# OKCpedia > General Real Estate Topics >  Architect Hans Butzer's Student's "Re-envisioning the Cox CC Site" Model + Plan

## Urban Pioneer

So... Another OU architectural team has re-envisioned downtown, without the Cox Convention Center.  Conceptual plans demonstrate what it would be like to have the grid restored.

Come see the model for yourself tonight at the Urban Neighbor's (Downtown's Neighborhood Association) monthly social.

It will be held on the roof garden where our office is, Steve Mason's building (Coffee Slingers) 1015 N. Broadway tonight 5:30-7:30.  Free appetizers and a cash bar.

Essentially, the roof garden is on top of Rawhide and accessible through the Main 1015 Building.  There is also a stairwell down to the sidewalk between the two buildings.

----------


## Urban Pioneer

Here is the UN newsletter:

https://app.e2ma.net/app/view:Campai...fea6afa5e19fec

----------


## Kerry

UP - can you (or someone else) take pictures of it for us?

----------


## Urban Pioneer

Sure.  I will try to do so.  However, if any bloggers want to come, the beautiful weather should make for a very pleasant experience on the roof.

----------


## Spartan

Oh my goodness, I am so jealous right now. That rooftop space that Steve Mason has recently done is amazing.

----------


## UnFrSaKn

I'm almost thinking of going but it starts in 20 min. Thought of doing video but I'm out of time.

----------


## BDK

I'd love to be there if I didn't have my last final tomorrow morning; seconding the request for pictures.

----------


## Urban Pioneer



----------


## Urban Pioneer



----------


## Urban Pioneer

I will try to post more technical detailed photo's when I have a chance to edit them and "lighten" them up for easy reading- Jeff.

----------


## mcca7596

Thanks!

Interesting idea on that last one to just extend the Myriad Gardens south to the Boulevard.

----------


## jarrington00

> Thanks!
> 
> Interesting idea on that last one to just extend the Myriad Gardens south to the Boulevard.


Tailgating in the gardens sounds fun.

----------


## Kerry

It looks a lot better with the Cox Center gone. BTW - that roof top party makes me want to move to downtown OKC even more.

----------


## bombermwc

And what exactlly do we get with that? Forgive me for being a downer here (like you're surprised), but as we clear out C2S, we're going to have mega-blocks of empty space waiting for private development to take off. Unless I see some 40-50 floor building go in place of the Myriad, I don't see that it serves any benefit.

You talk about restoring the grid, again, what does that give you? You can't go east/west because of the tracks and the gardens...1 block restored doesn't mean much. Same goes north/south with the Ford Center there. If the sole benefit is to get a few blocks of street-side real estate, i don't see the point. Now, if our current street-side retail or whatever was full, that would be one thing. But we already have a ton of empty street-side space around downtown...why add to it?

Without hearing what this particular student's plan for the block is, it's hard to comment on those specifics, but just judging by the images, we replaced it with several 1-2 floor buildings....which don't belong in a central core.

----------


## Kerry

Bomber - this might sound weird but you are missing the small picture because you are trying to see the big picture.  Restoring the four block grid is not going to improve traffic because there are still 3 obstructions in the way (railroad viaduct, OKC Arena, and Myriad Gardens).  However, it is going to create nearly 6,000 linear feet of street frontage that can be used for retail and other pedestrian functions.  That is over one mile of potential shopping in the heart of downtown.

If they make it multi-story then that increases to 12,000 to 18,000 linear feet.  By comparison, Penn Square has about 5,500 linear feet or retail frontage.  The beauty of the Cox site is that it has all that land under a single owner which will make luring retail possible.  National retailers don't want to deal with 20 different property owners - they want to deal with the same management company everyone else in the shopping district deals with.

Finally, if you look at pictures with the diagrams on the wall you will see that the buildings are actually 3 to 8 stories.

----------


## BG918

Very cool, and great to see Hans' urban design studio continue to come up with interesting ideas for downtown OKC.  I like the idea of the restored grid and mixed-use retail on the Cox site.  With the current underground parking garage you could expand that and offer a large amount of underground parking which could benefit retail.  I would hope the towers fronting Robinson would be taller though.

This model shows the Myriad Gardens on the convention center site...

----------


## David Pollard

Unless my eyes deceive me, they have also increased the height of the Sheraton. Not a bad idea, if technically possible, but I would hope they would give it a total new look as well. 

Also like the canopy over the 'Santa Fe Transit Hub': logical and elegant solution. The park extension though is a non-starter. That real-estate is too valuable for a park, particularly when there are other parks north and south of it.

----------


## Kerry

> The park extension though is a non-starter. That real-estate is too valuable for a park, particularly when there are other parks north and south of it.


 
LOL - that is the underground convention center.

----------


## David Pollard

Better yet, let's just put gigantic anchors on the Cox and sink the sucker!

----------


## Urban Pioneer

Interestingly awesome glass expansion of Santa Fe into a larger train station.

----------


## David Pollard

> LOL - that is the underground convention center.


You know, I wrote back in jest, but I wonder if putting the whole new CC underground COULD be an option? When you look at Google Maps, it might make more sense to concentrate retail/office/housing development along the sides of a larger park instead of breaking it up with a block... even a disected block. It would be more of a NYC central park effect then, which also grew organically with developments gradually progressing up the sides as demand dictated. There are probably enough access points in adjoining properties for a 'regal' entry, and loading docks etc. Huge skylights could still allow daylight access as well. Of-course there is the water-table problem to deal with. One thing is for sure; with that space being utilized as a park/underground CC it would send the adjoining property values into orbit and spurn growth. THEN we sink the Cox!

Oh, forgot to mention. There could be some wonderful solutions for the boulevard going through the park that would not effect its overall continuity. I am thinking about a series of pavilions etc. that are within the park but still interact well with the boulevard.

----------


## Urban Pioneer

> And what exactly do we get with that? Forgive me for being a downer here (like you're surprised), but as we clear out C2S, we're going to have mega-blocks of empty space waiting for private development to take off. Unless I see some 40-50 floor building go in place of the Myriad, I don't see that it serves any benefit.
> 
> You talk about restoring the grid, again, what does that give you?


I my opinion, it is a way to "extend" Bricktown into the core and connect the new Convention Center, Santa Fe Hub, and parks with multiple pedestrian corridors that could be filled with new high density development.  The blocks need to be "porous" to sustain activity in Bricktown by fostering pedestrian connectivity.

Everybody has been talking about how valuable the Bob Howard parking lots are.  I think this may actually be just as valuable for redevelopment.  I totally get the "keeping the arena argument" and used to think that way too.  Now, because of where things seem to be positioned "right or wrong" the Cox super block needs to go.

----------


## Pete

I've said for a long time the Cox Center needs to go, at least after we get another five years or so out of the somewhat recent improvements.

It's a concrete monolith and 98% of the time it's nothing but a dead hole right in the middle of downtown.

The massive, blank concrete walls are bad enough but the side that faces the Myriad Gardens is a particular disgrace.  What a waste of that frontage and the Robinson corridor.

----------


## Of Sound Mind

> It's a concrete monolith and 98% of the time it's nothing but a dead hole right in the middle of downtown.


98% of the time?  Really?  Ever tried to book meeting space? Seems to be in use more than 2% of the time. And that doesn't count the 40 games of the AHL and other events in the arena. That's a lot of activity crammed into 2% of the time.

----------


## Kerry

Even when used - it is still a dead hole.  You can tell by the complete absence of anything built next to it for the better part of 50 years.  The Myriad is one of the reason MAPS was necessary in the first place.  It failed to attract any development for most of its life, which is why I am concerned when I hear people say a new convention center will be a development magnet.  Show me where that has ever happened.

----------


## Spartan

I'm still not sold on the idea that "reclaiming the street grid" on the Cox site would do much for downtown circulation at this point. If anything it creates a pocket, although using Broadway as a continual axis sounds good to me, and also perhaps they could open up a hole in the BNSF bridge to connect California and the canal. That would essentially create an intersection with Broadway and the Canal axis, leading into Bricktown. Interesting possibilities there...

----------


## Kerry

Removing the Cox is not to improve downtown circulation (although it will a little bit).  It is to create 6,000 linear feet of street frontage.

----------


## Rover

Tear out the East side and part of the north meetings area and keep the Cox Arena.  There is plenty of room there to add a great two story retail area that the top is 1/2 the width of the bottom to allow for an elevated patio view of the garden.  It is big enought for a 3-4 story staggered building even.  What a great pre-game area for both the Thunder and the hockey team.  Keep the underground parking for events, garden visitors and shoppers.  Think of this in downtown San Diego. 

http://i.ehow.com/images/a05/3s/nj/t....1-800x800.jpg

Then, tear down the old Sheraton convention/retail area of the hotel and develop something meaningful there.  Would be a great residential tower location.

----------


## BG918

> I'm still not sold on the idea that "reclaiming the street grid" on the Cox site would do much for downtown circulation at this point. If anything it creates a pocket, although using Broadway as a continual axis sounds good to me, and also perhaps they could open up a hole in the BNSF bridge to connect California and the canal. That would essentially create an intersection with Broadway and the Canal axis, leading into Bricktown. Interesting possibilities there...


What if the *canal* was extended west under the tracks all the way to Myriad Gardens?  California would be below grade with the canal, as it is east of the elevated tracks, with patio restaurants fronting it along the way. Broadway would still go through from Sheridan to Reno.

----------


## Urban Pioneer

> What if the *canal* was extended west under the tracks all the way to Myriad Gardens?  California would be below grade with the canal, as it is east of the elevated tracks, with patio restaurants fronting it along the way. Broadway would still go through from Sheridan to Reno.


My guess is that it would be enormously expensive and require tunneling.  The issues with BNSF approvals would take years to work out as well.  It would be a our mini "big dig."  lol

----------


## Spartan

Well, we already had our "Big Dig" and I'll let you guys guess what that is, with one hint: it cost over $600 million after we were told like $200 million.

But yeah, my initial guess is that first of all it would be very difficult digging the trench for the canal under the BNSF tracks, and getting approval alone from the railroad would kill the project. Furthermore, there could be some excavation problems with digging however deep we'd have to into that block, if you're familiar with the history of those few blocks...

Which brings me to an awesome idea that I hadn't even thought of until just now. I know we have an Asian District now, but it would be kind of cool just for the hell of it to return those blocks to being our "China Town" as they were before the Cox Center...

----------


## Kerry

I could go for a China Town complete with entry gates.  Interesting idea.  The only problem I have is if the Ford site goes away the Cox area is the next best hope for downtown retail.

----------


## Patrick

> My guess is that it would be enormously expensive and require tunneling.  The issues with BNSF approvals would take years to work out as well.  It would be a our mini "big dig."  lol


Ummmmm, they dug out the tench for the current canal.  I don't see the difference.

----------


## stdennis

It would also require going underneath the Santa Fe Depot our new hub.

----------


## Larry OKC

> My guess is that it would be enormously expensive and require tunneling.  The issues with BNSF approvals would take years to work out as well.  It would be a our mini "big dig."  lol


A canal "extension" to the Convention Center was always planned and in the original MAPS but didn't get built (it wasn't to be an extension, it was supposed to be part of it all along). With what they did build, they kept their "extension" options open (think it was to go around the depot rather than though/under it). The estimated cost just before MAPS 3 was unveiled was $25M (roughly the same final cost of the original Canal). 

Personally like the idea of the Canal being incorporated into the Transit Hub. But probably cost prohibitive.

----------


## Larry OKC

> I've said for a long time the Cox Center needs to go, at least after we get another five years or so out of the somewhat recent improvements.
> 
> It's a concrete monolith and 98% of the time it's nothing but a dead hole right in the middle of downtown.
> 
> The massive, blank concrete walls are bad enough but the side that faces the Myriad Gardens is a particular disgrace.  What a waste of that frontage and the Robinson corridor.





> 98% of the time?  Really?  Ever tried to book meeting space? Seems to be in use more than 2% of the time. And that doesn't count the 40 games of the AHL and other events in the arena. That's a lot of activity crammed into 2% of the time.


I think Pete was meaning that even when utilized it is a dead hole, but you are correct, it is utilized a bit more than 2%
Stuff I had gleaned earlier (sorry, I don't have the sources cited): The Cox is underutilized...in recent years, amounting to between 151 and 158 total utilization days (roughly 42%) and from the _Gazette_: *Some OKC entities stand to benefit in a MAPS 3 proposal* (7/22/09)



> Among some of the items found include operating costs of Cox Convention Center and other convention centers across the country.
> 
> The study reported Cox Convention Center has been *operating at an annual loss of $3 million.* The study also reported about a dozen convention centers in cities similar to Oklahoma City, with new or renovated centers, have also been in the red with operating costs.

----------


## Rover

Lets just let Tulsa have all the state events.  We dont need to provide these services.  Lets get invisible. Who neads exposure and what is with this idea of offering services and facilities for our city.  Lets just act like the little city we are.   That will certainly help us be more urban.

Extreme sarcasm intended.

These implications that a cc is too expensive or unnecessary is very Tea Partyish and isolationistic.

Perhaps some of the losses we sustain is because the systems in the Cox are oudated and expensive to operate. And we cant compete for more profitable  meetings.  We have an aged building.  We need a modern and efficient building or fold up our tent.

----------


## Urban Pioneer

> Personally like the idea of the Canal being incorporated into the Transit Hub. But probably cost prohibitive.


Well conceivably, it will be.  We have $10 million for such improvements as part of that process opening up the pedestrian tunnel and establishing how a direct connection could be made to the canal 15' below will certainly be something I think most of the MAPS 3 Transit committee intends to look at.

Perhaps the "Water Taxi" can take on a role as a meaningful transportation link to the new boathouse once the connections are made at that end with the new I-40 Crosstown Pedestrian/canal tunnel.  It has always "irked me" that the Water Taxi is simply a tourist ride with no "taxi passes" for everyday citizens to use it to get somewhere.  But part of that has to do with it actually "going somewhere."  With that tunnel opening up, it could provide more direct linkage to the Chesapeake/Devon Boathouses of which the gym and trails are everyday uses for citizens that are somewhat difficult to get to, even by car.

With all that said, I have the greatest respect for what Chad has made out of the business.  It is a self sustaining entity and they have "made it work" year around.  But with the Santa Fe hub reemerging via connections by the tunnel and the direct connection to the boathouses, perhaps there are some opportunities there to expand services, particularly during "Olympic Events."

----------


## warreng88

Just a thought, would it be possible to demo all of the CCC except for the underground parking and the actual arena since the new convention center will not have one? It would be cool to still have all that underground parking and the arena, then hotels, office space, retail, etc all built where the old exhibition space was. The arena is used for arena football, hockey, concerts and larger meetings.

----------


## Larry OKC

*warren88:* I am not disagreeing but then you have to remember that it was primarily the exhibition areas that we spent $60M+ from MAPS in creating. I realize that was a few years ago, but seems like a waste to just tear it down. We have poured other millions into the facility since then and recently another several million into the arena portion for the Hockey team (I know you are for keeping the Arena portion). 

*Urban:* You are right and I had forgotten about the possibility of opening up the tunnel. I was thinking more in terms of the Canal flowing through the intermodal hub just as some have suggested that the Streetcars travel through the Convention Center site (rather than just a stop outside it or near it). Along the lines of the Disney monorail that raveled through the Contemporary Hotel @ Disney World.

*Rover:* I would think that part of the reason the Cox is underutilized is more due to the what was described as traveling through a time portal when it came to the meeting spaces (different ceiling heights, decor etc). The newer areas a re very nice but the older, pre-MAPS areas apparently were never improved or brought up to standards (though I think most people thought they were with MAPS). I am sure that there are probably some building inefficincies as well, but think the operational loss is more due to it being underutilized, rather than say, non-energy efficent HVAC systems or something similar (if that is what you meant).

I don't doubt the Mayor in the least that bringing the Cox up to current Tier 2 Convention standards would probably cost more than building new from scratch (there were structural "challenges" etc). Given what has been reported concerning the County Jail (remodel or new), there wasn't near as big of a difference and IIRC the new facility was actually a little cheaper than trying to fix the current one. So I wouldn't be surprised at all.

----------


## Rover

That is why I recommended demolishing the older exhibition area on the west side and not necessarily the meeting areas on the north side, or the Cox arena which has been invested in and is still usable.  By reclaiming the exhibition area it would supply plenty of area to add a significant retail area and possible hotel space overlooking the park.  We don't have to blow up everything, just the parts that aren't workable.

----------


## Larry OKC

Gotchya. No problems with that. Plus, if the 10 year timeframe happens w/the new C.C., there will probably be another few years before whatever MAPS 4 project might take its place, we will have gotten that many more years out of the multi-millions that have been but into the place. The longer removed you are from the spending, the better (presuming they don't continue to pur heaps of money into it on an ongoing basis).

----------


## UnFrSaKn

They could always put this at the old Cox CC site...

----------


## bombermwc

I understand the arguement for restoring the grid, I just don't agree that it's the best option, nor that it will produce what those advocates are, well, advocating. Yes, it would create street-side retail, and lots of it. But I still stand by my statement of, have you seen how much street-side retail is already empty? And do you realize how much will be created with C2S? And if we get C2S linked how we all say we want it linked (rail), then whether it's a blck or 1/2 mile away shouldn't matter right? Isn't that the point of a downtown rail system....remove the pedestrial "wall" of distance? So I still feel that what we would be doing, is creating a mass over saturation of the market. That Penn Square comparison is a great look into why it shouldn't be done. Do you really expect there to be as many stores thrown into that area as Penn Square has? You realize shopping downtown has been gone for 50 years, right? And just because our retail outlets aren't downtown, doesn't make downtown dead...it just has a different purpose. Not to mention if we're trying to make Automobile Alley into a retail destination now, this sort of plan would absolutely kill it. Why would someone want to go to AA if they can have a brand new space in the core? And how are you going to attract people to come down there to shop? It's a chicken-egg thing. It's still too easy in OKC to get in/out of the malls from anywhere in the city to want to make the conscious effort to go downtown to a store that exists elsewhere (which is why i still say AA needs to be local retail so it's the only destination for that store).

And I don't know who got the information for the Myriad being empty 98% of the time...that's just flat out wrong. The place is still very busy. No it's not as busy as Ford Center, but it's still very busy. Arenas don't have someone in them all day everyday. But go take a look at their events calendar... Cox Convention Center Events and there are always events in the small meeting rooms that don't make it to the calendar because they are "hosted" by the Rennaisance hotel. Even if you take out the graduations (which you really shouldn't because they are still events that bring in cash), the place isn't sitting idle. AND, things like graduation would NOT move to the Ford Center because it's too expensive. Mid-Del moved to First Southern Baptist on Sooner because of costs at the Myriad long before the upgrades.

----------


## Kerry

The advatage the Cox site would have for retail is that it is all owned by one entity. Dozens of individual owners is why retail doesn't exist downtown now. Even the area around Core 2 Shore is owner by dozens of different people. Remember when Bob Funk wanted to do his massive $200 million development east of The Brick. The retailers required to him have full control before they would agree to open there. The City didn't give him control and all the retailers backed out. That was 4 years ago and today the area is still parking lots.

Here is the OKCTak thread on it. It is an interesting read in hind sight. The Mayor said he didn't want to develop the land because he thought it might be part of MAPS III. Of course, not allowing private development because they wanted the land for MAPS III (which is designed to encourage private development) was beyond stupid.  We see this same thing now with the Ford site and the Convention Center (taking space away from private development, to build public development, that is designed to encourage private development, i.e. - stupid).

http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=10160&page=1

----------


## mcca7596

The city owns the Cox Center, I thought most on here didn't want the city getting involved in owning retail space. How do we know they would sell the whole area to just one developer?

----------


## Urban Pioneer

No.  Offer the four individual blocks up for redevelopment.  Retail is one thing, but it would be the ideal location for hotel expansion.  Sandwiched between Bricktown, the Core, the Transit Hub, and the Convention Center.

----------


## kevinpate

> They could always put this at the old Cox CC site...


I can't wrap my noggin' around ever seeing that standing anywhere in OK, but yeah, that's interesting.  What's up top ... a park and retail?

----------


## Kerry

> The city owns the Cox Center, I thought most on here didn't want the city getting involved in owning retail space. How do we know they would sell the whole area to just one developer?


The City would have to sell it to a single developer.  Check out the Bob Funk development I linked to earlier (hotel/residential/retail).

----------


## Rover

> No.  Offer the four individual blocks up for redevelopment.  Retail is one thing, but it would be the ideal location for hotel expansion.  Sandwiched between Bricktown, the Core, the Transit Hub, and the Convention Center.


Why hotel expansion?  People on here swear the convention center isn't necessary or doesn't provide any real economic benefit...so no hotel needed for it.

----------


## Kerry

Rover - who said the convention center isn't needed?

----------


## David Pollard

> I can't wrap my noggin' around ever seeing that standing anywhere in OK, but yeah, that's interesting.  What's up top ... a park and retail?


A swimming pool. YES! And I think one of the biggest in Asia. Truly amazing.

----------


## Rover

> Rover - who said the convention center isn't needed?


Several on this site.  

And I was being sarcastic.  Of course an adequate CC is a normal part of a cities offerings of services and facilities.

----------


## bombermwc

Good points, I still don't think that's the best use of the land though. All this discussion assumes the the Myriad isn't used....therefore is ready to doze. That is very far from the case. I also still don't feel that retail is worth the loss. Plus, retail covers the first floor...what about the rest of the height above it. Unless you're flopping down 30 story towers, forget it. What downtown does NOT need is low-rise....and 8 floors doesn't count for a tower in that plot. You don't build an 8 floor tower next to a 50 floor one.

----------


## Kerry

> Several on this site. 
> 
> And I was being sarcastic. Of course an adequate CC is a normal part of a cities offerings of services and facilities.


Did they say it isn't needed or that it isn't the huge profit center it is being portrayed to be?

----------


## bombermwc

Profit can be defined as tangible and non-tangible though. Compare it to the Thunder. The non-tangible profit from the Thunder is astronomical. The point here being, a CC brings people to the city that might not have come otherwise. They then experience the city and leave with an altered perception of it...hopefully with a better view.

----------


## Kerry

> Profit can be defined as tangible and non-tangible though. Compare it to the Thunder. The non-tangible profit from the Thunder is astronomical. The point here being, a CC brings people to the city that might not have come otherwise. They then experience the city and leave with an altered perception of it...hopefully with a better view.


I understand that, but that isn't the economic benefit the 'CC first' crowd is trying to sell.  They say the CC is the only project that will generate revenue so it must go first.  I am saying that is a load of crap.

----------


## Rover

> Did they say it isn't needed or that it isn't the huge profit center it is being portrayed to be?


There is revenue generated in multiple places with a cc.  Its economics depends on how you want to parse it and frame your argument for or against.  Few take a macro look at it and nobody has a crystal ball anyway.  Many want to take a single element of the analysis and extrapolate it to the whole product.

----------


## Kerry

All I can say is look at the current Cox calendar and tell me how many of those activites bring in people from out of town.  The vast majority are atteneded by locals.  Heck, pick any convention center in the country outside of the top 10 convention centers and you will find that nearly all are heavily tilted in favor of local events.  Nothing wrong with that becasue the Mayors Prayer Breakfast has to be held somewhere.

----------


## Chautauqua

"non-tangible" profit?  Where does that show up on the balance sheet?

----------


## Rover

> "non-tangible" profit?  Where does that show up on the balance sheet?


Please look up the definition of non-tangible.

To ignore the economic and other benefit of having a competitive CC is just as ignorant as overstating it.

----------


## Kerry

> "non-tangible" profit? Where does that show up on the balance sheet?


LOL - that is an accounting trick from Bernie Madoff.  It is where people still lose money but they are happy about it because future profits will be higher than the current losses.  Just trust him, the profits are coming.

----------


## Rover

> LOL - that is an accounting trick from Bernie Madoff.  It is where people still lose money but they are happy about it because future profits will be higher than the current losses.  Just trust him, the profits are coming.


You still need to look up the definition.  Bernie's was a pyramid.

----------


## Spartan

> Please look up the definition of non-tangible.
> 
> To ignore the economic and other benefit of having a competitive CC is just as ignorant as overstating it.


This. It's a necessary commodity, and there is no down-side to having a competitive convention center, as long as you don't butcher your city or eliminate development opportunities to do it. But the benefits are far too-often way overstated. If I ever make any "attack comments" toward a convention center, it's just to bring that in line. I take it for granted that we need it, but come on, YOU CAN'T BUILD A CITY AROUND IT, WAKE UP [insert subcommittee names] PEOPLE!! there, I got that out.

----------


## Rover

> I take it for granted that we need it, but come on, YOU CAN'T BUILD A CITY AROUND IT, WAKE UP [insert subcommittee names] PEOPLE!! there, I got that out.


Unless you are Vancouver.  It was put in a premier location with outstanding views.  If you haven't been to it, you should go.

I agree that you shouldn't build the city around it, but you also need to keep it in a vital area downtown and not make it a visitors' ghetto.  I am okay with the Ford site with the caveat that the current Cox is reconfigured and re-developed to open private development to face the MG.  Otherwise we have isolated the MG and reduced prime development opportunities.  If we are trading the south side for the east then I think it okay.

----------


## Spartan

I think though that the south side is more strategic, and also probably the west, which feels more open than the east frontage (that may or may not be a benefit for the east side though). I like the question Blair was asking earlier, which is why aren't we connecting these two parks? It's funny how that's not even part of the equation here because we view these parks so separately and inconclusively at the moment. However, I do think 20 years from now, we're going to be scratching our heads as to why the two parks aren't connecting, or why there's a convention center in the middle of the park...

As for Vancouver, yeah...


A riverside location for OKC could be cool, also. It's just too isolated, as you mention. But here's is an example of 300,000 sf of exhibition space for over $700 million. Obviously OKC is not going to get anything near this high-quality. But it is a beautiful site.

----------


## bombermwc

> I am okay with the Ford site with the caveat that the current Cox is reconfigured and re-developed to open private development to face the MG.  Otherwise we have isolated the MG and reduced prime development opportunities.


The building can't do that. The layout is such that the wall on the east and west side are also the wall of the "walking" area indoors. so unless you are prepared to create a building within a building, then it's not practical. You'd have to rip out walls and put in HVAC and all that goes with that into a structure that was never intended to do such things. I don't think you'd be happy with how it would look in the end anyway. Not to mention that you'd have to rip the holes in the walls for ONLY the doors. The structural steel would prevent you from having and store-front windows. You also can't put it outside the building because the sidewalk isn't wide enough for both foot traffic and storefront space. However, I don't feel that it has served as an issue for the Gardens in the past. In fact, I've rather enjoyed the lesser foot traffic in the Gardens. It's much easier to relax there when there aren't a million people around.

----------


## Rover

> The building can't do that. The layout is such that the wall on the east and west side are also the wall of the "walking" area indoors. so unless you are prepared to create a building within a building, then it's not practical. You'd have to rip out walls and put in HVAC and all that goes with that into a structure that was never intended to do such things. I don't think you'd be happy with how it would look in the end anyway. Not to mention that you'd have to rip the holes in the walls for ONLY the doors. The structural steel would prevent you from having and store-front windows. You also can't put it outside the building because the sidewalk isn't wide enough for both foot traffic and storefront space. However, I don't feel that it has served as an issue for the Gardens in the past. In fact, I've rather enjoyed the lesser foot traffic in the Gardens. It's much easier to relax there when there aren't a million people around.


I was really thinking the whole west exhibition area be torn down and a new project be made there, essentially facing the west and the garden.  The demolition of the exhibition hall shouldn't be terribly expensive.

----------


## Urban Pioneer

My personal opinion is that the new building should either be an architectural masterpiece that embraces the two parks (think Gehry swooping folds) or it should completely disappear within a "wrapped" urbanity.  There in NO room in between.  Anything less than being a profound statement/connector embracing the two parks *or* a building that completely disappears is what should be learned from the abortions of the past.

OKC has a chance to get it right, so let's do it right.

----------


## bombermwc

Which means it won't be either and we'll be left with something no one likes.

----------


## Kerry

> Which means it won't be either and we'll be left with something no one likes.


ding ding ding - we have a winner.  This is why I said I hope they put up a plaque with all the people responsible so future generations know who to blame.

----------


## Rover

Do you honestly believe Hall was going to put up an "architectural masterpiece"?

----------


## Kerry

> Do you honestly believe Hall was going to put up an "architectural masterpiece"?


Does it matter now?  At least his was private sector development.

----------


## Rover

> Does it matter now?  At least his was private sector development.


Yes, it does matter.  The discussion is highest and best use.

----------


## rcjunkie

> Do you honestly believe Hall was going to put up an "architectural masterpiece"?


On the other side, do you honestly know that he wasn't ?

----------


## Kerry

> Yes, it does matter. The discussion is highest and best use.


Hold on.  What are we talking about here - the old Cox or the new CC?

----------


## Rover

> On the other side, do you honestly know that he wasn't ?


Pretty good reason to believe there wasn't ANY solid plan on the table, let alone something along the lines of an architectural masterpiece.

----------


## Rover

> Hold on.  What are we talking about here - the old Cox or the new CC?


The comments were about making the building between the parks an architectural icon.

----------


## Comm'l Real Estate Guy

> On the other side, do you honestly know that he wasn't ?


Yes I do.  He wasn't.  I'm not sure how one defines architectural masterpiece, but it's very hard for ANYONE to do that anymore...it's just way too expensive and hard to make money.

----------


## Kerry

> The comments were about making the building between the parks an architectural icon.


Then we need to move the discussion over to the Convention Center thread.  This thread is about the Cox site.

----------


## Rover

> Then we need to move the discussion over to the Convention Center thread.  This thread is about the Cox site.


This was and is about the Cox site and re-use.  It is relative to what happens to the Ford site and whether the retrofitting or demolition and redevelopment is complementary or not.

----------


## Snowman

> This was and is about the Cox site and re-use.  It is relative to what happens to the Ford site and whether the retrofitting or demolition and redevelopment is complementary or not.


Demolition seems highly unlikely anytime soon

----------


## Patrick

> Demolition seems highly unlikely anytime soon


Then maybe we can start talking about demolition of Devon Tower and replacement with a 100 floor 1600 foot tall tower?

----------

