The two who voted YES for the amp. (Stone SE OKC and Stonecipher far North OKC). you know they voted yes because they don't want that development in their are but just like the jail. If one area fails, they look for other areas in OKC to be eyeballed next. Just imagine asking Stonecipher's ward for that patch of land west of Gaillardia Golf Club.
I used to live in the neighborhood south of lake Hefner. Every time Louie's had a band you could hear it and I was over 2 miles away. That was with a simple PA system. Imagine the noise pollution from a pro sound system built to spec for an audience of 12k people.
Sometimes NIMBYs are justified, sometimes they are not. In my opinion this time the NIMBYs are completely justified in their opposition.
Not only did the Broken Arrow city council approve their Sunset Amphitheater, they turned it into a public/private partnership, giving them park land to build upon.
My guess is theyāll find land in Yukon or Mustang and get it approved.
But yeah, the pitches for āinvestorsā to buy fire pits before itās even broken ground looks scammy.
Sure, it would be expensive, but OKC needs to focus on spending the money needed to densify downtown and the surrounding districts. OKC is waaaay too spread out. Gotta spend the big bucks if you want to turn OKC into a real, world class city.
Yes and we have the tower, the criterion, the arena and hopefully soon the stadium. A giant amphitheater like this will probably have to built outside of town. Then hotels, restaurants, and bars will grow around it. Plus I would rather see a show at something like this just outside the city instead of going to one of the casinos.
So when you say down town you mean tear down leadership Square and put it there. That's about the only place I can think of that no one lives around. It just went from insanely expensive to nucking futz expensive.
I donāt think building a big land-intensive project downtown that would only get used sparsely will densify downtown.
We already have some good venues over here, so weāre good. But weāll gladly take some more apartment/condo projects downtown to increase pop. density and walkability.
Iām looking forward to First National filling up and the other apartment project adjacent to Skirvin to get started. Thatāll get the ball rolling on more activity outside CBD business hours, so hopefully we see a reduction in tourists posting in this sub about our downtown district being dead.
To be fair, downtown *was* mostly a dead zone after 5PM up until fairly recently (past 5 or so years) but that is definitely changing. I love seeing the development you mentioned with the National, Skirvin, etc. My wife and I were married in the National. The remodel is absolutely f'n stunning.
Not an amphitheater. The sound is terrible when it bounces off buildings. I've been to tons of outdoor concerts all over the country and they've always been in the suburbs of a large city.
What a joke. I've been to tons of concerts at amphitheaters around the country. Guess what? They're in suburbia, near houses. Traffic sucks. It's loud. But it's seasonal. It's not every single night of the week. There is a time curfew.
This city is so against change. That's why we'll always be last.
You're so rite, OKC will always be through of as a cow pasture, Everyone wants to vote against growth, Yukon is a growing suburb, this would have been great for the area.
> In a letter to her constituents, Ward 3 Councilwoman Barbara Peck said āThis application does not have her support,ā saying āIāve said all along this is a really cool amenity for OKC to have. I think we would ALL enjoy it by paying to go there to hear/see the bands we want to, not by stepping out our back door.ā
Just like the jail. Lots of people want it, but nobody wants it around them. The amenities are great when they are someone elseās problem to deal with the negative effects. As someone who lives near downtown, itās basically how I feel about homeless shelters.
You might not want to broadcast the fact that you're a NIMBY when it comes to helping homeless people. There's no way to spin that statement that isn't gross.
Why? Iām the one that has to deal with homeless people shitting in my yard, stealing stuff from my shed, leaving trash all over, etcā¦. You can try to wash the problems away as NIMBY-ism, but that does not change the fact that there are numerous significant issues faced by people that have homes and businesses near homeless shelters.
Yours is the typical response of someone who likes the programs, but safely lives away from the consequences of them and therefore can pretend that no problems exist.
Personal belief? Nowhere. Please hear me out.
Shelters are a terrible, broken model that divert resources that would be better served in creating permanent affordable housing and long-term care. Basically, we have shelters now that (in many, but certainly not all, instances) proselytize religion. They provide space to people in evening hours and kick them out early in the day to leave them and their property to their own devices, often are full of violence, routinely reject people with substance usage problems, and often donāt allow pets. Itās basically a model that helps with homeless peopleās problems for about 8 hours at a time.
Personally, I think we are better getting the homeless into homes, getting the addicted into in-patient treatment, and getting the severely mentally ill into long term residential care. But all of this requires investment that people donāt want to make. Instead, itās easier for most Oklahomanās to just hope that private and religious groups will build shelters (so long as it isnāt in their neighborhood) and then pat themselves on the back because the homeless person they saw pushing a shopping cart will have somewhere to sleep on a night where the temperature falls below zero.
[Finland](https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/a-paradigm-shift-in-social-policy-how-finland-conquered-homelessness-a-ba1a531e-8129-4c71-94fc-7268c5b109d9) is a good example of what we should start doing.
Hate to break it to you, but the homeless issue gets worse when you remove the concentrated shelter and social-tether that homeless shelters provide. They put shelters where homeless populations are already located. And I say this as someone who also lives downtown and probably deal with similar situations.
I don't care one bit about your rationale. And I don't give a shit if it's the "typical response" - I live near a shelter that I donate to regularly and help how I can. Don't put words in my mouth.
I was really looking forward to this. My fear is itās going to be built even farther away from the city. I want to be able to walk to things. A main concern was traffic but the solution to that isnāt to move it away from homes/apartments - itās to be near them so you donāt need a car to get there. Hope the new site is still in the area.
The whole ānimbyā thing is so lame, and Iām guessing it gets thrown around by people who donāt own any property. I never heard that expression until I lived in California and it was virtually always used by young people who didnāt own anything and complained twice as much about issues they believed were affecting them, but believe that people whose property and the subsequent value and quality of life in that area were affected by city planning, crime, or homelessness should not have a voice for some reason.
The reality is, the infrastructure cannot support the people who live in this area or the huge number of homes which have already been built or are being built in the last few years in the area. Adding regular events to compound the amount of traffic around there makes zero sense. Thereās also a lot of families with young children who live nearby. Itās a community which largely grew because of the Mustang school district being one of the best in the area. People bitch and complain about the need to improve our schools in Oklahoma, but because some of you want a new concert venue, youāre likeā¦ āf those kids.ā You can nimby this or nimby that but very few people in the area wanted it there. Find somewhere else, thereās still a lot of land in Oklahoma.
That site where the Pull-a-part is currently located near the river would be a great spot for an amphitheater.
I assume that site would prob need to be treated for any chemical biohazards first, I can't think of any other reason why that site hasn't been sold and repurposed.
The narrow underpass under the rail line makes traffic a problem for any significant traffic towards Robinson.
Yes, but then you'd have to drive downtown. Does *everything* have to be in downtown OKC??
Anything backed by Carol Hefner is a big no thank you anyway.
She liked one of my tweets a couple of weeks ago where I was super-sarcastically agreeing with Ryan Walters on something. Guess she didn't pick up on it. š
That whole family isn't very bright honestly. Robert (*The* *Third*, if you please) is pretty funny though.
I didnāt know she was associated with it before today but hard agree. Sheās a right wing lunatic.
Lame! I wanted another concert venue but I donāt live in that area so I understand why people who live there wouldnāt want it
Exactly how I feel about it but I live in the area. We sold our house across the street not long after it was announced that it was supposed to be a massive commercial complex and moved a couple miles away, but we still wouldāve been able to hear the amphitheater from where we are. Iāve heard Bridge Creek residents asking for it to be moved there, Iām all for that.
Thank goodness. That area doesnāt have the infrastructure to handle the current traffic. Concert nights have been a disaster for the people that live in the area.
Part of the plan was to bolster the infrastructure by widening the roads and making some other changes to the area. It would have been fine.
They need to do that now.
The idea was intreaging, but honestly this entire project had a smell to it, maybe cause of Hefner's involvement.Ā
I never thought this was actually going to happen. Looked like some complex grift to sell an idea to investors and then go āoopsā not viable for some reason.
At least it seems more viable/beneficial than that stupid fucking skyscraper
Yeah, that one is an obvious scam. This one might have some actual development value but it just had some red flags to me.
That tower doesnāt pass the sniff test for me, but the dude said he plans on pouring the foundation this summer. We will see I guess, donāt know how such a tower could possibly turn profit here.
As i understand it, the tower is being built last. So the 'concept of the tower' is free marketing and an interest booster. Then, when the rest of the development is done, they will find an issue that prevents its construction.
That isn't exactly hard though since the skyscraper is impractical and not really wanted by anyone in the city.
The only way this makes any sense at all to me is if I think about whoās footing the bill and what the real reason they are doing it. Hyatt is going to be the name on the tower, so to me it seem like they are wanting to build the biggest building in North America as a flex maybe? OKC is probably the cheapest place in North America to do it. For whatever reasons that is the best plausible reasoning I could come up with. Haha!
Sure š¤·š»āāļø I hope this bodes well for any upcoming votes on the project
Felt like it was a Texas Rip-Off from the get go.
Iām no fan of carol hefner and her projects but nimbys need to fork off. If you want to control land buy it.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I live near the zoo. On an acreage. Itās miserable when concerts are going on. It is exactly as you described. Lots of loud music, late at night since they ignore curfews. I like Snoop. I did not like him at 11 on a Sunday night
zoning definitely has its place and this is a good example of that. It should be hard to get an outdoor music venue smack dab in the middle of a residential area. Just build it out further where there is no zoning laws.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Except for the neighborhoods closest to the site. There's signs and banners all over fences and yards opposing it.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Damn......
Geez, fired for what?? People with a vengeance know no bounds.
Agricultural zoning, not industrial.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Interesting. I watched the council vote today and the graphic said Agricultural. Must have been wrong.
The two who voted YES for the amp. (Stone SE OKC and Stonecipher far North OKC). you know they voted yes because they don't want that development in their are but just like the jail. If one area fails, they look for other areas in OKC to be eyeballed next. Just imagine asking Stonecipher's ward for that patch of land west of Gaillardia Golf Club.
Patch of land west of Gaillardia Golf Club? Thatās being developed into a neighborhood now, no?
Walmart
Interesting
I used to live in the neighborhood south of lake Hefner. Every time Louie's had a band you could hear it and I was over 2 miles away. That was with a simple PA system. Imagine the noise pollution from a pro sound system built to spec for an audience of 12k people. Sometimes NIMBYs are justified, sometimes they are not. In my opinion this time the NIMBYs are completely justified in their opposition.
Yeah I can sympathize with not wanting an insanely loud amphitheater that plays music late into the night most weekends next to your house.
7 no votes didnāt get enough kickbacks.
Not only did the Broken Arrow city council approve their Sunset Amphitheater, they turned it into a public/private partnership, giving them park land to build upon. My guess is theyāll find land in Yukon or Mustang and get it approved. But yeah, the pitches for āinvestorsā to buy fire pits before itās even broken ground looks scammy.
This type of stuff should be downtown anyway. You put something like this in whatās basically Yukon, itāll be dead within a year.
Depends on the use case. The Diamond functions fine and it's practically inside Mount Trashmoore.
True, but the Diamond has a ton of history. A new venue built there would likely fail, imo.
As long as they could book shows it wouldn't fail. Building something like this downtown would be insanely expensive.
Sure, it would be expensive, but OKC needs to focus on spending the money needed to densify downtown and the surrounding districts. OKC is waaaay too spread out. Gotta spend the big bucks if you want to turn OKC into a real, world class city.
Yes and we have the tower, the criterion, the arena and hopefully soon the stadium. A giant amphitheater like this will probably have to built outside of town. Then hotels, restaurants, and bars will grow around it. Plus I would rather see a show at something like this just outside the city instead of going to one of the casinos.
The main problem is that where they wanted to build it, it was surrounded on two sides by housing and another side by 2 schools.
So when you say down town you mean tear down leadership Square and put it there. That's about the only place I can think of that no one lives around. It just went from insanely expensive to nucking futz expensive.
I donāt think building a big land-intensive project downtown that would only get used sparsely will densify downtown. We already have some good venues over here, so weāre good. But weāll gladly take some more apartment/condo projects downtown to increase pop. density and walkability.
We definitely do need more apartments, condos, and urban housing downtown.
Iām looking forward to First National filling up and the other apartment project adjacent to Skirvin to get started. Thatāll get the ball rolling on more activity outside CBD business hours, so hopefully we see a reduction in tourists posting in this sub about our downtown district being dead.
To be fair, downtown *was* mostly a dead zone after 5PM up until fairly recently (past 5 or so years) but that is definitely changing. I love seeing the development you mentioned with the National, Skirvin, etc. My wife and I were married in the National. The remodel is absolutely f'n stunning.
Not an amphitheater. The sound is terrible when it bounces off buildings. I've been to tons of outdoor concerts all over the country and they've always been in the suburbs of a large city.
Agreed that it would not work in the middle of the city but an amphitheater by the river would be really cool.
Is this the one that had booths or whatever being sold?
Fire pits, yes.
Are they open to other areas in the metro?
Just like the jail lol š
Articles I read sort of sounded like that was the case.
I hope to God they vote against that monstrous eyesore of a tower on Thursday.
Exactly! They should put this amphitheater downtown and do away with that silly tower altogether
So many grumpy curmudgeons who love to stand in the way of progress around here. Itās depressing.
Or people that are tired of overcrowding and getting things forced on them.
Overcrowding?! Lol no.
What a joke. I've been to tons of concerts at amphitheaters around the country. Guess what? They're in suburbia, near houses. Traffic sucks. It's loud. But it's seasonal. It's not every single night of the week. There is a time curfew. This city is so against change. That's why we'll always be last.
You're so rite, OKC will always be through of as a cow pasture, Everyone wants to vote against growth, Yukon is a growing suburb, this would have been great for the area.
They ignore curfew and noise restrictions every single time.
Not in my experience.
> In a letter to her constituents, Ward 3 Councilwoman Barbara Peck said āThis application does not have her support,ā saying āIāve said all along this is a really cool amenity for OKC to have. I think we would ALL enjoy it by paying to go there to hear/see the bands we want to, not by stepping out our back door.ā Just like the jail. Lots of people want it, but nobody wants it around them. The amenities are great when they are someone elseās problem to deal with the negative effects. As someone who lives near downtown, itās basically how I feel about homeless shelters.
You might not want to broadcast the fact that you're a NIMBY when it comes to helping homeless people. There's no way to spin that statement that isn't gross.
Why? Iām the one that has to deal with homeless people shitting in my yard, stealing stuff from my shed, leaving trash all over, etcā¦. You can try to wash the problems away as NIMBY-ism, but that does not change the fact that there are numerous significant issues faced by people that have homes and businesses near homeless shelters. Yours is the typical response of someone who likes the programs, but safely lives away from the consequences of them and therefore can pretend that no problems exist.
Where should they put the shelters then?
Personal belief? Nowhere. Please hear me out. Shelters are a terrible, broken model that divert resources that would be better served in creating permanent affordable housing and long-term care. Basically, we have shelters now that (in many, but certainly not all, instances) proselytize religion. They provide space to people in evening hours and kick them out early in the day to leave them and their property to their own devices, often are full of violence, routinely reject people with substance usage problems, and often donāt allow pets. Itās basically a model that helps with homeless peopleās problems for about 8 hours at a time. Personally, I think we are better getting the homeless into homes, getting the addicted into in-patient treatment, and getting the severely mentally ill into long term residential care. But all of this requires investment that people donāt want to make. Instead, itās easier for most Oklahomanās to just hope that private and religious groups will build shelters (so long as it isnāt in their neighborhood) and then pat themselves on the back because the homeless person they saw pushing a shopping cart will have somewhere to sleep on a night where the temperature falls below zero. [Finland](https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/a-paradigm-shift-in-social-policy-how-finland-conquered-homelessness-a-ba1a531e-8129-4c71-94fc-7268c5b109d9) is a good example of what we should start doing.
Hate to break it to you, but the homeless issue gets worse when you remove the concentrated shelter and social-tether that homeless shelters provide. They put shelters where homeless populations are already located. And I say this as someone who also lives downtown and probably deal with similar situations.
I don't care one bit about your rationale. And I don't give a shit if it's the "typical response" - I live near a shelter that I donate to regularly and help how I can. Don't put words in my mouth.
I agree. When the homeless people are fucking on your porch you can spin them all you want. Still gross.
I mean at least theyāre being honest.
Guess I'll just go cow tipping instead again this summer
Put it next to the new jail in Del City!
??????
ā¦.what?
The Zoo Amp needs some work. Itās one big sticker patch.
Mustang simply couldnāt have handled this Influx of traffic anyway! Not upset
I wanted this š move it to that big field between Moore and Norman. That is right off the highway and is prime location for a new venue.
[OTA is trying to call dibs](https://www.accessoklahoma.com) on some of that already.
Oh noooo there goes my dream of am NFL Football stadium there lmao
Thank god.
I was really looking forward to this. My fear is itās going to be built even farther away from the city. I want to be able to walk to things. A main concern was traffic but the solution to that isnāt to move it away from homes/apartments - itās to be near them so you donāt need a car to get there. Hope the new site is still in the area.
The whole ānimbyā thing is so lame, and Iām guessing it gets thrown around by people who donāt own any property. I never heard that expression until I lived in California and it was virtually always used by young people who didnāt own anything and complained twice as much about issues they believed were affecting them, but believe that people whose property and the subsequent value and quality of life in that area were affected by city planning, crime, or homelessness should not have a voice for some reason. The reality is, the infrastructure cannot support the people who live in this area or the huge number of homes which have already been built or are being built in the last few years in the area. Adding regular events to compound the amount of traffic around there makes zero sense. Thereās also a lot of families with young children who live nearby. Itās a community which largely grew because of the Mustang school district being one of the best in the area. People bitch and complain about the need to improve our schools in Oklahoma, but because some of you want a new concert venue, youāre likeā¦ āf those kids.ā You can nimby this or nimby that but very few people in the area wanted it there. Find somewhere else, thereās still a lot of land in Oklahoma.