Restoring the street grid, but with pedestrian streets only, would make this literally the crossroads of downtown. From Santa Fe station/Bricktown to the park. The CBD (and parking) to Chesapeake Arena.

Restoring the street grid, but with pedestrian streets only, would make this literally the crossroads of downtown. From Santa Fe station/Bricktown to the park. The CBD (and parking) to Chesapeake Arena.

Yep! Imagine walking from parking through a vibrant and interesting area rather than the lifeless arena side of the Cox center to get to a game at the Peake.

I'm not sure that i'll ever be convinced that restoring the grid here is that big of a deal given how downtown is currently configured and the potential changes in the future just given the location of the Myriad. I mean one side of it faces the rail line and we wont have anything other than a false (and somewhat literal) wall between downtown and bricktown. On the opposite side, the gardens. THen we've got the Peak and real CBD space opposite that. But i do have a reason (and you've probably heard it before).

In all practical reality, the city will never give up this land, but lets look at it for future speculation.
At some point, we'll want to replace the Peak. Guess what? The city owns a huge block of land on prime land in downtown, right next to the Peak. SWEET! Guess what else? It's larger than what we need now that the convention center is open. Opportunity time! What i envision is something like a Barclay's Center original plan had (i think that's who it was). We could still get a new arena on the location, but also include some mixed-use space on the plot. It REALLY didn't work out for Barclays because they were a bit too ambitious, especially given the economy at the time. But on a smaller scale, it really could work. The only catch would be, does the city sell the land or does it become a landlord?

Barclays or Clayco ? Not sure where were at here ?

My pipe dream concept for the Cox site....something like Berlin's Sony Center. Imagine visitors and commuters streaming into a semi open air area from Santa Fe station and enjoying food and drink before Thunder games. Conventions holding special events in a plaza like this during the evenings. OKC needs to think big when it takes RFPs for this parcel. We need something truly world class that serves as the front door and calling card for the city. Would be nice to see a mix of uses integrated into the concept - trophy office headquarters, luxury hotel, apartments, condos, etc. I think it would truly be the heartbeat of downtown.
138551385613857

I'm not sure that i'll ever be convinced that restoring the grid here is that big of a deal given how downtown is currently configured and the potential changes in the future just given the location of the Myriad. I mean one side of it faces the rail line and we wont have anything other than a false (and somewhat literal) wall between downtown and bricktown. On the opposite side, the gardens. THen we've got the Peak and real CBD space opposite that. But i do have a reason (and you've probably heard it before).

In all practical reality, the city will never give up this land, but lets look at it for future speculation.
At some point, we'll want to replace the Peak. Guess what? The city owns a huge block of land on prime land in downtown, right next to the Peak. SWEET! Guess what else? It's larger than what we need now that the convention center is open. Opportunity time! What i envision is something like a Barclay's Center original plan had (i think that's who it was). We could still get a new arena on the location, but also include some mixed-use space on the plot. It REALLY didn't work out for Barclays because they were a bit too ambitious, especially given the economy at the time. But on a smaller scale, it really could work. The only catch would be, does the city sell the land or does it become a landlord?

I think restoring the grid would be an amazing way to engage and connect the people that are already downtown. Despite being surrounded by sub-par non-human scaled space, people come downtown in droves to the attractions that surround this block. The Myriad Gardens are bordered by a blank wall to the east, nothing to the south, and a fenced off field to the west yet it is always packed. The Arena draws thousands of people on the evenings. The Transit center/hole to bricktown will eventually draw people. The CBD draws in people for work. Imagine all of these areas connected to allow people who are already downtown to move from area to area easily, with engaging street life along the way. This block could easily be the epicenter of Downtown life and be the first true urban space in OKC. We'd be crazy to not take advantage of this opportunity. It would make the city lots of $$$ and would be the gathering place for the community.

We need to break it into 4 different blocks and develop them seperately. Very few developers on OKC have the money to do something the size of the Cox Center with the level of density we want. Break it into different pieces and we are more likely to get higher quality developments. Even if it takes longer that way, this isn't something that should be rushed.

We need to break it into 4 different blocks and develop them seperately. Very few developers on OKC have the money to do something the size of the Cox Center with the level of density we want. Break it into different pieces and we are more likely to get higher quality developments. Even if it takes longer that way, this isn't something that should be rushed.

I'm thinking that each block should be further divided into four or more parcels; this would maximize the opportunity for more dense, organic type growth on those blocks, instead of an entire monolithic block going solely to one project. But otherwise, I totally agree.

I mean one side of it faces the rail line and we wont have anything other than a false (and somewhat literal) wall between downtown and bricktown. On the opposite side, the gardens. THen we've got the Peak and real CBD space opposite that.

It being boxed-in like you describe is exactly why breaking up this monolith is such a significant opportunity.

I'm just stirring conversation here.....so knowing that a new arena will be going back and forth for any foreseeable future, what would be the overriding reason to break up the block rather than make the city search for and purchase new land each time the conversation comes up instead of using existing owned land downtown?

Is there current pedestrian traffic that would benefit from this restoration? Going west/east, there's already a barrier in both directions from the gardens and the rail line. North to South, there could be benefit there.

From a traffic standpoint, would this help or hinder flow? Adding more stoplights would probably slow down traffic....which can already be terrible at busy times. But a GOOD traffic study could potentially solve that if the city will do it. Not some of the crap studies they have been doing that dont actually DO anything.

In understand the desire to split it up and spur development. Of course that's an assumption that there is interest in creating good development in this space. It's speculative at this point, but i will for sure acknowledge that it would probably happen....im guessing low-rise.

If this were a couple of block west, i think i would probably be less of a fan of keeping it. But given where it is, (obviously) im skewed to leaving it as is. And remember, i'm trying to spur conversation for people to discuss this, not to start a mud slinging fest :)

Is there current pedestrian traffic that would benefit from this restoration? Going west/east, there's already a barrier in both directions from the gardens and the rail line. North to South, there could be benefit there.

Yes, Like I said a few post before, this area, if developed well, has the potential to become a funnel for the many pedestrians that are already downtown in the area:

The myriad gardens is always packed with peeps despite not having anything engaging adjacent to it.

The Arena Draws thousands for games and concerts,

the CBD has thousands of people working in it during the week,

and eventually there will be a connection to bricktown through the Hub and hopefully transit traffic.

These four (well 3, soon to be 4), already established areas surround this block. Opening the grid would connect them and would tap from all these popular areas. Mega potential here.


From a traffic standpoint, would this help or hinder flow? Adding more stoplights would probably slow down traffic....which can already be terrible at busy times. But a GOOD traffic study could potentially solve that if the city will do it.



Well, considering currently NO traffic can flow through that block, it stand to reason that it would help traffic flow by adding another street to disperse congestion. Increased connectivity can make the environment safer for pedestrians and help alleviate traffic congestion.

I'm just stirring conversation here.....so knowing that a new arena will be going back and forth for any foreseeable future, what would be the overriding reason to break up the block rather than make the city search for and purchase new land each time the conversation comes up instead of using existing owned land downtown?

Is there current pedestrian traffic that would benefit from this restoration? Going west/east, there's already a barrier in both directions from the gardens and the rail line. North to South, there could be benefit there.

From a traffic standpoint, would this help or hinder flow? Adding more stoplights would probably slow down traffic....which can already be terrible at busy times. But a GOOD traffic study could potentially solve that if the city will do it. Not some of the crap studies they have been doing that dont actually DO anything.

In understand the desire to split it up and spur development. Of course that's an assumption that there is interest in creating good development in this space. It's speculative at this point, but i will for sure acknowledge that it would probably happen....im guessing low-rise.

If this were a couple of block west, i think i would probably be less of a fan of keeping it. But given where it is, (obviously) im skewed to leaving it as is. And remember, i'm trying to spur conversation for people to discuss this, not to start a mud slinging fest :)

I don't think a new arena is going to happen at any point in the near-ish future. We're at least 25 years from anything like that. It's far enough in the future that it doesn't make sense to leave the Cox Center sitting there waiting for it to happen. Not when it's in such a good location.

There was a wave of new arena construction in the recent past, and many locations that were not that old had to be replaced. This has created a false sense in many people that the life expectancy of an NBA arena is only 20 years or so. This is incorrect. The reason those arenas had to be replaced was because of the increased use of luxury boxes. This was a significant physical change to the design of newer arenas that significantly increased revenue for the team. With a new collective bargaining agreement paying players a lot more money, if you didn't have luxury boxes bringing in cash, you went broke. That was the problem with the Seattle Key Arena. They renovated the damn thing just before luxury boxes became a thing you had to have.

The Chesapeake Arena was built with luxury boxes built-in. It has all the modern amenities that you'd want for an NBA team. Unless some structural defect is discovered, or some new physical change in arena design becomes the must-have thing, the Chesapeake will be fine. New electronics equipment can just be retrofitted in. Most new amenities can. The only thing that would require a new building is if they come up with some new arrangement of how the concrete is poured. As of May 22, 2017, zero NBA arenas have such a design change. Until something like that happens, there's no point in planning the new arena.

The Cox Center will be immediately across the street from what is planned to be the central hub of our future regional mass transit system. It will also be a short distance from the Chesapeake and the new convention center. And it's on the streetcar route. It will be a pretty bustling place, as opposed to the dead zone it is now.

The best use for it? Restore the street grid. Break up each block into sections and begin privately bidding them out. The city should be willing to take its time, and demand high quality designs. I think we could get two full service hotels, probably two residential towers, two or three office towers, a parking garage, and some sort of pedestrian-oriented events center. Let's say we orient the towers so they're towards the outside of the superblock, and then the "inside" of the block would have a 4-5 story streetwall all the way around on the new connecting streets.

Since it looks like a new arena will be built at the fairgrounds, if and when we need a new one why not just rebuild the Peake and play temporarily at the fair venue?

In any event, absolutely no need to set aside prime property for something that may never happen.

Since it looks like a new arena will be built at the fairgrounds, if and when we need a new one why not just rebuild the Peake and play temporarily at the fair venue?

In any event, absolutely no need to set aside prime property for something that may never happen.

^ we need a like button!

Remember, i'm just stirring conversation, which seems to be a plenty on this :)

So since the city does own this, lets explore the possibility of tossing the Cox after the CC opens. Couple of things to look at with that.
1 - What's the current contract with the Renaissance (or whatever it is now) since they manage the Cox Center's meeting space? Do we have to retain the space for some length of time or is there a buy-out or something similar available?
2 - If the meeting space is lost, one would assume all of the "traffic" would move to the new CC. So does that put another nail in the coffin for the "R" to survive under its new flag? Do you think the city would include some sort of construction option for at least some amount of meeting space tied to the existing skybridge? Do we even keep the skybridge?
3 - The big one. Would anyone be willing to contact the city manager to ask if the city would be interested in dozing the Myriad after the CC is open?

If #3 happens after 1/2 are worked out, then a couple of other assumptions have to have happened.
1 - The city will not close the doors as long as the place is budgetarily positive. If it's making money, they could even shudder part of it (ie the arena as suggested by Pete since the Fairgrounds one will be pretty close in capacity ability), and use the meeting spaces as needed per above point 1/2.
2 - The city will not close the doors and bulldoze until they have something sold. I'm sure they are looking at the Stage Center lot and are very unhappy with how that went.
3 - Any legal folks know if a plot like that can be speculatively sold as "broken up" before the grid is actually there? Meaning, if the city wants to sell off the land to developers, can they even do that before they doze and construct the road since right now, it's a single plot? I'm not up on the legal side of how that would work. The last thing we need is a Myriad sized plot of dirt in the heart of downtown where a functioning/occupied/maintained building stands.

My only other word of caution (dont hate me, i'm just playing devil's advocate for the other side since everyone here seems to be on the "tear it down" camp). This is speculative development....like ALL of C2S. With all of the C2S space 30 years from being developed, and supposedly prime real estate, what makes this so special? And being private development, like C2S, we have zero idea of what quality/type the development would be. We also don't currently have a market for office/residential to eat up that HUGE block of land. Throw something like the Stage Center plans on this plot and we'd flood the market on both sides...which also is not good. I'm honestly thinking we're looking at more of a 5 floor type structure space without current market. And with everyone pushing ground floor retail....we sure dont have the market to support that much of it. You manage to get all those structures built with something other than upscale residential, you might have something there though.....if a grocery store is part of it. That much ground retail would be equivalent to an entire shopping district, which is nothing to brush off in terms of how difficult it would be to convince retailers to move in. And we can't rely on only local shops....its going to HAVE to have chains to sustain/spur it.

Commence the shredding of my post....3...2...1.....

Since it looks like a new arena will be built at the fairgrounds, if and when we need a new one why not just rebuild the Peake and play temporarily at the fair venue?

In any event, absolutely no need to set aside prime property for something that may never happen.

The NBA is never going to play a season at a 12k arena with no suites and no club level That would not be realistic.

Also the Chesapeake site is really not big enough for a modern arena

People that say the Peake is "fine"

1 the Peake needs (or will need soon ) a second level of suites
2. The Peake is lacking in bars/restaurants and really has no place to add them

3. Back of house room at the Peake is pretty cramped

Remember, i'm just stirring conversation, which seems to be a plenty on this :)

So since the city does own this, lets explore the possibility of tossing the Cox after the CC opens. Couple of things to look at with that.
1 - What's the current contract with the Renaissance (or whatever it is now) since they manage the Cox Center's meeting space? Do we have to retain the space for some length of time or is there a buy-out or something similar available?
2 - If the meeting space is lost, one would assume all of the "traffic" would move to the new CC. So does that put another nail in the coffin for the "R" to survive under its new flag? Do you think the city would include some sort of construction option for at least some amount of meeting space tied to the existing skybridge? Do we even keep the skybridge?
3 - The big one. Would anyone be willing to contact the city manager to ask if the city would be interested in dozing the Myriad after the CC is open?

If #3 happens after 1/2 are worked out, then a couple of other assumptions have to have happened.
1 - The city will not close the doors as long as the place is budgetarily positive. If it's making money, they could even shudder part of it (ie the arena as suggested by Pete since the Fairgrounds one will be pretty close in capacity ability), and use the meeting spaces as needed per above point 1/2.
2 - The city will not close the doors and bulldoze until they have something sold. I'm sure they are looking at the Stage Center lot and are very unhappy with how that went.
3 - Any legal folks know if a plot like that can be speculatively sold as "broken up" before the grid is actually there? Meaning, if the city wants to sell off the land to developers, can they even do that before they doze and construct the road since right now, it's a single plot? I'm not up on the legal side of how that would work. The last thing we need is a Myriad sized plot of dirt in the heart of downtown where a functioning/occupied/maintained building stands.

My only other word of caution (dont hate me, i'm just playing devil's advocate for the other side since everyone here seems to be on the "tear it down" camp). This is speculative development....like ALL of C2S. With all of the C2S space 30 years from being developed, and supposedly prime real estate, what makes this so special? And being private development, like C2S, we have zero idea of what quality/type the development would be. We also don't currently have a market for office/residential to eat up that HUGE block of land. Throw something like the Stage Center plans on this plot and we'd flood the market on both sides...which also is not good. I'm honestly thinking we're looking at more of a 5 floor type structure space without current market. And with everyone pushing ground floor retail....we sure dont have the market to support that much of it. You manage to get all those structures built with something other than upscale residential, you might have something there though.....if a grocery store is part of it. That much ground retail would be equivalent to an entire shopping district, which is nothing to brush off in terms of how difficult it would be to convince retailers to move in. And we can't rely on only local shops....its going to HAVE to have chains to sustain/spur it.

Commence the shredding of my post....3...2...1.....

The Renaissance contract is ending soon which is the main reason they are taking their flag to Bricktown. Its all about supply and demand, if you build a new larger modern convention center, your older convention is not going to be able to charge as much as it did before. I don't know what the operating expenses are on the Cox Center, but half of it sits empty most of the year and I don't see the convention center half of the building maintaining its current level of business.

What's next for the Cox Center?

https://kfor.com/2018/07/12/whats-the-future-of-the-cox-convention-center/?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=5b47e5b104d3012caa07e1f7&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter

I think we need to start a "Save The Cox Center" campaign. It's such a marvelous piece of architecture and a part of OKC history that should be preserved. /sarcasm

I think we need to start a "Save The Cox Center" campaign. It's such a marvelous piece of architecture and a part of OKC history that should be preserved. /sarcasm

I’m terribly confused as to what you mean a “marvelous piece of architecture”. The cox center doesn’t have any true architectural elements to it nor any potential in my eyes. Tearing it down would help our city much more than ever keeping it up. It’s time to restore the grid!

he was being facetious. ...

OF COURSE BCHRIS WANTS THE COX REMOVED AND THE GRID RESTORED!!

I think it should be converted into the International Urban Renewal Museum

If the grid is restored, do we trust OKC to sell the land to quality developers, and those developers to come up with top-notch developments?

I'm more worried about (so called -- rightly so I'm sure) top-notch developers that will buy-and-hold vs buy-and-build. We shouldn't even tear it down until there's an approved, funded plan on the books. Keep using the arena for things, make money of it, etc, until we have plans in hand.

At a recent talk by Aubrey McDermid, she said they were trying to put more teeth into the municipal code regarding compliance with Plan OKC. It's possible I'm misremembering certain details, but the point is she said they're actively working on being able to prevent some of the things that have happened in recent years that really shouldn't have, but did because the Plan OKC has no teeth due to the way the municipal code is written.

(incidentally during Q&A I asked how she felt about de-annexation and she said she preferred not to answer publicly)

Maybe it could be turned into the Pei plan disaster museum.

I’m terribly confused as to what you mean a “marvelous piece of architecture”. The cox center doesn’t have any true architectural elements to it nor any potential in my eyes. Tearing it down would help our city much more than ever keeping it up. It’s time to restore the grid!

...?

How could you be confused? He literally wrote the word "sarcasm" at the end of his post. You quoted it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but since this property is owned by the City of OKC, wouldn't it go through a competitive RFP process for redevelopment?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but since this property is owned by the City of OKC, wouldn't it go through a competitive RFP process for redevelopment?

technically yes. assuming it isn't all done in informal and behind closed door meetings..

technically yes. assuming it isn't all done in informal and behind closed door meetings..

Please cite an example - ANY example - of a significant public property being sold for redevelopment purposes to a private party or parties via "informal and behind closed door meetings."

Here are the downtown parcels that I can think of off the top of my head which have been sold or transferred for private redevelopment by the City or OCURA over the past 20 years or so:


Deep Deuce Apartments (developer selected via RFP process)
Lower Bricktown (developer selected via RFP process)
The Hill (developer selected via RFP process)
Skirvin Hilton hotel (redeveloper selected via RFP process)
Legacy/Avana (developer selected via RFP process)
Devon Tower (yes, even Devon Tower property was transferred via RFP process, and Devon took the process very seriously)
The Edge (redeveloper selected via RFP process...actually two RFPs because first award for old Mercy site was unable to perform)
Page Woodson (redeveloper selected via RFP process)
Convention Center (Omni) hotel development and operation (developer/operator selected via RFP process)
Housing/mixed use adjacent Omni Hotel (developer selected via RFP process)

Other notable projects with public land interest, and their respective processes/transactions:


First National Bank redevelopment (awarded by federal judge based upon recommendation of court-appointed receiver, who utilized a competetive RFQ/proposal process)
South of Stage Center site (awarded to Clayco via RFP process, though developer did not perform, showing like old Mercy site that RFP doesn't solve all issues)
Block 42 (developer approached OCURA asking for them to assist in acquiring blighted property adjacent to land on which he was already in control of)
PLICO/Flatiron (originally acquired by OCURA on behalf of Presbyterian Health Foundation, this was not done via RFP as its development was specifically tied to adjacent land owned by the foundation. The entire thing was complicated, but OCURA and PHF and then the owner it was transferred to had a say in how it was developed. When the original development partner was unable to perform the current developer was selected and designs approved after an extensive review process covered extensively in multiple local papers and in this forum)
Aloft (mostly private aquisition although included some City/OCURA land after application from owner controlling adjacent property)
Renaissance Hotel ( having a hard time finding contemporary detailed stories on this deal - as no local reporters were specifically covering downtown beat at time - other than that it was happening. OCURA was involved, but I THINK this property was COTPA land, which would not have been subject to the RFP requirement. In this case I know the City sought out JQH because they desperately wanted a hotel across the street from the MAPS-funded Myriad conference facilities and John Q Hammons was top-of-the-heap at the time. I know that they made deals to lure him that they since had some regret over, including tying up catering and bookings at Cox Center and also obligating them to also allow him to build a future hotel adjacent to Chesapeake Arena, which eventually was Courtyard by Marriott. At the time - 1995 - they were truly desperate to get a hotel as there was only one single hotel downtown, off-brand at that).
Courtyard by Marriott (this property was subject to a handshake deal with John Q Hammons to get him to do Renaissance. By the time arena was constructed the City was less desperate and took a look at other deals - at least one of them, that is - before allowing Hammons to proceed (https://newsok.com/article/2748171/two-developers-compete-for-downtown-hotel-site). Not sure what process was as I cannot find reporting specific to how selection was made.
Like PLICO, a number of deals in the OU Medical Center area were/are subject to a long-term development agreement between OCURA and what was the Presbyterian Health Foundation, so they have different layers of processes but still go through a pretty rigorous vetting.

Deals which to the best of my memory mostly unencumbered by public land ownership:


Brownstones at Maywood (mostly property acquired privately, a ton of which was a private sale of Kerr-McGee lots in Deep Deuce to Triangle partners)
Lofts at Maywood (spinoff of Triangle after Brownstones failed to connect and for-sale market upheaval and correction
Maywood II (same as above)
LEVEL (same as above)
Mosaic (same as above)
Central Avenue Villas (private land acquisition)
Metropolitan (private land acquisition)
LIFT (land acquired and development driven by Saint Anthony)
Too many Midtown Renaissance, Steve Mason and other redevelopment projects to mention here, all via private land aquisition
Steelyard (private land acquisition)
Criterion Theater (private land acquisition)
Hotels in Bricktown not already mentioned, including Holiday Inn Express, Hampton Inn, Hilton Garden Inn, Homewood Suites, all private land acquisition
West Village (private land acquisition)
Sandridge and associated property (private land acquisition)

Everything in the above list, despite being privately acquired, endured various levels of scrutiny in public meetings including Bricktown and downtown design reviews, all of which occurred in open meetings with published agendas and minutes.

Sometimes of course public land has been swapped (mostly with other cities or government entities), but nobody is swapping the Cox Center land, as evidenced by the city turning down such a proposal by REHCO for the old Ford dealership site.

Regarding COTPA, which as I pointed out is a public trust with OKC as its beneficiary municipality and NOT the same thing as the City of Oklahoma City (read a description of the purpose of municipal public trust here (http://www.crawfordcpas.com/Municipalpublictrusts.pdf)), there have been a number of transactions in recent years. Keep in mind that the responsibilities of a public trust are to work to the benefit of its associated municipality, NOT necessarily to get the most money out of a property. For instance, in the case of the Santa Fe garage - which let's be honest obviously drove the post that I quoted - this means for instance not putting a property on the market to the highest bidder but instead looking at the most benefit for the City and its taxpayers.

If you do the former, you could end up with a single-focus, bottom-line-only parking operator who price gouges, drives up the parking rates in the immediate area, runs off corporate users - like Continental or BancFirst, for instance - and makes redevelopment of contiguous space such as Cotter Ranch Tower tricky or even impossible. Can you think of ANY scenarios whereby a highest bidder might not be the best deal for OKC? Can you think of any downtown property owners who you might not want to own it, simply by nature of writing the largest check?

Instead, the deal currently being considered does the following:


Provides Continental a long-term parking solution and solidifies their ability to remain in downtown OKC
Enables BancFirst to confidently purchase and redevelop Cotter Ranch Tower with contiguous parking
Guarantees the existing parking arrangement with the Skirvin
Requires after-hours event parking availablity to remain in place
Frees up Cox Center underground parking from Contintental requirements so that it can be redeveloped at some point
Frees up bonding capacity for COTPA to build and participate in other needed structured parking deals

COTPA also, by the way:


did redevelopment deal for Century Center Garage after being approached by developer with plan
Developed Arts District Garage, with a public selection process for architect and an attempt via OCURA to RFP residential above garage

Again, these things were done by a public trust charged with managing its assets to the best possible benefit of Oklahoma City, and these things were done largely through open processes. If you care to, you can go find links to every single thing I posted. Meeting agendas, meeting minutes, extensive reporting in publications like The Oklahoman, The Journal Record, The Gazette and others, television stories, etc., and extensive coverage and conversation ad nauseam in this very forum.

Regarding The Alliance, which is a frequent target here, it is pretty openly acknowledged by those who follow such things that - although there are still areas where media would like more access - the OCURA business it conducts is VASTLY more transparent than it has ever been. One of the deals struck during the creation of the organization was a requirement that their meetings be public, which is NOT a legal requirement (meaning they exceed the legal requirement there). You can go attend an OCURA meeting anytime. Here is the meeting schedule for both OCURA and the Economic Development Trust (https://www.theallianceokc.org/2018-meetings).

Additionally, The Alliance publishes meetings minutes and also reports on their activities, including a President's Report (https://www.theallianceokc.org/presidents-report) and a regular newsletter (https://www.theallianceokc.org/newsletters). There are also regular blog-type posts (https://www.theallianceokc.org/news), most directly from Cathy O'Connor. There is a description of who they are (https://www.theallianceokc.org/aboutthealliance), there is lots of detail on what they do (https://www.theallianceokc.org/what-we-do), there is a list of current RFPs (right now there are ten) (https://www.theallianceokc.org/rfps).

I honestly question whether many who are so critical of this group have ever been to a meeting, read an agenda, or even spent time on the website. For all of the talk about how nefarious this group is, a huge amount of what they do is available online at the click of your mouse. Click for yourself and judge for yourself. And go to a meeting if you'd like. You can even sign up to be heard.

Embark/COTPA's meetings are also pretty easy to track down (https://embarkok.com/about/calendar/), by the way.

So I will ask again...which of the above-listed projects makes you think that the Cox Center site would be sold off to a private developer for redevelopment purposes via a back-room deal with no public process? I'm sure I haven't listed everything, and maybe you can give me an example of it happening before, but before you casually toss out a suggestion that it is possible or even likely that it would happen to the Cox site, maybe you could list at least...one?

I’ve been an avid reader of this site for over a decade and as much as I enjoy your posts, this is one of my favorites... great job...

Regarding The Alliance, which is a frequent target here, it is pretty openly acknowledged by those who follow such things that - although there are still areas where media would like more access - the OCURA business it conducts is VASTLY more transparent than it has ever been. One of the deals struck during the creation of the organization was a requirement that their meetings be public, which is NOT a legal requirement (meaning they exceed the legal requirement there). You can go attend an OCURA meeting anytime. Here is the meeting schedule for both OCURA and the Economic Development Trust (https://www.theallianceokc.org/2018-meetings).

Additionally, The Alliance publishes meetings minutes and also reports on their activities, including a President's Report (https://www.theallianceokc.org/presidents-report) and a regular newsletter (https://www.theallianceokc.org/newsletters). There are also regular blog-type posts (https://www.theallianceokc.org/news), most directly from Cathy O'Connor. There is a description of who they are (https://www.theallianceokc.org/aboutthealliance), there is lots of detail on what they do (https://www.theallianceokc.org/what-we-do), there is a list of current RFPs (right now there are ten) (https://www.theallianceokc.org/rfps).

To clarify a few things:

None of the Alliance meetings, negotiations, documents or anything else are subject to open meetings and records laws. They don't publish minutes and the information they share is completely at their own discretion and is selective. Prior to establishing the Alliance, everything regarding the matters they now handle was subject to open meetings and records laws.

And long before the Alliance was formed, OCURA published its minutes and their meetings were open. In fact, I have minutes that date back as far as 2006 (the Alliance was formed in 2011) that were provided upon request and they specifically state the group was operating under the OK Open Meetings Law and list attendees that include reporters.

Please cite an example - ANY example - of a significant public property being sold for redevelopment purposes to a private party or parties via "informal and behind closed door meetings."

I was being facetious. but am actually very glad that it resulted in your post. because I actually wasn't aware, or not fully understanding the history of a few of the things you mentioned. it is a very informative post and I thank you for your time and effort you put into it.

Pete, what Alliance secret deals do you believe are being concocted at this time that are being done in bad faith or in avoidance of transparency?

Other than the Alliance persons themselves, who are the main bad actors conspiring to do the behind the scenes deals? You seem to know what all is happening, so in the public's interest, please identify projects and name names. If you don't have the resources or wish to be at the forefront, can you get your new partner, Ch 4, to do it? You seem pasionate about resolving this, so light the fuse.

Nobody is really saying that the Alliance is doing anything shady.

I think the point is that there should be no reason for anybody to ever even have to worry about anybody doing anything shady due to FOI and Open Records laws. And having an organization that doesn't have to comply with these laws at the very least creates the impression that something 'could' be going on, but that impression could be mitigated by having open meetings, releasing records, etc.

Sunshine Laws don't always exist to catch bad actors, they exist to show that bad actors didn't exist to begin with.

If what is being insinuated is true, then the open meetings act has been regularly violated. That would mean there are bad actors conspiring to meet and conduct business. And, it seems as if they would be meeting to discuss the business presented to them from outside interests who then are likely part and parcel.

To clarify a few things:

None of the Alliance meetings, negotiations, documents or anything else are subject to open meetings and records laws. They don't publish minutes and the information they share is completely at their own discretion and is selective. Prior to establishing the Alliance, everything regarding the matters they now handle was subject to open meetings and records laws.

And long before the Alliance was formed, OCURA published its minutes and their meetings were open. In fact, I have minutes that date back as far as 2006 (the Alliance was formed in 2011) that were provided upon request and they specifically state the group was operating under the OK Open Meetings Law and list attendees that include reporters.

I should have been more clear. Sorry. OCURA is now more transparent than it has ever been, and that is thanks to The Alliance. Ask anyone who has followed them closely or covered them in the media over the past couple of decades. Seriously. For starters, yes, you could/can get minutes and agendas from pre-Alliance days via requests, and always could. But they were not routinely published online until The Alliance began to manage OCURA under agreement with the City. Now the meetings, agendas, packets and minutes are published like clockwork on The Alliance's website. You can find all of that here: https://www.theallianceokc.org/2018-meetings

On the same page you can find schedules, agendas and minutes for The Oklahoma City Economic Development Trust and the Oklahoma Port Authority.

Other problems that used to challenge the transparency of OCURA was a tendency to move meetings around to different locations and to not always have regular office hours. These were mostly due to small staff and resources, but obviously were not optimal. The Alliance has changed all of this.

Regarding The Alliance itself, it is NOT a municipal agency but instead a professional management team contracted by Oklahoma City to manage the affairs of these other orgs and to become a one-stop shop for businesses looking to locate a presence in Oklahoma or invest. Their job is to sit down with these companies and figure out what is required to bring new investment and jobs to our city. Then to direct them to the proper mechanisms, which can include City incentives, state and even federal dollars. Instead of chasing around to a bunch of agencies which may or may not be on the same page, The Alliance streamlines the process and helps OKC move fast in securing economic development.

But as a private organization The Alliance itself has fewer requirements than do the organizations it manages. By the way, other cities have very similar models. OKC's was in part modeled after one in Kansas City, if I recall correctly. Having recently been to Austin on a ULI trip one of my biggest takeaways was that Austin is desperate to get a similar org in place. In fact, it is probably the one and only thing about OKC of which Austin is jealous.


Nobody is really saying that the Alliance is doing anything shady...


Unhhh...of course they are. It has been a recurring theme on this board for a long, long time and lately has been a dominant topic here.


...I think the point is that there should be no reason for anybody to ever even have to worry about anybody doing anything shady due to FOI and Open Records laws. And having an organization that doesn't have to comply with these laws at the very least creates the impression that something 'could' be going on, but that impression could be mitigated by having open meetings, releasing records, etc.

Sunshine Laws don't always exist to catch bad actors, they exist to show that bad actors didn't exist to begin with.
I think that we can all agree that is a noble sentiment. But it ignores reality. Let me explain why: one of the first rule of negotiations is to not lay all of your cards on the table. Or put another way, the first person to name a price in a negotiation LOSES THE NEGOTIATION.

There of course is a purist argument that we (OKC, the state of Oklahoma, whoever) should not use incentives at all, and to just let the market determine what happens. Frankly, I personally would prefer it this way... ...if everyone else did it too. Unilateral disarmament when it comes to incentives would be disastrous, ESPECIALLY for a city which historically struggles to be noticed. Incentives:


Allow OKC to attract businesses/jobs which might not otherwise locate here (Boeing, etc)
Encourage development in areas of the community where it is more challenging/expensive to develop or where you wish to concentrate employment for strategic purposes (downtown, health center) or where it might be difficult to attract interst at all (JFK neighborhood)
Secure retail in your community which might otherwise not locate here to begin with or instead locate in a metro municipality where sales tax would be siphoned off

Think all of our competition isn't also playing the incentive game? You're dead wrong if so. I mentioned this in another thread a month or two ago, but OKC is providing COSTCO with about $3 million in conditional incentives, while Dallas - who arguable needs to use incentives less than almost any city in our region - gave COSTCO how much? Yep, $3 million (https://candysdirt.com/2016/05/08/3-million-economic-incentive-new-north-dallas-costco-coming/).

Even in our own state and our own metro, our neighbors are playing the game...AGAINST OKC. Norman, Edmond, Midwest City and more have incentives designed to lure business and development (and sales tax dollars) to their communities based on proximity to Oklahoma City. Considering pretty much all of our operational budget as a city is dependent upon sales tax revenue, we have to protect against this as if our lives depend on it. Because it sortof does.

So again, unfortunately I am of the opinion that playing the incentives game is a fact of life. If you agree with this in principle, the next step is to decide how you are going to play the game. Whether this involves property or money is beside the fact. Both have value. If you are doing it and you don't want to get absolutely fleeced, having all of your potential resources and all of your methods on full display is only going to give the next company a road map for exactly what your thinking is, exactly how you operate, and exactly what you have to offer, to the dollar. And by the way, it also gives competing municipalities a road map to outbidding you.

Also, by the way, many companies would simply refuse to come to the table at all if they were unable to negotiate under protections of NDAs and the ability to keep certain proprietary information absolutely private.

So, THIS is why The Alliance was formed as an organization which can negotiate on behalf of the City while maintaining some level of discretion. I truly believe they are solid reasons, and despite what is being suggested these elements actually PROTECT the City's interests, its tax dollars, and its economic development opportunities. It's completely fair to keep giving this process scrutiny, but automatically jumping to the conclusion that the reasons are nefarious is a bad, bad idea and a total mis-read, in my opinion.

Urbanized, I for one am glad you bring clarity, insight and common sense to this board. I get tired of insinuations without specifics to back them up, or insight and balance. If people have knowledge of illegalities or unethical behavior, then absolutely they should shine light on it. Otherwise, if there is no basis but suspicion based on incomplete facts (or absence of facts), I think it is detremental to beat the drum of conspiricies, incompetence, and impropriety, no matter how subtley it is done. If one has a suspicion, then investigate first....really investigate...not just ask your friends. If credible evidence exists, then pursue it. But too many think 1+1=3.

This is not a binary issue where either you have complete secrecy and economic development, or you have neither.

There was a ton of economic development before the Alliance came along. In fact, the huge percentage of new businesses and retailers and developments never even talk to the city or the Alliance or ask for incentives.

The idea that Costco or Boeing wouldn't come here without the Alliance and it's related secrecy is pure speculation.

And when it comes to secrecy in government and spending hundreds of millions of tax dollars, the burden of proof is squarely on those asking for those things.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This.

while a appreciate the information that Urbanized is bringing on the issue and he is correct in a lot of his statement... Pete sums it up best with the fact that it is not a binary issue

The OKC Yard Dawgz, for the past few weeks or so, have been teasing that the team will return. Today, they changed their profile picture and it includes the caption "The Dawgz are Back". Has anyone heard anything more about this?? Attached is the link to their facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/OKCYardDawgz/?hc_ref=ARQdRZoskmIq35ElMTRapVGG1fAK-esBFGDKtf9PJ19we7xjzp2ng7g3j2CFEVp8iaQ&__xts__[0]=68.ARDwggXqZwBJNFkcz-EcHW0MBg_SysNHLP4DfAHKtWeaFUguVVShoOKc_tYaipTUIWH5 gDqTKv55wFs7by4HJ7kfjFmbvczOwGeGkuTrNeBvWVWy15bigL HKjHDFkGdtLBrILuGO0C4lRUoJhTpXI-ADZ8QM0A3gyxusmVkfgzxM9Rp57WQk_Cd5U79mJePFUTfRcIO7 Mjce0_GmMpWUYDQoA7QVO18gOgM6GZtwsw&__tn__=kCH-R

would be great to have more entertainment options in the city.

not everyone likes or can afford the Thunder and/or OU, diversity of entertainment is yet another initiative that OKC needs to adopt.

if done right a pedestrian mall would be great. Canal extension anyone?

not everyone likes or can afford the Thunder and/or OU, diversity of entertainment is yet another initiative that OKC needs to adopt.

I've seen numerous people comment on the expense of Thunder tickets and I'm not sure if people are aware that you can get tickets for under $20 to most games as long it's not an elite opponent.

I think it shows, to an extent, the lack of knowledge on getting tix to these games on the cheap. There are many ticket exchange apps (Stubhub, ticketmaster) where you can get tickets electronically and sometimes up to and after tip off. Sometimes the sellers fire sale them during these times as well. Now you will most likely be in Loud City, or in OU case, the upper deck, but you will still be at the game.

For instance, you can go the OU Army game for $44 total tomorrow thru Stubhub. Will probably be cheaper tomorrow too.

if done right a pedestrian mall would be great. Canal extension anyone?

Would be neat but it would present some pretty significant engineering challenges. The canal would have to go under the BNSF viaduct, under Santa Fe Station, and under the streetcar line on EK Gaylord. I don't think it'd be very cost effective. I'd rather just see the grid restored or an at-grade pedestrian mall.

As soon as the new convention center is completed, the city will move quickly on plans for the Myriad/Cox Convention Center. This site has tremendous potential.

If by move quickly you mean demolish it and leave it barren for years awaiting the right deal, then yes, I believe that.

I guess I always thought this is where the new arena will go in 10 years when CHK/Ford is out of date.

Arenas will look much different in a few years. Less actual seats, more club and VIP seats. Loud City will be 1/2 the size it is now. More restaurants and food options. Also wouldn't be surprised to see some type of casino or a big club/restaurant/sports bar place for a sports book. Its just a matter of time before Oklahoma allows sports betting and the NBA and the city find a way to make it happen.

I guess I always thought this is where the new arena will go in 10 years when CHK/Ford is out of date.

Arenas will look much different in a few years. Less actual seats, more club and VIP seats. Loud City will be 1/2 the size it is now. More restaurants and food options. Also wouldn't be surprised to see some type of casino or a big club/restaurant/sports bar place for a sports book. Its just a matter of time before Oklahoma allows sports betting and the NBA and the city find a way to make it happen.

I'm not really sure why everyone thinks CHK will be out of date that quickly. Look at the arena market...without a major change in how revenue is generated by NBA arenas (like adding luxury boxes in the 90s and 2000s), CHK is going to be a viable venue for 20-30 years or longer. It will obviously need to be updated and renovated over the years, but there is nothing going on in the foreseeable future that will make the shell of that building obsolete. At any rate, it will be obsolete well after the Cox site is likely developed.

I'm not really sure why everyone thinks CHK will be out of date that quickly. Look at the arena market...without a major change in how revenue is generated by NBA arenas (like adding luxury boxes in the 90s and 2000s), CHK is going to be a viable venue for 20-30 years or longer. It will obviously need to be updated and renovated over the years, but there is nothing going on in the foreseeable future that will make the shell of that building obsolete. At any rate, it will be obsolete well after the Cox site is likely developed.

This.

In the 90s and 2000s cities weren't building new arenas just for the hell of it. They had to do it because of the changing demands of the NBA. The Peake won't need to be replaced until the NBA has a requirement that it cannot be retrofitted to meet.

I 100% agree.

However there is another factor. If the powers that be determine that they want/need a new arena, they will use whatever justification necessary. Maybe even slip it as a MAPS project and prioritize it over other projects that the public thought were more important.

I 100% agree.

However there is another factor. If the powers that be determine that they want/need a new arena, they will use whatever justification necessary. Maybe even slip it as a MAPS project and prioritize it over other projects that the public thought were more important.

I think public opinion of MAPS as we know it is peaking, or has already peaked. I’m not sure another one would pass if it is only limited to big ticket items.

The OKC Yard Dawgz, for the past few weeks or so, have been teasing that the team will return. Today, they changed their profile picture and it includes the caption "The Dawgz are Back". Has anyone heard anything more about this?? Attached is the link to their facebook page.
https://www.facebook.com/OKCYardDawgz/

Lol, man I forgot about the Yard Dawgz. If they have $1 beer night I'm in.

I 100% agree.

However there is another factor. If the powers that be determine that they want/need a new arena, they will use whatever justification necessary. Maybe even slip it as a MAPS project and prioritize it over other projects that the public thought were more important.

There is no reason to "want/need" a new arena over renovating the current one unless it would greatly improve the bottom line for the team.

I've said this before and many will throw rocks at me for saying it, but i dont feel like restoring the grid at the Cox site is a good idea. We have land in the heart of downtown that's primed for that next arena when the Peake is ready to go. Getting that land back later would make the project a LOT more expensive. The Cox can still serve a purpose for smaller events and will most likely be a cheaper option than the new CC anyway. The fact that we have two venues so close could be beneficial for very large events too.

There really isn't anything there to NEED the grid restored either, as in you dont get anything from it. East/West you just get access from a rail wall with no connection to bricktown and then the park. North South, you aren't REALLY blocked today because people walk through the Cox all day and get to be indoors while they cross. But that being said, there isn't much need there between the 2 hotels and the Peak. Normal downtown workers go to SantaFe and go north or west to their buildings, not south towards the Peak.

There is SOOOO much open land right now with C2S, we definitely don't need a plot like this open. And without a developer ready to build without TIFF/etc, then we'll just end up with another OG&E/Stage Center debacle.

The current Cox site is a pivotal area and link between C2S, CBD, Bricktown, and the intermodal hub of Santa Fe Station.

Saving such a valuable block for an arena that we won't need for 15+ years is ludicrous. The city has so much to gain by demoing the CCC and RFPing the land. The additional property tax and revenue generation from that one block alone could probably build a new arena in 15 years. By the time OKC needs a new arena, there will be several viable locations. East Bricktown (Chevy Events Center), Lumberyard, Coop site - to name some obvious ones.

As long as we don’t move the arena up to Edmond then I’ll be cool. But yea, no need to worry about a new arena now when the Peake will outlast all the development around it. Imagine downtown in 15-20 years. There’s still a bunch of space to put a new arena if need be and I’d hate for the Cox to sit there and collect dust while we wait for a perfectly good arena to get old. But quick question, why not implode the Peake and build a new arena on the same site? Just a thought.

Sager, THAT ^ definitely wont happen.

IF (and a big IIIFFF) they were to ever move the arena from downtown, it would go to the fairgrounds or somewhere else in OKC, not to a suburb like Edmond. .. But rest assured, it WILL stay downtown, no doubt.

COX: I agree that we shouldn't hold onto the Myriad lands as there are plenty of other developable sites within the rest of downtown to put a new arena should we need to go that direction. We need to expand the CBD and myriad is the natural progression (as will the Chesapeake arena lands eventually).

My thing is, there have been NO developers even wanting to think about building up (rather than out) in OKC in a while! Aside from the Devon Tower and the BOK Park Plaza building (barely half full, if that), when was the last tower even proposed in OKC, let alone a residential tower of any kind? If the space was cleared of the convention center, I do not think it will be built up, but rather out. It will take a creative (for OK only, as it seems everywhere else they don't mind building up) mind to build towers to expand the CBD in OKC.

I've said this before and many will throw rocks at me for saying it, but i dont feel like restoring the grid at the Cox site is a good idea. We have land in the heart of downtown that's primed for that next arena when the Peake is ready to go. Getting that land back later would make the project a LOT more expensive. The Cox can still serve a purpose for smaller events and will most likely be a cheaper option than the new CC anyway. The fact that we have two venues so close could be beneficial for very large events too.

There really isn't anything there to NEED the grid restored either, as in you dont get anything from it. East/West you just get access from a rail wall with no connection to bricktown and then the park. North South, you aren't REALLY blocked today because people walk through the Cox all day and get to be indoors while they cross. But that being said, there isn't much need there between the 2 hotels and the Peak. Normal downtown workers go to SantaFe and go north or west to their buildings, not south towards the Peak.

There is SOOOO much open land right now with C2S, we definitely don't need a plot like this open. And without a developer ready to build without TIFF/etc, then we'll just end up with another OG&E/Stage Center debacle.

I don't think there's enough demand for land in downtown OKC right now to demo the Cox Center. In 10 years that might be different, but right now I think it's unlikely to generate the level of investment that we desire.

For that development to truly be a "success", we probably need something larger than the proposed OG&E/Clayco project. There's twice as much available land here, and this need a $1 billion-plus level of investment. To do it right, the city probably needs to coordinate 4 or 5 different developers, each one moving forward on a different piece of the property with their own (well funded) projects. But I don't think anybody is ready to do that right now.

Let's say there are (at least) 3 barriers to this moving forward today. First, we've got a lot of Class A office space that is unfilled thanks to the BOk building that just opened up. It will fill up eventually, but we don't have a pressing need for more office space downtown right now. Second, until First National opens up, we've got very little information on how the city will handle high rise housing. As I understand it, it's almost impossible to get loans to build high rise residential until the city proves it can support something comparable. Third, the city can't use any TIF funds to help with a hotel for the foreseeable future because of our deal with Omni.

Now, all those issues could be worked out. BOk may fill up in the next few years, and if the oil industry continues to recover, or we get some more tech companies moving here, we may need more Class A space in the future. From what I understand, Harold Hamm runs a super-tight ship, and once he retires here in 5 or 10 years, it's possible that CR could grow significantly. Our outlook on office towers could be a lot stronger in 2028 as opposed to today. First National may be a huge success, and high rise residential could work very well in OKC. And Omni may do such good business here that they might want to exercise their option to put an additional hotel on the Cox Center grounds.

But I don't think any of this is going to happen the day after the new convention center opens. I'd suggest keeping the Cox Center open for smaller conventions, at least for a few years until a truly world-class (not make believe world class like we sometimes see) proposal is ready to go.