Could we possibly stagger the convention center construction until after the exhibit hall at the fairgrounds is complete, and use it for state conventions? I know the location is bad, but I hope the facilities are better than the Cox. At the same time demolish the Cox and put in our new convention center. Might be a less than pleasant scenario. Just a thought.

With the size of the footprint they are looking for, the fact that convention centers create large dead pedestrian zones, require a sea of parking, and are typically design with only one attractive side I am starting to think this thing needs to be moved out of downtown and placed on the south side of the river.

Urbanized, how bout the Staybridg Suites site?
Sorry, I missed this last night. Too remote for the CC to be successful, and the site config makes access very difficult.

With the size of the footprint they are looking for, the fact that convention centers create large dead pedestrian zones, require a sea of parking, and are typically design with only one attractive side I am starting to think this thing needs to be moved out of downtown and placed on the south side of the river.
If you're going to build a failure in that location, why build anything at all? Does ANY of what I have posted register with you? I'm not just making this **** up out of thin air.

Since Populous scored the Steelyard site at #2, we should certainly take a look at the parking lot in front of the Bricktown Events Center and/or the Bodyworks site.

The former is very comparable to the Steelyard location and owned by the City. The latter is larger and just to the east.

I know it's removed from the full-service hotels of downtown but as we've already documented, there are tons of hotels in Bricktown, Aloft is nearby and the street car would go right by.

By the way, if anyone wants to read the final Populous report, it's linked at the top of the page -- but it's big file to download.

The streetcar will adapt if it needs to. Remember, there is already a couplet that runs on Sheridan and Reno to Perry, and there's a small phase 2 project as of yet of undetermined route. It looks like we'll have some time to think about it.
I'm sorry, but the streetcar can handle a few hundred at a time assuming multiple dedicated pieces of equipment standing by (as opposed to running regularly-scheduled routes) NOT 4K leaving at the same time, hoping to get somewhere that's a 15 minute walk in each direction, all during a one hour lunch break. The streetcar is HELPFUL, but it's not a magic bullet when it comes to making a CC viable.

The North Bricktown site would be nice in that it's a short jaunt to the Santa Fe Station (maybe a tunnel or pedestrian bridge across Sheridan could link them?)

Based on requirements, it looks like they would need both these sites.

The could still pull the under-the-road trick to keep the cc on the east side of the properties and then the west end could be for the hotel, overlooking the ballpark with a great view of downtown and right in the middle of all the Bricktown action. Would help create the need for density in Lower BT as well.

If they really needed to, they could even take the McDonald's site (providing they had the money).

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/option1.jpg

Could we possibly stagger the convention center construction until after the exhibit hall at the fairgrounds is complete, and use it for state conventions? I know the location is bad, but I hope the facilities are better than the Cox. At the same time demolish the Cox and put in our new convention center. Might be a less than pleasant scenario. Just a thought.

The expo center will probably be done for at least 2 or 3 years by the time the convention center will even break ground. It could be useful for any local convention events, but we would still be limited on what kinds of events we could bring in though. Sometimes there are no good options.

Since Populous scored the Steelyard site at #2, we should certainly take a look at the parking lot in front of the Bricktown Events Center and/or the Bodyworks site.

The former is very comparable to the Steelyard location and owned by the City. The latter is larger and just to the east...
I agree. It has challenges, but also some advantages.

If you're going to build a failure in that location, why build anything at all? Does ANY of what I have posted register with you? I'm not just making this **** up out of thin air.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch - it has become clear the city can't afford a downtown location that uses this much land. Even if they wanted to use the Cox site the opportunity costs wasted with that decision are more than the convention center will cost. Pick somewhere else. Maybe there is a reason places like the Music City Center ended up costing north of $600 million (3X what ours is planned for) or why Omaha's (which was used as a model by OKC for both design and price) is a half mile from downtown and is on the other side of the interstate from nearly every hotel.

The Savannah Convention Center - across the river from downtown Savannah
http://savannahmeetings.com/images/userfiles/image/facilities_trade_center_daytime.jpg

The City can't afford a downtown location? The City already OWNS more than one... SMH.

Also, you say half a mile like its a long way. Both the C2S site AND the east Bricktown site are THREE QUARTERS OF A MILE from the Skirvin.

This was pulled only because the city finally figured out the they could not afford the land cost period (now why it took them this long to figure it out is a different question). If the court ruled on a price the city would have been 100% bound by that and would have to come up with the 70 80 90 100 mil whatever the price might have been

Yeah, I have been saying this since the beginning. How can the design a convention center on land they don't own? This will be another black eye on the MAPS future. Our city leadership continues to disappoint. They will probably pick a piece of land with the most buildings with historic value.

Hey that's what happens when you don't let your CITY PLANNING staff have any influence on the City's most-public planning effort for the last 20 years...

http://wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net/80450F/1079ishot.com/files/2014/06/Lipton_Kermit-630x422.png

The Bodyworks site has already been bought with plans to build condos and 2 hotels. The City will run into the exact same problem they just bailed on.

http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Bodyworks+Site

JTF, just about any building can look lovely in a photo. You should cross-reference your suggestions with how relatively successful a building is (or is not), and you should also consider the city in which it is located. Savannah could probably locate their CC at the airport and still be somewhat successful...because even people who've never been there want to go there.

OKC has a built-in perception challenge. Convention planners know they will be dealing with a certain percentage of their attendees who will be saying "WTF? Oklahoma City? Groan..."

The ammunition our CVB needs to overcome that objection is ease of use. Period, end of story. If the CVB can bring planners in for site visits and effectively demonstrate that attendees can have a great time and get everywhere they need/want to be within a 10 minute walk, Oklahoma City WILL pull above its weight in bookings, and WILL have a CC that pays for itself in - at the very least - economic impact. We will also have a building that is less of an ongoing drain on City resources, if at all.

Planners need to KNOW that OKC will knock the socks off of their attendees. If they don't know that, we will be at an extreme disadvantage as a conference/convention destination.

JTF, just about any building can look lovely in a photo. You should cross-reference your suggestions with how relatively successful a building is (or is not), and you should also consider the city in which it is located. Savannah could probably locate their CC at the airport and still be somewhat successful...because even people who've never been there want to go there.

OKC has a built-in perception challenge. Convention planners know they will be dealing with a certain percentage of their attendees who will be saying "WTF? Oklahoma City? Groan..."

The ammunition our CVB needs to overcome that objection is ease of use. Period, end of story. If the CVB can bring planners in for site visits and effectively demonstrate that attendees can have a great time and get everywhere they need/want to be within a 10 minute walk, Oklahoma City WILL pull above its weight in bookings, and WILL have a CC that pays for itself in - at the very least - economic impact. We will also have a building that is less of an ongoing drain on City resources, if at all.

Planners need to KNOW that OKC will knock the socks off of their attendees. If they don't know that, we will be at an extreme disadvantage as a conference/convention destination.

like like like

Someone mentioned this earlier but what about the southern half of the block that Stage Canter is on. Could extend back west to the land that Peacock has for sale also (I think in the 2-4 million range). The only other purchase would be Allen Contracting.

I don't see Allen selling, they just moved there a few years back from their office on Eastern.

Site 3 was the original site that everyone expected to be selected. It is the best site. I would think they would look at that again. Moving to Bricktown defeats the whole Core-to-Shore concept.

Pardon my ignorance, but let me throw this out there and please enlighten me:

I'm not exactly seeing another site large enough for a quality convention center AND hotel now that fits the glove like this site perhaps did(?).
So, question is, what would be the ramifications of renovating and modernizing the current Cox Convention Center and finding a smaller parcel of land for a hotel (even if it's smaller than we all imagine).

Because at this point, what would OKC be losing if this plan is scrapped altogether, and is replaced with a complete overhaul of the CCC and building a new hotel instead?
(Obviously the city loses out on the potential mixed use development we here dream about on the "Cox Super Block"...)

Don't get me wrong, I've liked this project and think it has positives, but this does seem to throw a wrench in things.

The Bodyworks site has already been bought with plans to build condos and 2 hotels. The City will run into the exact same problem they just bailed on.

Bodyworks Site - OKCTalk (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Bodyworks+Site)

The sale has not closed on that site.

I don't know the pending price, but it may not be more than the $13 million that is budgeted for land acquisition and the City already owns the parking lot to the west.


We have a real issue now because land prices have escalated over the last four years (since they first made the previous selection) that options are going to be pretty limited.

The expo center will probably be done for at least 2 or 3 years by the time the convention center will even break ground. It could be useful for any local convention events, but we would still be limited on what kinds of events we could bring in though. Sometimes there are no good options.[/QUOTE]


Agree.

...It is the best site...
Based on what exactly? Kick-starting C2S? That is absolutely the wrong priority.

JTF, just about any building can look lovely in a photo. You should cross-reference your suggestions with how relatively successful a building is (or is not), and you should also consider the city in which it is located. Savannah could probably locate their CC at the airport and still be somewhat successful...because even people who've never been there want to go there.

OKC has a built-in perception challenge. Convention planners know they will be dealing with a certain percentage of their attendees who will be saying "WTF? Oklahoma City? Groan..."

The ammunition our CVB needs to overcome that objection is ease of use. Period, end of story. If the CVB can bring planners in for site visits and effectively demonstrate that attendees can have a great time and get everywhere they need/want to be within a 10 minute walk, Oklahoma City WILL pull above its weight in bookings, and WILL have a CC that pays for itself in - at the very least - economic impact. We will also have a building that is less of an ongoing drain on City resources, if at all.

Planners need to KNOW that OKC will knock the socks off of their attendees. If they don't know that, we will be at an extreme disadvantage as a conference/convention destination.

The sooner CC planners in OKC drop this idea that out-of-state conventions are going to drop billions of dollars in town and realize that the convention center should primarily serve the residents of metro-OKC the better. At that point the city can actually start building a successful center. I think this is the perfect time for OKC to re-evaluate if it is worth getting involved in an arms race for national conventions.

We are having this exact same debate in Jax right now.

I'm sorry dude, you are totally talking out of your ass at this point. I talk to out of town convention planners on a regular basis, and have for years. The CVB actually brings them to the businesses I have operated and owned, to help make their convention pitches. They love, love LOVE Oklahoma City, specifically because of the dense grouping of walkable facilities and amenities. Attendees say the same thing, when they are here. Right now the lion's share are sports attendees, because THAT is where we currently have venue strength. We have developed a very positive national reputation in the convention industry. The only limiting factor right now is our lack of an adequate building.

Early in the process, Populous and the committee also considered the 'East Bricktown Hybrid Site' which is along the lines of what I was suggesting up-thread.

However, when you look at the size of what they want to do (and I know most of this is absolutely required in their programming) the project is so massive it's difficult to imagine it fitting anywhere without taking out lots of expensive property -- at this site or anywhere downtown.

As this site was proposed, you can see it would take a bunch of properties that are either already developed (IHOP building), recently redeveloped (Bricktown Events Center), under construction (Criterion) or recently purchased.

And while the Cox site seems like a way to get around the land acquisition piece, as Urbanized (and Populous) has pointed out, that site would be very expensive to develop and probably outside the budget in other areas.

It's growing harder and harder to see a way forward.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/option11.jpg

Urbanized thank you for your response to my question earlier. I understand that golden 10 minute walking ratio and especially how it relates to the full service hotels but were the hotels not more important before they offically decided to build a CC hotel? I would think that it would allow a little bit more flexibility in the distance from the full service when you have 700-800 rooms next door, understandably still important but maybe less so since we want the hotel next door right? 4 or 5 years ago I can see why the importance was so high but with all the hotels planned downtown and especially bricktown I think entertainment or attractions would have a higher importance to attracting and wowing the CC goer. In that sense I think the 2 Bricktown sites should be the front runner. I am no designer but there has to be ways to make everything work on the main street site and still allow the railroad through.

It's growing harder and harder to see a way forward.


^That. If the City wants to build a center the size to compete for national conventions they have to move it out of downtown to an adjacent neighborhood or create a new district from the ground up (AICCM). Otherwise, they need to build a facility that primarily serves the people of metro-OKC and scale the size way down.

On edit - I vote for option 2. Scale the size down and make it a place people in metro-OKC will enjoy attending events at.

So we are left with:

1) Pay a whole lot of money for land in an ideal spot
2) Build on land we already have and cram it in the space available
3) Build far away and try to promote development in the area

Just curious, what about buying the producers COOP with a developer or perhaps letteting a developer buy it and then but a plot of land and then build a new convention center and tie it into a MLS Stadium with twin 35-40 story hotels for the CC AND the soccer stadium.

Part of the CC could curve around the soccer stadium and it could be part of a massive complex with store fronts hiding the CC so it doesn't even look like one.

I would then extend the underground and place those moving sidewalks like you see in airports or even better build a minute suspended sky tram system connected multiple garages like the proposed Bricktown garage.

Here is where Populous really let us down.

As part of their study, they created this chart to show potential cost premiums when it came to land acquisition and site prep.

As you can see, they estimated that the Core to Shore North (site that was ultimately selected) would only have a minor premium, and similar to the other sites. And in fact was shown to be way cheaper than Core to Shore South if we relocated the substation.

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

Your question mark confuses me a bit - but they did put on an RFP to build on land they didn't own. This is from January 20, 2015.

Making reservations: OKC Council approves RFP for convention center hotel | The Journal Record (http://journalrecord.com/2015/01/20/making-reservations-council-approves-rfp-for-convention-center-hotel-real-estate/)

You really do struggle with facts and logic sometimes. That's an RFP for hotel operators. That is not an RFP for "land they don't own." RFP is not how land acquisition works you ding dong.

^

When you look at that chart, you would say, "We can get the primo Core to Shore North site for LESS than C2S South and for about the same price as East Bricktown."

But that wasn't even close to correct and a massive false assumption.


Remember, there was no way they were going to C2S South without moving the substation, which is why the mayor slid that $30 million in for that purpose (amid controversy).

hfry, make no mistake, there has ALWAYS been an intention to build an adjacent convention hotel, even when that wasn't yet officially acknowledged. An ATTACHED convention hotel is critical to the success of a CC (ask Dallas).

Most people seem to misunderstand the purpose of an attached HQ hotel. They are generally NOT intended to house all attendees, but rather to house conference officials, exhibitors, presenters, etc., and usually to provide food/beverage catering. While certainly attendees also stay there, they often have other priorities. They might have rewards memberships and brand loyalty with other flags. They might be on a flat per diem that allows them to pocket the difference if they stay at a cheaper property, or at the very least divert more to entertainment and meals. They might own their business and be very economy-minded in all transactions.

This is why a convention is usually only concerned with a block of 500-ish at the attached hotel - even when projected attendance is in the thousands - and why walkability to a variety of other properties is key to success.

By the way, regarding the aforementioned Dallas CC, the City of Dallas has had to spend even more on their attached Omni because attendees were complaining that there weren't enough dining options within a walkable distance and that waiting on trains to get them to other downtown options created too much wait time and not enough opportunity to get a meal during conventions. Sound familiar? We need to avoid circumstances like that at all costs, and the way to do this is to make existing amenities a part of the equation.

If the consultant made a mistake, and they are the 'experts' then I wonder if they will look at the current situation for us for free or at cost?

Here are the final rankings.

Note that Cost is only weighted as 4 and is one of just many items and thus a very insignificant part of the total score.

Also note the the convention committee requested Populous change the Core to Shore South ranking from 5 to 1 due to the substation issue, while East Bricktown and Core to Shore North both received a middle 3 rating.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/optionrank2.jpg

I don't see Allen selling, they just moved there a few years back from their office on Eastern.

True but the city can take by eminent domain.

OKC Mayor Mick Cornett On New Convention Center Location - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports | (http://www.news9.com/story/28255652/okc-mayor-mick-cornett-on-new-convention-center-location)

hfry, make no mistake, there has ALWAYS been an intention to build an adjacent convention hotel, even when that wasn't yet officially acknowledged. An ATTACHED convention hotel is critical to the success of a CC (ask Dallas).

Most people seem to misunderstand the purpose of an attached HQ hotel. They are generally NOT intended to house all attendees, but rather to house conference officials, exhibitors, presenters, etc., and usually to provide food/beverage catering. While certainly attendees also stay there, they often have other priorities. They might have rewards memberships and brand loyalty with other flags. They might be on a flat per diem that allows them to pocket the difference if they stay at a cheaper property, or at the very least divert more to entertainment and meals. They might own their business and be very economy-minded in all transactions.

This is why a convention is usually only concerned with a block of 500-ish at the attached hotel - even when projected attendance is in the thousands - and why walkability to a variety of other properties is key to success.

By the way, regarding the aforementioned Dallas CC, the City of Dallas has had to spend even more on their attached Omni because attendees were complaining that there weren't enough dining options within a walkable distance and that waiting on trains to get them to other downtown options created too much wait time and not enough opportunity to get a meal during conventions. Sound familiar? We need to avoid circumstances like that at all costs, and the way to do this is to make existing amenities a part of the equation.

I agree with you 100% that this is a very important project to get right, and you've listed all the reasons better than I could. Honestly I don't know why you aren't head of the CVB, Chad. It is breathtaking at times how bad Mike Carrier is.

The thing though is we have to balance the overall city's interests. It doesn't help anything to tear down more fabric and create yet another super block. I believe this needs to go in Lower Bricktown which was already an urban design fail, and could streamline land assembly which will require ED no matter where we go. We need the location thy is best for the city as a whole, and not just the CC.

The problem with ED is when you invoke arbitration, the mediated fair market value price is binding. OCURA already has a lot of tentacles south of Reno, including land leases that can be broken and or land that can be claw-backed from Randy Hogan for not meeting his timeline (by a mile).

Imagine the lower canal finally "done right," flowing through and/or beside the new CC. It could be extremely ideal. LB is the place to go.

Imagine the lower canal finally "done right," flowing through and/or beside the new CC. It could be extremely ideal. LB is the place to go.

This would be amazing.

Question is, is this even a possibility? Would the city even consider it and if so, would Randy Hogan cooperate?

This would be amazing.

Question is, is this even a possibility? Would the city even consider it and if so, would Randy Hogan cooperate?

Randy Hogan would probably not "cooperate" but that doesn't matter because he lacks a pot to piss in. OCURA should've moved to clawback the land eons ago. Same for Deep Deuce Apartments. OCURA has a lot of latitude it doesn't utilize bc their reputation is built on the "development services" (bending over backwards for developers) model, which obviously isn't too bad a thing overall.

I'm sorry, but the streetcar can handle a few hundred at a time assuming multiple dedicated pieces of equipment standing by (as opposed to running regularly-scheduled routes) NOT 4K leaving at the same time, hoping to get somewhere that's a 15 minute walk in each direction, all during a one hour lunch break. The streetcar is HELPFUL, but it's not a magic bullet when it comes to making a CC viable.

I never said it was. Of course the streetcar can't handle those kinds of numbers. I was simply responding to the question of how moving the CC might affect the streetcar route. It would be nice to have a streetcar stop close to the CC, especially to help older or handicapped attendees. If it can be accomplished within the constraints of funding and distance, I'm sure an attempt will be made to do just that.

Maybe OCURA didn't have motivation for taking it back because it hadn't been presented with a higher and better use. NOW, maybe they do.

BTW Spartan, your posts have really been spot on for awhile. You are more and more articulating a pragmatic but still progressive stance, which isn't always easy to do. Thanks for your input.

Ah, man, appreciate the kind words but totally disagree about Mike. He dragged OKC kicking and screaming into the convention business as it exists in the 21st Century. Heck, most of the relevant info I have has only been gained from years of conversation with people like Mike and his excellent staff.

Anytime you take issue with something he says or does, recall that he serves many masters. This whole thing is incredibly political, and Mike does an excellent job of navigating those waters.

I would say build it here.

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o214/bchris02/Lower%20Bricktown_zpsjoz96tjd.jpg

Ah, man, appreciate the kind words but totally disagree about Mike. He dragged OKC kicking and screaming into the convention business as it exists in the 21st Century. Heck, most of the relevant info I have has only been gained from years of conversation with people like Mike and his excellent staff.

Anytime you take issue with something he says or does, recall that he serves many masters. This whole thing is incredibly political, and Mike does an excellent job of navigating those waters.

I remember Alan Simms who left for Ft Worth years ago. He was good.

Mike exhibits virtually zero interest in working together with the other MAPS projects.

Maybe OCURA didn't have motivation for taking it back because it hadn't been presented with a higher and better use. NOW, maybe they do.

BTW Spartan, your posts have really been spot on for awhile. You are more and more articulating a pragmatic but still progressive stance, which isn't always easy to do. Thanks for your input.


Thanks Rover, but keep in mind I'm just speaking openly and saying what people with vested interests may be unable to suggest on here. Not having a horse in the race can be very empowering, lol. I don't get to make these comments regarding Ohio development, for instance.

I would say build it here.

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o214/bchris02/Lower%20Bricktown_zpsjoz96tjd.jpg

Turn part of it north and south and capture some land south of the canal. This way you can leave the hotel.

Mike exhibits virtually zero interest in working together with the other MAPS projects.

Not really his job is it? I understand the desire to want to have seamless integration, but his priorities are conventions and visitors.

I would say build it here.

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o214/bchris02/Lower%20Bricktown_zpsjoz96tjd.jpg

More likely across the street north. Then build structured parking between Residence Inn and Bass Pro.

So what does this do for the timeline of the streetcar and the park? Does having to go back to the drawing board for the CC speed up the finish of the street car and park?

Not really his job is it? I understand the desire to want to have seamless integration, but his priorities are conventions and visitors.

It's called synergy.

So what does this do for the timeline of the streetcar and the park? Does having to go back to the drawing board for the CC speed up the finish of the street car and park?

It could for the park because they have a very long implementation plan and now that MAPS funds will likely be available sooner for them with the cc being delayed, they could easily ramp that up.

They have all the land acquired for the main park, have all the final designs and will be demolishing all the structures soon.

It's called synergy.

I know. I also would like to know what brought on that personal comment towards him not caring about other MAPS projects.

More likely across the street north. Then build structured parking between Residence Inn and Bass Pro.

Then put the CC hotel on the lumberyard site with a short skytram over the blvd to the CC and parking.

This might be real unpopular, but what does anyone think about just giving the CC funds to the street car and then work on a seperare bond package for a new convention center?

North Bricktown site was my fave early on because I liked the connection and expansion with the Skirvin, but only if the rail needs could be met. They'd then need to use the rest of that lot for a new Karchmer garage concept to meet parking demand for both the CC and all the other new things happening on Main St.

East Bricktown site: Maybe THIS (new CC location) is what Steve thought would make KC and Dallas jealous! He knew it was coming!

(j/k obvs)

Another site consideration... west downtown, the 3 lots (Hall Cap) to the south and East of 21C. With west downtown re-activating, maybe the time is right?

I'm beginning to believe there is no way to do this project successfully without additional money, and maybe a lot of it.

I just don't see how they can piece together a big enough site that is anywhere near the hotel stock and other amenities that everyone seems to agree are vital to it's success -- at least not within the current budget.

I bet they end up needing another $50-$100 million to make that happen.