"Heart of Southdown"?

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

I seem to remember a theater right in the middle of brookside...

There was a theater on Cherry Street as well.

[Gaspar]

Riverwalk didn't explode until the theater opened.

[azbadpuppy]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

From my experience the very first thing developers do after purchasing land is tear out all the trees and flatten the landscape (happening right now at 101 & memorial and 106th). That's already done downtown so they should feel comfortable.

What you are describing is the old Williams Center Forum with multiple screens. It was popular, had convenient adjacent parking and multiple floors of retail and restaurants surrounding an ice skating rink. It was cool and novel for the times. Different times I know and downtown was still filled with Williams employees but still.....

Dickinson theaters was alone for years out on Memorial. Years. Regal Plaza was only recently developed and more because Bixby and that area of Tulsa is growing so fast, NOT because of the theater. Someone has to offer a counter view of reality, go ahead and blast me, but it seems simplistic to think that multi screen movie theaters are the catalyst for development. They are part of the recipe but not the yeast.

I have to agree with you that theaters are not a catalyst. IMO, the answer to successful downtown development actually lies in its parking and transit situations, not large multiscreen movie theaters- those only really do well where large numbers of people live anyway. Why would a large number of Tulsans drive downtown specifically to see a movie when the same movies are playing all over town at a theater close to home? The Forum already failed downtown, and another good example is the failure of the Arizona Center and Mercado shopping centers in downtown Phoenix- very similar projects to the Forum in Tulsa, but outdoors.

For an example of a successful downtown miltiplex theater look to Denver. The pavillions is adjacent to the 16th street mall, which has dozens of restaurants, shops, bars, hotels, etc. The mall was there long before the theater- but Denver also has an estimated 70,000 people living in its downtown.

The biggest mistake Phoenix, Tulsa, and many other downtowns have made is supplying too much parking in their downtowns. Parking only creates a bubble environment, in which people drive in, park, go straight into their destinations, then run back to their car and leave straight afterwards. There is no foot traffic, no patronizing the smaller businesses downtown, no street life at all. Phoenix has literally spent billions trying to revitalize their downtown, and along with a new ballpark, new arena, new shopping malls, parks, plazas, etc etc they built massive parking structures all over DT. The result? Downtown is still pretty much a ghost town. There is still no grocery store(!) or any significant retail at all. It is slowly improving, but I believe it won't really get any better until ASU opens their downtown campus with 15,000 students,(most living DT without cars) and the opening of the light rail.

Denver, however, did not build a lot of new parking to go along with all of the massive development in their revitalized downtown areas (specifically LODO). The result? A thriving pedestrian oriented 24 hour downtown. People are basically forced to take public transit to ball games, shopping, etc. Parking is so difficult in downtown Denver, suburbanites will actually take the train/bus to events. This totally encourages them to stroll and linger DT and actually patronize the other businesses. Something like 90 bars/restaurants sprung up around Coors field after it opened because of all the foot traffic around it. Granted, Denver has a light rail and very good transit system, but Tulsa needs to do something similar if Downtown is to ever become a true 'destination'.

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy


I have to agree with you that theaters are not a catalyst. IMO, the answer to successful downtown development actually lies in its parking and transit situations, not large multiscreen movie theaters- those only really do well where large numbers of people live anyway. Why would a large number of Tulsans drive downtown specifically to see a movie when the same movies are playing all over town at a theater close to home? The Forum already failed downtown, and another good example is the failure of the Arizona Center and Mercado shopping centers in downtown Phoenix- very similar projects to the Forum in Tulsa, but outdoors.

For an example of a successful downtown miltiplex theater look to Denver. The pavillions is adjacent to the 16th street mall, which has dozens of restaurants, shops, bars, hotels, etc. The mall was there long before the theater- but Denver also has an estimated 70,000 people living in its downtown.

The biggest mistake Phoenix, Tulsa, and many other downtowns have made is supplying too much parking in their downtowns. Parking only creates a bubble environment, in which people drive in, park, go straight into their destinations, then run back to their car and leave straight afterwards. There is no foot traffic, no patronizing the smaller businesses downtown, no street life at all. Phoenix has literally spent billions trying to revitalize their downtown, and along with a new ballpark, new arena, new shopping malls, parks, plazas, etc etc they built massive parking structures all over DT. The result? Downtown is still pretty much a ghost town. There is still no grocery store(!) or any significant retail at all. It is slowly improving, but I believe it won't really get any better until ASU opens their downtown campus with 15,000 students,(most living DT without cars) and the opening of the light rail.

Denver, however, did not build a lot of new parking to go along with all of the massive development in their revitalized downtown areas (specifically LODO). The result? A thriving pedestrian oriented 24 hour downtown. People are basically forced to take public transit to ball games, shopping, etc. Parking is so difficult in downtown Denver, suburbanites will actually take the train/bus to events. This totally encourages them to stroll and linger DT and actually patronize the other businesses. Something like 90 bars/restaurants sprung up around Coors field after it opened because of all the foot traffic around it. Granted, Denver has a light rail and very good transit system, but Tulsa needs to do something similar if Downtown is to ever become a true 'destination'.

Pup,
Forum didn't fail.  It was closed to make room for the new trading facility.

You have good points.  But you can't force a vehicle society like Tulsa to change.  That takes decades of increased population density.

The occasional ball game or concert will only make downtown an occasional destination.  The idea behind successful LBE is regular and recurring traffic.

As kids my friends and I would venture to the Forum every weekend to see movies and walk around down town even though Woodland Hills and Southroads were right down the road.  Being in downtown was just cool!  

People don't just go to a movie.  They go "out".  Driving to Dickenson for some good food at Michael Vs and then seeing a movie sounds like a good evening, but if the wife and I can go downtown for a nice dinner, movie, the lights of the city, drinks, a stroll, and some shopping, that's a date!  That would become a regular activity.  

You're right about a "bubble destination" I can get downtown from 91st street in 10 minutes or less.  As long as I can do that, it will be hard to pressure me to take public transportation.  So rather than force changes on people, why not take advantage of the fact that Tulsa is easy to get around, and capture that traffic for a longer duration of time by offering a myriad of activities tied to a centralized location?

This will actually cause the density necessary to reduce parking and encourage more public transportation options as you propose.  With the density will also come the market to support the secondary retail/grocery/and service industries.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

From my experience the very first thing developers do after purchasing land is tear out all the trees and flatten the landscape (happening right now at 101 & memorial and 106th). That's already done downtown so they should feel comfortable.

What you are describing is the old Williams Center Forum with multiple screens. It was popular, had convenient adjacent parking and multiple floors of retail and restaurants surrounding an ice skating rink. It was cool and novel for the times. Different times I know and downtown was still filled with Williams employees but still.....

Dickinson theaters was alone for years out on Memorial. Years. Regal Plaza was only recently developed and more because Bixby and that area of Tulsa is growing so fast, NOT because of the theater. Someone has to offer a counter view of reality, go ahead and blast me, but it seems simplistic to think that multi screen movie theaters are the catalyst for development. They are part of the recipe but not the yeast.

I have to agree with you that theaters are not a catalyst. IMO, the answer to successful downtown development actually lies in its parking and transit situations, not large multiscreen movie theaters- those only really do well where large numbers of people live anyway. Why would a large number of Tulsans drive downtown specifically to see a movie when the same movies are playing all over town at a theater close to home? The Forum already failed downtown, and another good example is the failure of the Arizona Center and Mercado shopping centers in downtown Phoenix- very similar projects to the Forum in Tulsa, but outdoors.

For an example of a successful downtown miltiplex theater look to Denver. The pavillions is adjacent to the 16th street mall, which has dozens of restaurants, shops, bars, hotels, etc. The mall was there long before the theater- but Denver also has an estimated 70,000 people living in its downtown.

The biggest mistake Phoenix, Tulsa, and many other downtowns have made is supplying too much parking in their downtowns. Parking only creates a bubble environment, in which people drive in, park, go straight into their destinations, then run back to their car and leave straight afterwards. There is no foot traffic, no patronizing the smaller businesses downtown, no street life at all. Phoenix has literally spent billions trying to revitalize their downtown, and along with a new ballpark, new arena, new shopping malls, parks, plazas, etc etc they built massive parking structures all over DT. The result? Downtown is still pretty much a ghost town. There is still no grocery store(!) or any significant retail at all. It is slowly improving, but I believe it won't really get any better until ASU opens their downtown campus with 15,000 students,(most living DT without cars) and the opening of the light rail.

Denver, however, did not build a lot of new parking to go along with all of the massive development in their revitalized downtown areas (specifically LODO). The result? A thriving pedestrian oriented 24 hour downtown. People are basically forced to take public transit to ball games, shopping, etc. Parking is so difficult in downtown Denver, suburbanites will actually take the train/bus to events. This totally encourages them to stroll and linger DT and actually patronize the other businesses. Something like 90 bars/restaurants sprung up around Coors field after it opened because of all the foot traffic around it. Granted, Denver has a light rail and very good transit system, but Tulsa needs to do something similar if Downtown is to ever become a true 'destination'.

Very good points indeed. We do need more people living downtown and I agree with the parking thing. Best scenario for any new parking downtown is that it be part of a mixed use development, shops and living wrapped around parking.  

I go back to my 3 legs of the stool analogy. One leg is living, the other entertainment/shopping, the other business, gov. and college. You need to push for all 3 and not get too focused on just one.

I think downtown as an entertainment type destination having a theater would help round out the options there. Why would you go downtown to a theater if you could go anywhere else? I would go because there would be other things to do before and after. I already go downtown to eat a lot. I could go many other places but I like going downtown. Would be nice imo to go to a movie before or after I eat versus going to a movie in one part of town then driving all the way downtown to eat. The ol "dinner and a movie" thing. Also, one would hope and expect that any theater downtown would not be just an average theater, that it would be an attraction itself. Something different, special and unique.

I also like going out to the clubs and coffe shops downtown. Again, would be nice to have other options to do as well while I am there. I think a small theater would work downtown. Yes we need more living, yes the colleges should be expanded, etc. I think we are moving along on all fronts. Couple more years and downtown will feel like quite a different place than it does now. Perhaps then is when we will see a movie theater coming in down there.

[azbadpuppy]

quote:Originally posted by Gaspar

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy


I have to agree with you that theaters are not a catalyst. IMO, the answer to successful downtown development actually lies in its parking and transit situations, not large multiscreen movie theaters- those only really do well where large numbers of people live anyway. Why would a large number of Tulsans drive downtown specifically to see a movie when the same movies are playing all over town at a theater close to home? The Forum already failed downtown, and another good example is the failure of the Arizona Center and Mercado shopping centers in downtown Phoenix- very similar projects to the Forum in Tulsa, but outdoors.

For an example of a successful downtown miltiplex theater look to Denver. The pavillions is adjacent to the 16th street mall, which has dozens of restaurants, shops, bars, hotels, etc. The mall was there long before the theater- but Denver also has an estimated 70,000 people living in its downtown.

The biggest mistake Phoenix, Tulsa, and many other downtowns have made is supplying too much parking in their downtowns. Parking only creates a bubble environment, in which people drive in, park, go straight into their destinations, then run back to their car and leave straight afterwards. There is no foot traffic, no patronizing the smaller businesses downtown, no street life at all. Phoenix has literally spent billions trying to revitalize their downtown, and along with a new ballpark, new arena, new shopping malls, parks, plazas, etc etc they built massive parking structures all over DT. The result? Downtown is still pretty much a ghost town. There is still no grocery store(!) or any significant retail at all. It is slowly improving, but I believe it won't really get any better until ASU opens their downtown campus with 15,000 students,(most living DT without cars) and the opening of the light rail.

Denver, however, did not build a lot of new parking to go along with all of the massive development in their revitalized downtown areas (specifically LODO). The result? A thriving pedestrian oriented 24 hour downtown. People are basically forced to take public transit to ball games, shopping, etc. Parking is so difficult in downtown Denver, suburbanites will actually take the train/bus to events. This totally encourages them to stroll and linger DT and actually patronize the other businesses. Something like 90 bars/restaurants sprung up around Coors field after it opened because of all the foot traffic around it. Granted, Denver has a light rail and very good transit system, but Tulsa needs to do something similar if Downtown is to ever become a true 'destination'.

Pup,
Forum didn't fail.  It was closed to make room for the new trading facility.

You have good points.  But you can't force a vehicle society like Tulsa to change.  That takes decades of increased population density.

The occasional ball game or concert will only make downtown an occasional destination.  The idea behind successful LBE is regular and recurring traffic.

As kids my friends and I would venture to the Forum every weekend to see movies and walk around down town even though Woodland Hills and Southroads were right down the road.  Being in downtown was just cool!  

People don't just go to a movie.  They go "out".  Driving to Dickenson for some good food at Michael Vs and then seeing a movie sounds like a good evening, but if the wife and I can go downtown for a nice dinner, movie, the lights of the city, drinks, a stroll, and some shopping, that's a date!  That would become a regular activity.  

You're right about a "bubble destination" I can get downtown from 91st street in 10 minutes or less.  As long as I can do that, it will be hard to pressure me to take public transportation.  So rather than force changes on people, why not take advantage of the fact that Tulsa is easy to get around, and capture that traffic for a longer duration of time by offering a myriad of activities tied to a centralized location?

This will actually cause the density necessary to reduce parking and encourage more public transportation options as you propose.  With the density will also come the market to support the secondary retail/grocery/and service industries.

Hmmm, I seem to remember the Forum shops closing sporadically, and the whole place just dying a slow death, but I could totally be wrong since I don't know the history. It seems that if the Forum was successful they would have just built a new trading facility somewhere else.

Regardless, I agree with you about regular and recurring traffic, but I don't believe it is as simple as building a movie theater. A theater is a by-product of an already established area, IMO. If downtown already had a shopping district, or a critical working/living mass of people, or a large school/university then a theater would work. Show me a dying downtown that was 'sparked' back to life by a new theater and I will agree with you.

I truly believe that Tulsa and Tulsans need to rethink the transit/parking/driving situations if downtown will ever thrive. I also realize this will not happen overnight, but nothing worthwhile ever does.

[azbadpuppy]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

From my experience the very first thing developers do after purchasing land is tear out all the trees and flatten the landscape (happening right now at 101 & memorial and 106th). That's already done downtown so they should feel comfortable.

What you are describing is the old Williams Center Forum with multiple screens. It was popular, had convenient adjacent parking and multiple floors of retail and restaurants surrounding an ice skating rink. It was cool and novel for the times. Different times I know and downtown was still filled with Williams employees but still.....

Dickinson theaters was alone for years out on Memorial. Years. Regal Plaza was only recently developed and more because Bixby and that area of Tulsa is growing so fast, NOT because of the theater. Someone has to offer a counter view of reality, go ahead and blast me, but it seems simplistic to think that multi screen movie theaters are the catalyst for development. They are part of the recipe but not the yeast.

I have to agree with you that theaters are not a catalyst. IMO, the answer to successful downtown development actually lies in its parking and transit situations, not large multiscreen movie theaters- those only really do well where large numbers of people live anyway. Why would a large number of Tulsans drive downtown specifically to see a movie when the same movies are playing all over town at a theater close to home? The Forum already failed downtown, and another good example is the failure of the Arizona Center and Mercado shopping centers in downtown Phoenix- very similar projects to the Forum in Tulsa, but outdoors.

For an example of a successful downtown miltiplex theater look to Denver. The pavillions is adjacent to the 16th street mall, which has dozens of restaurants, shops, bars, hotels, etc. The mall was there long before the theater- but Denver also has an estimated 70,000 people living in its downtown.

The biggest mistake Phoenix, Tulsa, and many other downtowns have made is supplying too much parking in their downtowns. Parking only creates a bubble environment, in which people drive in, park, go straight into their destinations, then run back to their car and leave straight afterwards. There is no foot traffic, no patronizing the smaller businesses downtown, no street life at all. Phoenix has literally spent billions trying to revitalize their downtown, and along with a new ballpark, new arena, new shopping malls, parks, plazas, etc etc they built massive parking structures all over DT. The result? Downtown is still pretty much a ghost town. There is still no grocery store(!) or any significant retail at all. It is slowly improving, but I believe it won't really get any better until ASU opens their downtown campus with 15,000 students,(most living DT without cars) and the opening of the light rail.

Denver, however, did not build a lot of new parking to go along with all of the massive development in their revitalized downtown areas (specifically LODO). The result? A thriving pedestrian oriented 24 hour downtown. People are basically forced to take public transit to ball games, shopping, etc. Parking is so difficult in downtown Denver, suburbanites will actually take the train/bus to events. This totally encourages them to stroll and linger DT and actually patronize the other businesses. Something like 90 bars/restaurants sprung up around Coors field after it opened because of all the foot traffic around it. Granted, Denver has a light rail and very good transit system, but Tulsa needs to do something similar if Downtown is to ever become a true 'destination'.

Very good points indeed. We do need more people living downtown and I agree with the parking thing. Best scenario for any new parking downtown is that it be part of a mixed use development, shops and living wrapped around parking.  

I go back to my 3 legs of the stool analogy. One leg is living, the other entertainment/shopping, the other business, gov. and college. You need to push for all 3 and not get too focused on just one.

I think downtown as an entertainment type destination having a theater would help round out the options there. Why would you go downtown to a theater if you could go anywhere else? I would go because there would be other things to do before and after. I already go downtown to eat a lot. I could go many other places but I like going downtown. Would be nice imo to go to a movie before or after I eat versus going to a movie in one part of town then driving all the way downtown to eat. The ol "dinner and a movie" thing. Also, one would hope and expect that any theater downtown would not be just an average theater, that it would be an attraction itself. Something different, special and unique.

I also like going out to the clubs and coffe shops downtown. Again, would be nice to have other options to do as well while I am there. I think a small theater would work downtown. Yes we need more living, yes the colleges should be expanded, etc. I think we are moving along on all fronts. Couple more years and downtown will feel like quite a different place than it does now. Perhaps then is when we will see a movie theater coming in down there.

I agree that a certain type of theater would do quite well downtown- most likely a 'destination' type theater like a science IMAX or an arthouse or dinner theater type of thing. This would definitely bring in people simply because they couldn't get it anywhere else. But then you have the same 'bubble' situation of driving in, going into the 'destination' and then driving out. It would be the same as the ballpark, the PAC, or the arena.

Downtown will really thrive when it is perceived more of a neighborhood than a destination point- when people actually want to live there.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

quote:Originally posted by Gaspar

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy


I have to agree with you that theaters are not a catalyst. IMO, the answer to successful downtown development actually lies in its parking and transit situations, not large multiscreen movie theaters- those only really do well where large numbers of people live anyway. Why would a large number of Tulsans drive downtown specifically to see a movie when the same movies are playing all over town at a theater close to home? The Forum already failed downtown, and another good example is the failure of the Arizona Center and Mercado shopping centers in downtown Phoenix- very similar projects to the Forum in Tulsa, but outdoors.

For an example of a successful downtown miltiplex theater look to Denver. The pavillions is adjacent to the 16th street mall, which has dozens of restaurants, shops, bars, hotels, etc. The mall was there long before the theater- but Denver also has an estimated 70,000 people living in its downtown.

The biggest mistake Phoenix, Tulsa, and many other downtowns have made is supplying too much parking in their downtowns. Parking only creates a bubble environment, in which people drive in, park, go straight into their destinations, then run back to their car and leave straight afterwards. There is no foot traffic, no patronizing the smaller businesses downtown, no street life at all. Phoenix has literally spent billions trying to revitalize their downtown, and along with a new ballpark, new arena, new shopping malls, parks, plazas, etc etc they built massive parking structures all over DT. The result? Downtown is still pretty much a ghost town. There is still no grocery store(!) or any significant retail at all. It is slowly improving, but I believe it won't really get any better until ASU opens their downtown campus with 15,000 students,(most living DT without cars) and the opening of the light rail.

Denver, however, did not build a lot of new parking to go along with all of the massive development in their revitalized downtown areas (specifically LODO). The result? A thriving pedestrian oriented 24 hour downtown. People are basically forced to take public transit to ball games, shopping, etc. Parking is so difficult in downtown Denver, suburbanites will actually take the train/bus to events. This totally encourages them to stroll and linger DT and actually patronize the other businesses. Something like 90 bars/restaurants sprung up around Coors field after it opened because of all the foot traffic around it. Granted, Denver has a light rail and very good transit system, but Tulsa needs to do something similar if Downtown is to ever become a true 'destination'.

Pup,
Forum didn't fail.  It was closed to make room for the new trading facility.

You have good points.  But you can't force a vehicle society like Tulsa to change.  That takes decades of increased population density.

The occasional ball game or concert will only make downtown an occasional destination.  The idea behind successful LBE is regular and recurring traffic.

As kids my friends and I would venture to the Forum every weekend to see movies and walk around down town even though Woodland Hills and Southroads were right down the road.  Being in downtown was just cool!  

People don't just go to a movie.  They go "out".  Driving to Dickenson for some good food at Michael Vs and then seeing a movie sounds like a good evening, but if the wife and I can go downtown for a nice dinner, movie, the lights of the city, drinks, a stroll, and some shopping, that's a date!  That would become a regular activity.  

You're right about a "bubble destination" I can get downtown from 91st street in 10 minutes or less.  As long as I can do that, it will be hard to pressure me to take public transportation.  So rather than force changes on people, why not take advantage of the fact that Tulsa is easy to get around, and capture that traffic for a longer duration of time by offering a myriad of activities tied to a centralized location?

This will actually cause the density necessary to reduce parking and encourage more public transportation options as you propose.  With the density will also come the market to support the secondary retail/grocery/and service industries.

Hmmm, I seem to remember the Forum shops closing sporadically, and the whole place just dying a slow death, but I could totally be wrong since I don't know the history. It seems that if the Forum was successful they would have just built a new trading facility somewhere else.

Regardless, I agree with you about regular and recurring traffic, but I don't believe it is as simple as building a movie theater. A theater is a by-product of an already established area, IMO. If downtown already had a shopping district, or a critical working/living mass of people, or a large school/university then a theater would work. Show me a dying downtown that was 'sparked' back to life by a new theater and I will agree with you.

I truly believe that Tulsa and Tulsans need to rethink the transit/parking/driving situations if downtown will ever thrive. I also realize this will not happen overnight, but nothing worthwhile ever does.

Can't rewrite that history Gaspar. The Forum died a slow death. At the end it was just Orange Julius and the Ice. Then Williams recaptured the space for their uses since they owned it anyway.

I think Az confirms my belief by noting real world experience. The Delman on 15th (now Cherry) and the Brook on Peoria were not anchors or catalysts for those two areas. They closed before those areas became hot spots. I could look up their opening dates but I would bet they came after the neighborhoods were established. I also dispute that the growth of Riverwalk was due to the theatre. Its almost entirely teen patrons and even they are banned after a certain time each evening. I would venture it was more due to the mexican restaurant selling margaritas outdoors!

And if your theory held, I would have taken my kids to 106th and Memorial or 71st & Memorial theaters when they were young and had dinner etc. Instead, we would hit Fontana, 31st & Sheridan or even Sand Springs before we would venture that far south. It was convenience and price that ruled.

Interesting to see that besides the nature of the demographics and density of the surrounding neighborhoods being the key components, that of all things, too much parking may be counterproductive. I love counter intuitive stuff like that. Nonetheless, we can't wait for light rail to be accepted here.

I would welcome a place downtown to go see movies downtown, just don't believe it is the catalyst you do. The focus currently on quality housing, good demos and entertainment activities is the most important thing.

[mrB]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy
... The Delman on 15th (now Cherry) and the Brook on Peoria were not anchors or catalysts for those two areas. They closed before those areas became hot spots...

Places like the Delman are gone for good. Unfortunately we can't raise those historic buildings from the dust. But maybe the Brook could be restored. The facade is 'basically' hidden in there and the marquee/sign still shines. It could be made into a theatre that serves dinner and drinks. Now that the Restless Ribbon has her 'bow on'!

[inteller]

well, I went to take a look at Regal Plaza and I'm pretty blown away.  I had no idea they are building a 5 story parking garage, neatly tucked away so you can't see it from the road.  It is still a work in progress, but it reminds me a LOT of LoDo in Denver.  You can sit there and stew with envy, jealousy, whatever, but they did this right.  Stores where you can come in from the front or back, the majority of the parking hidden from Memorial, and it is unusually dense....oh, and the public didn't have to pay them to do it.  That's just sweet.

If Memorial Commons is half this nice I am pretty confident that Southtown wins.  I'm sure da mare will do all she can to keep it choked off to the north at 101st/memorial.