What exactly do you think "new urbanism" means?

Just because it doesn't have to be urban, it doesn't mean it can't be urban. A couple years back I had the opportunity to visit the Philadelphia convention center, and at the time I thought it fit very nicely with the downtown there. Of course it has the added benefit of sitting right next door to the Reading Terminal Market, which made for a great lunch spot on several of the days I was in town.Hey, I support a more urban convention center here in OKC. But saying just because it doesn't have to be urban, doesn't mean it can't be urban could be said for a suburban style.

Again, I think OKC's convention center should be held up to urbanist standards, but I think we can still make an amazing convention center. I esp. like the grass on the roof. It would be nice to see some ordinance requiring some amount of plants on rooftops.

Well, I believe Nashville spent around $600 million on theirs. If what some are saying about the finalized cost of our convention center being $800 million, then we could easily support a competing one. I also think theirs looks bigger because it is sprawled out more instead of being more vertical.

Maybe you're right though, I honestly haven't spent much time researching this matter. Not sure if OKC would even be able to attract conventions like that even with a better convention center than Nashville's.

I don't think we should plan on a phase II. I think it's going to be a hard sell. We may end up without a phase I if one of our mayoral candidates has his way. Wonder if he's ever been inside the Cox Center? Or really looked at the outside? Or thought about losing that superblock? Maybe that would be concentrating on downtown too much.....

What exactly do you think "new urbanism" means?I believe new urbanism is a building style that only works if an entire community is built to its standards. I think new urbanist communities are great to have and can provide wonderful benefits for the people the live, work, and play in them. I prefer suburban, but that's just me. I want to see Edmond's core redeveloped to become a miniature new urbanist community probably more than anyone and have talked to Charles Lamb about it a few times and I've heard Edmond is open to the idea.

I don't think we should plan on a phase II. I think it's going to be a hard sell. We may end up without a phase I if one of our mayoral candidates has his way. Wonder if he's ever been inside the Cox Center?Yeah, that is completely true. I actually thought about that... I doubt Ed has been in the Cox center seeing as he's never been to as Thunder game. Hopefully we at least get a phase one built.

"Dwarfs the city behind it"?????? Really!? That's strange. It is a very beautiful structure and almost anyone would be lucky to live by it, I know I wouldn't mind living by it.

Well I guess it's not much different from the Edmond "Rt 66" Walmart towering over the Fox Lake neighborhood.

Well I guess it's not much different from the Edmond Walmart towering over the Fox Lake neighborhood.Spartan, I am not understanding what you mean by it dwarfing the city? Nashville has huge skyscrapers that stand over this. It adds to the city, imo. Just out of curiosity, what exactly do you not like about it?

I agree. They should have just put a giant guitar shaped building there.

But OKC can not afford NOT to build a CC that can compete with KC-STL-Austin-Ft. Worth-Denver ect. It's time for OKC to take a step up and move ahead of the Tulsa's-Whichita'-Omahas of the world. You either get on board of get left behind. If OKC wants to grow and become a serious contender then a new world class cc. needs to be built. If it costs 500 mil. then so be it. By the time we pay it off we can pass another maps for a new arena and keep momentum going. Maybe the maps project needs to include all the counties surrounding OKC next time since these suburbs also benefit from a strong OKC. Your either with us or against us.+1

they kinda did on the roof. Not the purtiest ge-tar I ever seen, but might look better if one is flying over and looking down.Yeah, I didn't know if I was the only one seeing that or if they did that on purpose. I like it.

It looks like something may start happening on this as per Steve's article.

Oklahoma City council reviews condemnation sought for convention center site | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-council-reviews-condemnation-sought-for-convention-center-site/article/3943513)


The Oklahoma City Council on Tuesday will be asked to approve starting condemnation on a proposed site for the new convention center in what is being described as an “amicable” process of determining the property’s value.

Glad to see they are being adults about this, instead of how the Brewer's handled their negotiations with the city regarding Santa Fe Station.

Some quick calculations:

REHCO owns 11.7 acres and are being offered $12.8 million by the City. That's $1,092,000 per acre.

Stage Center just sold it's 3.17 acres for $4.275 million for $1,349,000 an acre.


I bet the City ends up paying closer to $15 million.

That would be a steal if the city can acquire it for that price, although the site is still more desirable as a contiguous park or private development. If they entire arbitration we are locked in and could pay as high as $30-40 million.

We they get the convention center land acquired and the development started before Dr. Shadid's recall petition is processed and possibly voted upon?


http://www.thunderfans.com/vforum/images/smilies/okc.gif "Oklahoma City looks oh-so pretty... ...as I get my kicks on Route 66." --Nat King Cole.http://www.thunderfans.com/vforum/images/smilies/okc.gif

We they get the convention center land acquired and the development started before Dr. Shadid's recall petition is processed and possibly voted upon?


http://www.thunderfans.com/vforum/images/smilies/okc.gif "Oklahoma City looks oh-so pretty... ...as I get my kicks on Route 66." --Nat King Cole.http://www.thunderfans.com/vforum/images/smilies/okc.gif

That's what I was thinking a few pages back. But the city council has to approve the purchase of the land and you better believe ES is going to fight hard to not get it passed. I am curious if it has to go to a revote if the purchasing of the land has to be delayed. Steve?

That's what I was thinking a few pages back. But the city council has to approve the purchase of the land and you better believe ES is going to fight hard to not get it passed. I am curious if it has to go to a revote if the purchasing of the land has to be delayed. Steve?

haha, given how much the rest of the council seems to despise Shadid now, I wonder if he'll be the lone dissenter.

As Per Brian Brus' article in the Journal.


OKLAHOMA CITY – City Council members approved the acquisition of properties downtown for the development of a new convention center under the MAPS 3 tax issue on Tuesday.

The approval sets in motion condemnation and a third-party appraisal, said Brent Bryant, head of City Hall’s MAPS projects department. Bryant said the appraisal will be scheduled soon.


Guess who wasn't there to vote. LOL


The council agenda item passed without discussion in a vote of 5-0. Four ward representatives, including Ward 2 Councilman Ed Shadid, were absent from the proceedings Tuesday.

Guess one could say this was a DRED-less decsion.
Who were the other three who were absented, or would that be absentED?

As Per Brian Brus' article in the Journal.

Guess who wasn't there to vote. LOL

How long until Edgar comes on here saying Mick planned the vote for when ES was out of town? End of the day?

How long until Edgar comes on here saying Mick planned the vote for when ES was out of town? End of the day?

Seems about right. Perhaps Ed is in NYC working on a business degree.

Guess one could say this was a DRED-less decsion.
Who were the other three who were absented, or would that be absentED?

I guess Ed was being 'transparent', as in invisable, as in a no show...... talk was very cheap in that last election.

I guess Ed was being 'transparent', as in invisable, as in a no show...... talk was very cheap in that last election.

Not sure I would say that. Ed probably paid a higher price (in more ways than one) than he anticipated.

Not sure I would say that. Ed probably paid a higher price (in more ways than one) than he anticipated.

Thread is going off topic. So I will just make one post on this subject, and then back to the convention center...

Talk was cheap but we all paid a huge price during this election. Because the local political scene has certainly changed for quite a while, and the false allegations and smear campaign did damage to the trust of voters.

Just like convicting someone of a terrible crime, and them later being found not guilty can be extremely damaging to an individual. Accusing those in leadership of the city of being corrupt, even if innocent, the accusation is damaging to trust. And Ed got away with that damage, even if he was wrong in his accusations. He still caused damage.

And I'm done with that topic in this thread. Steering back towards the convention center...

Not a huge fan of the site. But still glad to see this move forward, and not backwards.

Does anyone know how long the rest of this process should take? I would think the condemnation itself wouldn't take too long but the appraisal probably would. A few months maybe?

The MAPS 3 Board will meet 3/27/14 to consider approval for the final conceptual design.

Some highlights:



This design reserves much of the western half of the project site for the convention center, leaving open land along the southwest edge of the property for private mixed-use development along the new downtown boulevard. This utilization of the site also preserves the entire east half of the site for the proposed convention headquarters hotel to be privately developed, which can front Robinson and enjoy proximity to major intersections at both Reno and the boulevard. In this location, the hotel can offer easy access to Bricktown, the Chesapeake Arena, the new Downtown Park and the Central Business District, not to mention the potential for a direct below-grade guest connection to the convention center.



http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/cc032114a.jpg




http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/cc032114aa.jpg






Exhibit Hall Level (50 feet in height, all below ground):
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/cc032114b.jpg




Meeting Room (Ground) Level:
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/cc032114d.jpg




Ballroom Level:
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/cc032114e.jpg





Parking Study:
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/cc032114f.jpg

It might raise public support if they were to make the underground exhibit halls accessible to people during tornadoes. I know this raises other safety issues, but it would seem to be a safe place to be in the event of a large tornado.

50 feet below ground? That may not be the best idea in Oklahoma. Just a thought.

Looks like they are planning to market all the property along the Boulevard to private developers.

Eliminates a lot of the objections some here and elsewhere have suggested previously.

50 feet below ground? That may not be the best idea in Oklahoma. Just a thought.

Why?

Now the big question comes what can be done with the ES petition to get a revote after we are already set to finalize the design and secure the property? Is the council just moving over it knowing it has no legs to stand on? I would think if there was a real threat, this process would be postponed a little.

I like this plan, especially preserving the connection between the Myriad Gardens and Central Park.

Really, the only thing that will be above ground other than the hotel is the ballroom.

The entire exhibit hall will be subterranean, and that will include future expansion. Loading docks will be underground as well.

Now the big question comes what can be done with the ES petition to get a revote after we are already set to finalize the design and secure the property? Is the council just moving over it knowing it has no legs to stand on? I would think if there was a real threat, this process would be postponed a little.

Why? Until the voters tell the city otherwise, this should continue to move forward as planned. There is no reason to stop/slow a project based on the future outcome of a petition which may or may not even come to pass.

I have to say, I mostly like it. Probably the best we could do with this site without it being a monolithic superblock... and we get boulevard street interaction!

50 feet below ground? That may not be the best idea in Oklahoma. Just a thought.

They better make a cistern at the bottom.

It seems like good land use, though one wonders how long the "expansion lots" will be there.

Didn't ES plan on getting 6,000 signatures to make the city hold a special election to have a revote for the convention center since "we weren't given all the information about the hotel and phase 2" before it went to a vote of the people? I am not saying I agree, in fact, I am on the complete opposite end that I disagree and think we need this CC more than any other MAPS3 project, I am just curious about how they are going to move forward if they authorize the plans and the land is purchased, then the city goes to a revote on the CC a year from now. If it passes again, nothing has changed. If it fails, then we have a super block and a half sitting empty in city hands with no funding to build anything on them.

I know people hate the underground, but it might not be a bad idea to run a tunnel (leave it sealed off and unfinished, but pour the concrete) down the west side of hudson from Main street, and then to the convention center site, while that site, the preftakes block, and the stage center block are being demoed. That way we don't have to tear too many things up in the future if we want to eventually dig a tunnel across from Devon (to connect with their skybridge) and finish out the tunnels to give access from the conv center to the rest of the system. The side benefit of this is that you could also connect the city offices on Main to this while you were at it so that they could eventually enjoy the underground connectivity. An alternative would be to build a connecting tunnel on the cox site whenever it's razed, but then you don't get that side benefit for the city offices.

^

The one really good thing the Underground does for downtown is to directly connect parking and office buildings.

It makes it easier to provide parking further away, which is important because we don't have any room to add garages in the middle of the CBD.

And as someone who worked downtown for eight years, there were many, many days where I was happy to be able to take the Underground between my offices and my parking space.

The MAPS 3 Board will meet 3/27/14 to consider approval for the final conceptual design.

Some highlights:


For some reason, your images don't like to show up on my office computer.

^

The one really good thing the Underground does for downtown is to directly connect parking and office buildings.

That is not a good thing. It robs street front retailers of foot traffic that they 100% depend on.

Yeah, I like these renderings. I think I posted a page or two ago about the park connection, and it looks like that idea is still nicely in play.

The 160k/200k/300k/330k numbers, are those indicating the sq. ft. size of the exhibit hall if they build it out to those various sizes?

I know people hate the underground, but it might not be a bad idea to run a tunnel (leave it sealed off and unfinished, but pour the concrete) down the west side of hudson from Main street, and then to the convention center site, while that site, the preftakes block, and the stage center block are being demoed. That way we don't have to tear too many things up in the future if we want to eventually dig a tunnel across from Devon (to connect with their skybridge) and finish out the tunnels to give access from the conv center to the rest of the system. The side benefit of this is that you could also connect the city offices on Main to this while you were at it so that they could eventually enjoy the underground connectivity. An alternative would be to build a connecting tunnel on the cox site whenever it's razed, but then you don't get that side benefit for the city offices.I agree with you.

The Underground needs to be done with. We need more street activity and obviously the streetcar needs riders. Ridership directly correlates to diversified economic activity for shops along the route and for Bricktown.

If there is any one big failure in Oklahoma City regarding land use and pedestrian activity, it is that we throw every tool in the box at connectivity. IE- excessively wide roads, high speed limits, parking garages everywhere, parking lots near front doors, the Underground, and generally just spreading things too far apart. Blair Humphreys and I were talking about this some months ago. If there is anyone thing that we both lament, it is the lack of a "great street" with true 24 hour urban pedestrian activity. Arguably, Broadway/Auto Alley might get that way with the parking changes, Metropolitan, and so forth, but why can't we do that on more streets?

Enough with wide roads. Enough with excessive parking. Enough with spreading everything apart... Embrace the streetcar, sidewalks, and develop meaningful, expressive, and energetic corridors full of activity that will make our city truly vibrant.

Yeah, I like these renderings. I think I posted a page or two ago about the park connection, and it looks like that idea is still nicely in play.

The 160k/200k/300k/330k numbers, are those indicating the sq. ft. size of the exhibit hall if they build it out to those various sizes?

Yes, those would be the future expansion options.

The Underground needs to be done with. We need more street activity and obviously the streetcar needs riders. Ridership directly correlates to diversified economic activity for shops along the route and for Bricktown.

If there is any one big failure in Oklahoma City regarding land use and pedestrian activity, it is that we throw every tool in the box at connectivity. IE- excessively wide roads, high speed limits, parking garages everywhere, parking lots near front doors, the Underground, and generally just spreading things too far apart. Blair Humphreys and I were talking about this some months ago. If there is anyone thing that we both lament, it is the lack of a "great street" with true 24 hour urban pedestrian activity. Arguably, Broadway/Auto Alley might get that way with the parking changes, Metropolitan, and so forth, but why can't we do that on more streets?

Enough with wide roads. Enough with excessive parking. Enough with spreading everything apart... Embrace the streetcar, sidewalks, and develop meaningful, expressive, and energetic corridors full of activity that will make our city truly vibrant.

Knocked it out of the ballpark. Excellent post.

Knocked it out of the ballpark. Excellent post.

Yes yes...Yay for everything except underground. Underground is not a good idea in Okc. Build it up to the sky I say! Seriously,being underground in Ok. is only good when a tornado is coming at you.

Why would they want to take people off the streets and have them underground? Make no sense to me.

I know people hate the underground, but it might not be a bad idea to run a tunnel (leave it sealed off and unfinished, but pour the concrete) down the west side of hudson from Main street, and then to the convention center site, while that site, the preftakes block, and the stage center block are being demoed. That way we don't have to tear too many things up in the future if we want to eventually dig a tunnel across from Devon (to connect with their skybridge) and finish out the tunnels to give access from the conv center to the rest of the system. The side benefit of this is that you could also connect the city offices on Main to this while you were at it so that they could eventually enjoy the underground connectivity. An alternative would be to build a connecting tunnel on the cox site whenever it's razed, but then you don't get that side benefit for the city offices.

All of these sites are already connected in the best possible way: streets, which we've invested in.

The Underground needs to be done with. We need more street activity and obviously the streetcar needs riders. Ridership directly correlates to diversified economic activity for shops along the route and for Bricktown.

If there is any one big failure in Oklahoma City regarding land use and pedestrian activity, it is that we throw every tool in the box at connectivity. IE- excessively wide roads, high speed limits, parking garages everywhere, parking lots near front doors, the Underground, and generally just spreading things too far apart. Blair Humphreys and I were talking about this some months ago. If there is anyone thing that we both lament, it is the lack of a "great street" with true 24 hour urban pedestrian activity. Arguably, Broadway/Auto Alley might get that way with the parking changes, Metropolitan, and so forth, but why can't we do that on more streets?

Enough with wide roads. Enough with excessive parking. Enough with spreading everything apart... Embrace the streetcar, sidewalks, and develop meaningful, expressive, and energetic corridors full of activity that will make our city truly vibrant.I disagree man.

I disagree man.

Why?

I disagree man.

I disagree with you, man.

I disagree with you, man.

I agree with your disagreement. Man.

The Underground needs to be done with. We need more street activity and obviously the streetcar needs riders. Ridership directly correlates to diversified economic activity for shops along the route and for Bricktown.

If there is any one big failure in Oklahoma City regarding land use and pedestrian activity, it is that we throw every tool in the box at connectivity. IE- excessively wide roads, high speed limits, parking garages everywhere, parking lots near front doors, the Underground, and generally just spreading things too far apart. Blair Humphreys and I were talking about this some months ago. If there is anyone thing that we both lament, it is the lack of a "great street" with true 24 hour urban pedestrian activity. Arguably, Broadway/Auto Alley might get that way with the parking changes, Metropolitan, and so forth, but why can't we do that on more streets?

Enough with wide roads. Enough with excessive parking. Enough with spreading everything apart... Embrace the streetcar, sidewalks, and develop meaningful, expressive, and energetic corridors full of activity that will make our city truly vibrant.


Just to be clear, I'm in agreement with you 98% of the time. I'm a huge transit and walking advocate and can't wait until we have a system that gets me everywhere I need to go so I don't have to care about owning a car. I walk many miles a day downtown (yesterday I walked from home [5th/Hudson] to 9th/Broadway to Deep Deuce to Bricktown to the CBD to home. However, I do think there is a place for cars and even a (very limited) place for the underground. I didn't used to feel that way until experiencing a winter downtown while walking everywhere. I will always default to the street. But it's proven nice to not have to walk outside in subzero windchills (though I did walk home in -10 from a Thunder game as it was after hours for the Underground [the nearest access point is two blocks from where I live]). All of that said, if we didn't have an Underground, I wouldn't advocate for creating one. I was simply saying since we have one, and since it is convenient and useful, that IF we were ever going to expand it, the best time would be while all those blocks were being razed, for efficiency and cost savings and such.

Sorry to throw the thread off topic so much! Yay more walkable Convention Center plan with good street interaction!

Oklahoma's weather is too extreme to not appreciate the underground. It also helps with companies leasing space in multiple buildings downtown. Like ShawnW said before me, if we didn't already have one I don't think anybody would want to make the case to build it, but since we have it its nothing but a positive in my opinion.

I disagree with you, man.you don't even know why or what exactly I disagree with, but alright. I'll expand a little later. Not going to get too into it because I know most here are anti-large highway, anti six-lane roads, and pretty much anti-anything that doesn't doesn't give people walking around the first priority.

Why?I'll explain a little later today, but like I said, it won't be a huge post, just a paragraph or two.

you don't even know why or what exactly I disagree with, but alright. I'll expand a little later. Not going to get too into it because I know most here are anti-large highway, anti six-lane roads, and pretty much anti-anything that doesn't doesn't give people walking around the first priority.

In our core.. Yes very anti-anti-walkable features. There's no excuse for Oklahoma... The land of tough cowboys and huge manly monster trucks... To not be able to tolerate conditions that doesn't prohibit people from walking in Minneapolis or Chicago, or Phoenix or Vegas.

The Underground needs to be closed.

Memorial road is just fine being a super-auto corridor. I don't like that style, but it's not out of place up there. (For the record I conduct business about 4-5 times a week on memorial. So I don't "not drive" or have an anti-car bias.)

In our core.. Yes very anti-anti-walkable features. There's no excuse for Oklahoma... The land of tough cowboys and huge manly monster trucks... To not be able to tolerate conditions that doesn't prohibit people from walking in Minneapolis or Chicago, or Phoenix or Vegas.

The Underground needs to be closed.

Memorial road is just fine being a super-auto corridor. I don't like that style, but it's not out of place up there. (For the record I conduct business about 4-5 times a week on memorial. So I don't "not drive" or have an anti-car bias.)Not talking about the core. If that was the discussion was about, then that is laughable claiming our streets downtown are too wide. What a joke. Even Kansas City has wider streets downtown then we do.

Oh, and the underground should be expanded. I understand where you are coming from, but I'm all about giving people freedom, and that includes the freedom to choose to walk in a series of tunnels underground. We shouldn't force people to walk above ground just because you want to them to. If people want to look at retail, they will walk on the street, if they are going to a certain destination, then they will take the underground to avoid the elements.

The underground is great for connecting parking and buildings and will continue to be important for downtown growth

I agree it will support growth. But the wrong kind of growth. We need growth in street level activity and street level offerings.