This is also not strike-1 for the project. Were this the first time something happened that had us asking "What's really going on here", I think no one would really think twice about it.

If the land that we are building on is so valuable, maybe we need to reconsider the plans for the site. I think most here still agree that we'd prefer East-Parkside and we ought to at least test the waters on that location.

I think this is big part of the CC problem. It has been shady from the beginning - literally - because they asked the public to vote on a plan the Chamber wouldn't make public (and still hasn't). The CC subcommittee could never be accused of running a good PR campaign.

As for the location, I was really opposed to it from the beginning but I came to realize that public/civic buildings should get the best spots - but, and this is a huge BUT, the architecture needs to live up to the place of prominence it is being given. If they are going to half-ass the design then I just as soon it be located next to the railroad (for the record - glass curtain wall falls under the definition of half-ass). Did anyone watch the video I posted of the Howard Kunstler Ted Talk about how bad architecture wrecked cities? The convention center in Saratoga Springs, NY he referenced is NOT acceptable here!

We all agree that the Cox Convention Center will eventually have to be replaced. Oklahoma City completed study for the site process through the reputable firm Populous.

Let's get the new convention center & conference hotel under construction ASAP!

Let's frame this another way:

Are we excited about spending $25M to $30M for just the land that the convention center is going to sit on?

At that price point, I think we are being irresponsible to not at least make an offer for the other two locations that were under consideration in 2012, most particularly because the study indicated that this site should cost the least and that's turned out to be just not even close to reality.

Wrong. More than any other MAPS3 project the success of the CC depends upon its location, in this case it hinges directly upon its WALKABLE proximity to hotels, dining and entertainment. Other than the facility itself, that is the main selling point when pitching a conference or convention, and would be the most likely thing to compel a group to select OKC over another market.

Adding even five minutes to that average walk - or placing additional barriers like speedway-type boulevards between the CC and those amenities - could cripple the prospects of success for the most expensive of all MAPS3 projects. Keep it inside that bubble and OKC outperforms as a convention market; move it outside the bubble and we become a city easy to say no to, and one of those places that convention industry naysayers cite as an example of failure.

placing additional barriers like speedway-type boulevards between the CC and those amenities could cripple the prospects of success for the most expensive of all MAPS3 projects

Maybe certain people should re-think their desire for a speedway-type boulevard cutting the south side of downtown off.

While I agree with that, even if the boulevard were a happy little cobblestone lane, the south of Ford Center location would create walks in the range of 15+ minutes to a large number of critical locations. Contrary to the prevailing opinion that downtown "fat cat" business interests intervened on location because they inexplicably stand to benefit from the CC (nobody has ever bothered to explain how this would happen) the CC committee intervened on location selection because one site was already being pushed/assumed, and they came to understand how critical location was to the success of our biggest MAPS3 investment.

It's easy to dislike or distrust people because they are rich and powerful, but usually the reason they are rich and powerful is because they understand how business works. In this case, the convention business only works under a specific set of parameters. The CC is NOT the type of project you can place just anywhere in hopes of spurring development around it.

The eminent domain resolution has been dragging on for quite a while now, which indicates the parties cannot come to agreement.

Based on comparable downtown sales over the last few years, it looks like the price would be somewhere between $20 and $33 million and the CC budget only includes $17 million for land and site preparation.

Any land swap is still a cost that should be billed to the convention center project.

Not if it's for the hotel.

I've had several conversations with a council member about the convention center and hotel and they've maintained that the convention center hotel isn't going to require as much of a subsidy as many people seem to think. They've told me more than once that they felt like free land and a reasonable TIF would get it done.

If that's the case, the land swap may very well just be the portion of land being used for the hotel, greatly reducing the cost of the overall property that would come out of the MAPS budget.

Wrong. More than any other MAPS3 project the success of the CC depends upon its location, in this case it hinges directly upon its WALKABLE proximity to hotels, dining and entertainment. Other than the facility itself, that is the main selling point when pitching a conference or convention, and would be the most likely thing to compel a group to select OKC over another market.

Adding even five minutes to that average walk - or placing additional barriers like speedway-type boulevards between the CC and those amenities - could cripple the prospects of success for the most expensive of all MAPS3 projects. Keep it inside that bubble and OKC outperforms as a convention market; move it outside the bubble and we become a city easy to say no to, and one of those places that convention industry naysayers cite as an example of failure.

Congratulations, you just made a great argument for the East Bricktown site!!

Congratulations, you just made a great argument for the East Bricktown site!!

East BT is on the outer fringe and MG is in the middle of everything...walkable to more things of interest, not just BT restaurants and bars.

Congratulations, you just made a great argument for the East Bricktown site!!
As much as I would personally love the east Bricktown site, it puts downtown's only full-service hotels outside of the 10 minute bubble; 15-17 minutes away by foot. Believe me or don't, but that would have calamitous impact on OKC's ability to book conferences and conventions. Salability of OKC as a convention destination doesn't revolve ONLY around proximity to Bricktown.

lol…15-17 minutes away by foot? I can walk to Midtown from Bricktown in 17 minutes.

Broadway/Sheridan is 3 blocks away from the C2S North Site, 5 blocks away from the C2S South Site and 6 blocks away from the East Bricktown site.

I'm not arguing that the Bob Howard site isn't the BEST site…outside of the Cox Center it's the most prime real estate in the entire state of Oklahoma, but because of that, it's going to come at a price to the city in terms of land acquisition costs, and a price in terms of removing such prime real estate away from the private sector for a convention center that is going to be mostly useless to the average person spending time in OKC unless they beef up their plans for street front retail.

How about you get on Google Maps and measure walking distance from 100 Joe Carter (the northwesternmost point of the E Bricktown site) to the Skirvin, to the Renaissance, to the Sheraton, and to the Colcord. I'll sit here and wait.

These aren't random, made-up facts and figures I'm posting; they are convention industry standards. They don't give a flying flip how long it takes you to jog to Midtown. They only care about how long it will take the average VISITOR to walk from point A to point B using universally-accepted measures. Like I said, believe me or don't believe me.

Please don't confuse facts with opinion.

With the development of film row/west downtown, midtown, bricktown, core area, central park, the street car routes, etc., the currently tabbed site is good and much better than out on any edge, including east BT. People love to look at today when planners have to look at what will be tomorrow.

I'm calculating to Broadway/Sheridan where 2 of the 4 full service hotels sit:

5 minutes from Bob Howard (.3 miles)
8 minutes from Substation (.4 miles)
11 minutes from Bricktown (.6 miles)

If I'm a planner, I put it on the site of the substation, because you will get your full service hotel built right on the lot that will be plenty for many conventions and you add 3 minutes of walk time to other full service hotels and subtract about a minute of walk time from Bricktown and it kickstarts development on the east side of the Park, and opens up Bob Howard to be a larger scale development.

And just for *@%!s and giggles, it's 19 minutes from East Bricktown site to the Memorial in Midtown…so I missed by 2 minutes.

You bring up a good point Rover. While Bricktown is the current entertainment option that makes the identified location most salable to convention planners, proximity to up and coming areas like Film Row an improved CBD and even reasonable closeness to Midtown and Automobile Alley (outside of the hard and fast 10 minute walkability bubble but closer than they would be to east Bricktown), plus nearness to Chesapeake Arena, MBG and Central Park, the art museum, the Memorial...ALL make this a superior location. Convention planners and convention-goers will be floored by what OKC has to offer.

Again, the overriding motivation in CC site location MUST be its walkable proximity to hotels and amenities. Otherwise, it will be incredibly difficult to book, and will be a humongous waste of taxpayer dollars. You want the boondoggle so many people predict? Start fiddling with the location.

You all are speaking like the substation is like 15 blocks away from the Bob Howard site.

They're literally caddy-corner on the Boulevard/Robinson intersection.

You would also get 5x the development from a private investor on the Bob Howard site than you would on the substation site, if you're even going to get something on the substation site (given that it's a lot larger investment for your average developer than it is for a municipal entity).

Again, I'm not saying definitely move it, but at least make an offer on the substation and if you get it for a bargain, put the convention center there.

A decision has been made on the convention center site. Let's move on...

June 2011 - Convention Center Site Selection Analysis Report:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/conventioncenter.pdf

You all are speaking like the substation is like 15 blocks away from the Bob Howard site.

They're literally caddy-corner on the Boulevard/Robinson intersection.

You would also get 5x the development from a private investor on the Bob Howard site than you would on the substation site, if you're even going to get something on the substation site (given that it's a lot larger investment for your average developer than it is for a municipal entity).

Again, I'm not saying definitely move it, but at least make an offer on the substation and if you get it for a bargain, put the convention center there.

You lost this argument months ago. And, for good reason.

You lost this argument months ago. And, for good reason.

Okay.

The substation has a number of significant drawbacks:


The hotel location would by necessity be on the north end, which by necessity would require the entrance to the CC to be moved a block south of where you are thinking it would be.
The entrance would be required to be on the park (west) side, as loading docks would be on Shields (adding additional distance to entertainment amenities).
It would place one more barrier to walkability (a speedway of a boulevard) between the CC and everything else, adding to the barriers that already unfortunately exist for the current site (while removing none).
Would be about 3/4 of a mile from the Skirvin, and nearly that for the Renaissance and Sheraton, taking all of them outside of the magical 10-minute walkability bubble
Would do the same for most of Bricktown (Sheridan/Oklahoma, considered zero corner for Bricktown, would be a 14 minute walk, Sheridan/Mickey Mantle even further)
Would require an estimated $30 million relocation of the substation. Estimated years ago, I might add.

You're talking about placing millions of dollars in bookings and many millions more in economic impact and tax revenue into extreme jeopardy just to save a few million on the front end...that oh, guess what? You won't save anyway.

We've been over this it his thread before - ad nauseam - but monkeying with the location to save a few bucks is penny wise and pound foolish. Sacrificing the bookability and mortgaging the future of the most expensive component of MAPS3? Perish the thought. Only if you want to waste taxpayer dollars would I encourage you to stick with you substation idea.

Press release from OKC

City to reopen MAPS 3 Convention Center site selection process

Oklahoma City will reopen the site selection process for the MAPS 3 Convention Center in search of a location that better fits the land acquisition budget.

The Municipal Counselor on Tuesday dismissed Oklahoma County District Court lawsuits against the owners of the property that the City Council selected for the convention center. The action marks the end of the City’s current attempt to acquire this property, the site of a former car dealership south of Myriad Botanical Gardens and west of the downtown arena.

“It became obvious to the City Manager, the Municipal Counselor and me that purchasing this proposed MAPS 3 Convention Center site is not in the best interest of our residents and the MAPS program,” said Mayor Mick Cornett. “This protects the integrity of the MAPS program and shows our commitment to build every MAPS 3 project within budget while meeting or exceeding the expectations of our residents.”

The City’s budget for the MAPS 3 Convention Center includes $13 million for land acquisition. The property’s owners provided documents estimating its value at more than $100 million.

This isn’t the first time the City has reopened the site selection process for a MAPS project. Previous MAPS projects that involved a reopened site selection process include the ballpark, the downtown library and the Bricktown Canal.

The City and the project consultant, Populous, will revisit the site selection process with the MAPS 3 Citizens Advisory Board and the Convention Center subcommittee.

“This remains a citizen-led initiative, which has been the bedrock of MAPS since the very beginning and has helped us earn the trust of Oklahoma City’s residents,” Cornett said. “We’re going to get right back to work on the site selection process, and our expectation of building an incredible, on-budget MAPS 3 Convention Center is unchanged.

Wow !

Been following this for a while and waiting for them to release some info; here are the details:

OKCTalk - Breaking: City to seek new site for Convention Center (http://www.okctalk.com/content/124-breaking-city-seek-new-site-convention-center.html)

Good grief. How many dollars were wasted on the site planning for this location? What a mess.

This is an absolute bombshell with so many ripple effects they are difficult to separate and list.

hmm.. well a mess for sure but perhaps we will end up with a better overall product when its all said and done. I think south of boulevard wouldn't be a bad placement and could definately elimiate the barrier between parks and allow for some great development on the old site. it definately left those owners with some prime real estate.

Been following this for a while and waiting for them to release some info; here are the details:

OKCTalk - Breaking: City to seek new site for Convention Center (http://www.okctalk.com/content/124-breaking-city-seek-new-site-convention-center.html)

I was told closer to 50 million, but could not believe it myself, just gossip...........did not want to say anything.
Ridiculous....................

What about the responses to the hotel RFP? Do we get to see them, or will the whole thing be reissued? I'd sure be interested to see what was submitted and by whom.

That sound you just heard was the s*** hitting the fan...

It would have been way more than $50 million had the streets and alleys been included.

REHCO had sought to close them years ago; very similar to Devon, Hines and Clayco. But the City never provided their approval.

I suspect it has hit the fan, yet hasn't reached it's final destination.

What about the responses to the hotel RFP? Do we get to see them, or will the whole thing be reissued? I'd sure be interested to see what was submitted and by whom.

We still should be able to see them but they are meaningless now.

So... if a new site is chosen that is not on the now-approved streetcar route (which I thought was a selling point), could this cause a re-opening of the streetcar route as well?

This will also impact the streetcar, pending TIF's, the redevelopment of the Cox Center, perhaps the Clacyo deal....

Hard to get my mind around all of this.

WOW what a fiasco... What a waste of time, resources, and money. Not to mention that this dropped today on all the teams submitting RFPs, and the only team to maybe have a heads up is populous. Everyone else has just wasted a bunch of $$$ wouldn't be surprised to see some of them walk away from the city and not come back.

Or the optimist in me says...

Maybe city had its stuff together and in the RFP told them to explore other sites and we might see even more unique options that haven't been thought of yet. :wink:

Took the city long enough to figure out what we knew two years ago. There was no way the city could ever afford that site.

I figured that they would but obsolete, but I'd sure like to know about the responding brands, number of rooms, aesthetics, and most importantly, the subsidy ask.

For those of us that are hoping this announcement opens the door for a continuous urban park from core to shore: If the City balks at a $100 mil site acquisition for the beloved convention center, there is no way in Hades they spend it for a park...

I figured that they would but obsolete, but I'd sure like to know about the responding brands, number of rooms, aesthetics, and most importantly, the subsidy ask.

$100 million in documented worth for this parcel sure makes the Coop more palatable at $105 million.

I figured that they would but obsolete, but I'd sure like to know about the responding brands, number of rooms, aesthetics, and most importantly, the subsidy ask.

I still believe that will come out and will be interesting to see.

But it completely changes everything to ask them to build south of the boulevard or wherever the cc ends up going.

I'm assuming this will also delay construction and timeline of the whole thing?

I'm assuming this will also delay construction and timeline of the whole thing?

Oh yes! By a great deal.

They thought they had the property and were in final design plans.

Now, they have to start all over and the #2 rated choice (Steelyard site) is no longer an option.

City scraps site for MAPS convention center | News OK (http://newsok.com/city-scraps-site-for-maps-convention-center/article/5398172)

I thought everybody was pretty upset about this site selection, I for one don't really want my convention center between 2 parks. That is 2 sides of prime development. Rather see this on Uhaul or Lumber yard maybe as mixed use with scaled down version of the Bricktown Tower Fantasy/Vision. This may be a step back for the current moment but I truly believe is a positive step forward. That site was arguably the most prime piece of real estate in the the state. In between 2 state of the art parks (well 1 and then a really big park as well.)

hmm.. well a mess for sure but perhaps we will end up with a better overall product when its all said and done. I think south of boulevard wouldn't be a bad placement and could definately elimiate the barrier between parks and allow for some great development on the old site. it definately left those owners with some prime real estate.

Yeah I appreciate someone realizing that they weren't going to get champagne on a Natty Light budget, but what a waste all this time and effort have been! They should probably kill the notion they are going to get any land around DT for the $13 million budgeted.

A south of the blvd location is probably the next best site, but I fear its going to be too separated from the bulk of DT and not very walkable to Bricktown. You would almost have to take the streetcar at that point.

They should seriously start considering building the new CC on the current Cox Site, even though that would be a logistical nightmare.

Such a shame, i know i'm uneducated in these matters, but would eminent domain even remotely be a possibility? It seems like the owners of the lot aren't doing much to contribute to downtown with it.
Sorry for my ignorance if it such.

For those of us that are hoping this announcement opens the door for a continuous urban park from core to shore: If the City balks at a $100 mil site acquisition for the beloved convention center, there is no way in Hades they spend it for a park...

Yes, in fact the barrier will most likely be even greater now. It will interesting to see what kind of development now will generate enough to pay for a $100 million site. It will have to go UP to justify that amount. So MG will be more enclosed and separated from the bigger park.

Such a shame, i know i'm uneducated in these matters, but would eminent domain even remotely be a possibility? It seems like the owners of the lot aren't doing much to contribute to downtown with it.
Sorry for my ignorance if it such.

The action the City just dropped was eminent domain.

Also, the owners had previously announced plans to develop the property before the convention center decided they wanted it.

One other consequence: Other MAPS programs should now be moved up in the timing because the cc is back to square 1.

They have to be staggered because they are paid for as sales tax is collected. But now the cc won't need big chunks for a while, they could move more quickly with Central Park and the streetcar, although the latter will have some decisions to make with this new wrinkle.

Took the city long enough to figure out what we knew two years ago. There was no way the city could ever afford that site.

Exactly, most everyone on this board were rooting for another site location, yet the city adamantly went with this one. What an embarrassing turn of events.

The good news is, if this site is $100 million, think how much the Cox site is worth if there is indeed someone willing to pay $100 million AND develop the south side of the park.

I did a search but didn't see it, is there a link to the pre-convention center proposal for this site?

Well I guess it will at least continue to be Thunder parking.

All kidding aside, it is kind of a shame. Although I never understood the need, not sure why we couldn't just remodel the Cox Center and add some additional hotels. I'm sure that's been discussed though so feel free to ignore this comment.

Yes, in fact the barrier will most likely be even greater now. It will interesting to see what kind of development now will generate enough to pay for a $100 million site. It will have to go UP to justify that amount. So MG will be more enclosed and separated from the bigger park.

I wonder if a powerful someone else wants that land to develop.

Exactly, most everyone on this board were rooting for another site location, yet the city adamantly went with this one. What an embarrassing turn of events.

I honestly don't know what they were thinking.

They had $17 million, of which about $13-$14 million was for land acquisition (the balance being for site prep).

I had forwarded to the City all the comps I had of downtown transactions, done my own calculations (the exact process that would be used in determining fair market value) and everyone knew they were miles apart.

The City had only budgeted $10 million or so to acquire property to the west of Central Park and had not even spent all of that, so they had maybe another $5 million or so of property to 'trade'.

Yet, we are talking about being perhaps as much as $100 million apart.

In the meantime, they are paying consultants to determine land use around this site assuming it to be where the cc and hotel would land, are having the architects develop final plans for the cc itself, spending all this time and energy chasing hotel proposals and funding options, creating new TIF districts to feed all this.... Good grief.

Well I guess it will at least continue to be Thunder parking.

All kidding aside, it is kind of a shame. Although I never understood the need, not sure why we couldn't just remodel the Cox Center and add some additional hotels. I'm sure that's been discussed though so feel free to ignore this comment.

Man, between this post and the ones in the streetcar thread. I feel like you just enjoy going against the grain around here.

This is rather annoying, i don't expect a private development to be very pedestrian friendly between the 2 parks, or fit in between them very well..What other sites (beside the Steelyard) have been thought of or are accessible?

I've got my fingers crossed for #5 North Bricktown. I'm not a fan of that parking lot, and see this as a good way to bridge CBD/Bricktown/DD. We should then use the citizen's committee's recommendation for the streetcar. *Picture from Pete's post10282