Tvsdesign!

Populous!

Not a fan of Populous myself. They've massively cut staff lately and my background info tells me the City was actually very unhappy with their design process for the Thunder practice facility.

I think tvsdesign and Fentress will be the two front-runners.

Fentress/TAP

Tvsdesign

Ok, Im fully aware of some projects that TAP has had a presence on but as hotel design goes...these names don't mean squat to me. Anyone have any pics or links they can post of any developments these front running firms have built or had a hand in designing? Thanks in advance.

Ok, Im fully aware of some projects that TAP has had a presence on but as hotel design goes...these names don't mean squat to me. Anyone have any pics or links they can post of any developments these front running firms have built or had a hand in designing? Thanks in advance.

Links to their websites are on the last page. HOWEVER, this is for the convention center design, NOT the hotel.

Well somebody posted this info in the wrong thread then ;-)

Links to their websites are on the last page. HOWEVER, this is for the convention center design, NOT the hotel.

they are going to be fully attached and most likely the winner will get both jobs

they are going to be fully attached and most likely the winner will get both jobs

I doubt it, the hotel operator will have a say on the design, whether it be Omni, Hilton, or whoever.

I doubt it, the hotel operator will have a say on the design, whether it be Omni, Hilton, or whoever.

if the city is spending 50mil on the hotel they will have a pretty big say also

Looking at their websites, I like Fentress's approach. They obviously don't go in with a predetermined mindset on what a convention center should look like, nor does it look like they are simply trying to create wow factor regardless of environment. All of the frontrunners have some impressive examples, but Fentress's portfolio looks like they give the most consideration to the facility's surroundings and city's existing architectural elements.

they are going to be fully attached and most likely the winner will get both jobs

This is absolutely false. Although anything is possible, having the same design team do both is a highly unlikely scenario. TVS will try and get the whole enchilada because they have done hotels, but all the other firms have relationships with developers and firms that specialize in convention center hotels as well. During the site selection process, TVS had a hotel developer on their team, as did some of the other firms who all thought having that expertise would come into play and be an integral part of the site selection although I’m not sure it ever did. Since all these firms have convention center experience, they also all have relationships with hotel developers and hotel design firms, and they’ve all had discussions with each other about OKC. Also, the City has had numerous discussions over the last two years with various hotel developers, so behind the scenes, they have a good feel for whom most of the players will be when this all shakes out. Don't be surprised if you see Hines Development, who did Devon Tower, be a major player for the hotel, likely teamed with Garfield Traub Development out of Dallas. They both have been sniffing at this every since they came to town and were on the TVS team for the CC site selection, but did not make the short list. Here is a link to GT's convention center hotel development experience. http://www.garfieldtraub.com/portfolio?vertical=138

As far as the CC designers, Fentress designed the convention center in Denver, which the OKC Chamber toured a couple of years back and were very impressed. They also toured Charlotte’s convention center which TVS designed and the Kansas City CC where HNTB did a recent ballroom addition. They again were very impressed with all of these, but Charlotte and Denver were the front runners for different reasons. One other tid bit that I don’t was published is Guernsey is also on the Fentriss/TAP team, so you have the national CC design guru now teamed with 2 local firms, thus spreading the work out locally.

If you were not aware, the City's convention center RFP is carefully worded such that the contract is only for a partial schematic design package, then the design will be shelved for a period of time as the tax coffers fill up. That scenario opens up the remote possibility the City can re-issue a new design RFP down the road for completion of the CC design, or they could continue with the same firm. Why? They are covering their bases. The City soon needs just enough CC design info to know where the major parts & pieces are going to be located and to validate the budget. They need to know where the loading docks will go, the main entries, as well as meeting rooms and ballroom. They need that information now so meeting planners can get a look at what's coming in OKC in terms of size and layout so they can begin to book conventions for 2018+. They also need the info to better coordinate with the boulevard that will bump out to the south to allow more room for the CC as needed, and the City needs the info to formulate a draft of the hotel RFP so its timing coincides with the CC opening. The public private partnership of the hotel is going to be sticky and will take some time to flush out, so they gotta get moving soon.

As far as the hotel goes, it is likely the City's strategy will be to loosely create an RFP that allows the hotel developers enough flexibility to be highly competitive on their bids. Don't be surprised if in doing so, the City allows more than one hotel site option, one adjacent to the CC, maybe one across the street connected via a tunnel or bridge. That may all wash out after the CC firm is selected and they validate cost and come up with a solid schematic design that vets major design issues like sub-surface conditions, expansion, entries, etc. Once a partial schematic design is completed, the CC plans will be shelved for a period of time, likely a year or more. This is why the City wrote the RFP to stop at schematic design. That gives them the flexibility to pick another design team to complete the project if for some reason they so chose. Yes, that would be ridiculous I'm sure you're thinking, but, they are trying to cover their bases with the delayed design schedule. Their thought being, anything can happen in that design time shut down period.

To connect some more dots, OKC Convention & Visitor Bureau President, Mike Carrier, worked with TVS before he came to OKC, on the Columbia, S.C. convention center completed in 2004. Garfield Traub, or simply Garfield Corp. at the time, was teamed with TVS and a host of other players for a 250 room Hilton branded hotel. Another player that was competing with GT was John Q. Hammons and Marriott. Both teams ended up losing or dropping out and the deal was won by the Windsor Aughtry Company as the developer. Their bid required less of a city subsidy than the others at only $3m. It resulted in a 222 room Hilton. FaulknerUSA (Austin CC 800 rm hotel developer) was another competitor and I think Garfield or Hammons may have been the 3rd. These deals have a lot of ebb and flow in them not to mention multiple players on each team where the economics can change the dynamics quickly. I believe Colombia S.C.'s CC hotel deal was around a 3 year process and was finished after the CC was completed. OKC desperately wants and needs the hotel opening to coincide with the CC. The hotel deal will probably be similar in nature to the housing for the old Mercy site, but obviously on a much larger scale. Multiple heavy hitting teams will come in with a wide variety of designs and financing deals that will all vary on design, amenities, rooms, and how much $$ they'll need the City to subsidize in some form or fashion.

Another thought to ponder: Once the CC hotel does come on line, John Q. Hammons Renaissance will no longer be the designated CC hotel or food service contractor as they are now for the Cox Convention Center. JQH also owns the Bricktown Residence Inn, OKC loves JQH for taking a chance on this city back in the day, so good track record, good relationship, proven product in the market.......will the City strive to forge a deal and reward JQH for yet another OKC deal........time will tell.

Other things to ponder on the relationship front......Hines = Devon Tower = Larry Nichols, Hines and Garfield Traub, Larry Nichols and Mike Carrier (on CC sub-committee together and helped move CC RFP up a year), Mike Carrier and TVS, Hines and Garfield Traub once on TVS's team in OKC and other locations, Devon's Data Center designed by FSB, OKC Chamber Hdqrtrs won by FSB with Larry Nichols on selection committee........

With all this said, my guess is one day in the not so distant future; it will be the "Devon Convention Center in Oklahoma City" with TVS as the design architect. Who knows on the hotel, it could go many ways and will ultimately come down to who simply presents the best proposal and overall package in terms of number of rooms, amenities, design, brand, etc, for the least amount of public dollars, but it sure would be convenient for the Hines team to round out the package and tie all the previous relationships and players together.

...and now we know why the CC has to be so close to the Devon complex (of course, a lot of us already knew why).

...and now we know why the CC has to be so close to the Devon complex (of course, a lot of us already knew why).

If this turns out comparable to the Devon complex, we'll all be happy.

To parahrase Jane Jacobs (only because I can find the exact quote right now), great archicture doesn't always make a great neighborhood. I am also concerned that MBG will suffer from a lack of time diversity. Surrounded totally by day time office and convention uses, who will use it after 5PM?

Devon used world class consultants, designers, and contractors. I think that influence of excellence would be a great reason to have all those people involved. We should hope the cc project comes in on time and on or under budget like Devon. I find it hard to believe people would think that a bad or evil thing, but some do, I guess.

To parahrase Jane Jacobs (only because I can find the exact quote right now), great archicture doesn't always make a great neighborhood. I am also concerned that MBG will suffer from a lack of time diversity. Surrounded totally by day time office and convention uses, who will use it after 5PM?

Even in NYC every neighborhood isn't fully active 24 hrs a day. It is okay to have predominantly business areas. Or does new urbanism dogma dictate sameness in all areas?

It is okay to have predominantly business areas.

How is it okay in cities to have places that are devoid of humans for more than half the day?

To parahrase Jane Jacobs (only because I can find the exact quote right now), great archicture doesn't always make a great neighborhood. I am also concerned that MBG will suffer from a lack of time diversity. Surrounded totally by day time office and convention uses, who will use it after 5PM?

The arena is caddy corner...Conventions don't last all day, and a lot of people like to get out of the hotel after the convention...There are areas of downtown that won't draw many people after business hours...this is not one of them.

fwiw, the MBG is most definitely not suffering from a lack of visitors at present.
And, at present, the proposed cc/hotel site is a dead, empty parking lot.
And, at present, the nearby Stage Center site (RIP) is a dead, empty unused structure.
And, at present, the proposed elementary site is an empty grassy lot.
And, at present, the proposed central park to the south is still a blighted mess.
And, at present, neither the Peake nor the Cox center are active every night.
And, at present, Vast has not started its operations.

So, I'm gonna go not real far out on a limb and predict that once there is a cc/hotel and something else where the sadly dead Stage Center now stands, and an elementary school, and a proposed park, and increased activity at the Peake and Cox and Vast opens, that MGB is not going to suddenly develop a bad case of nobody wants me, everybody hates me, I'm gonna rot in my earth worms blues.

To parahrase Jane Jacobs (only because I can find the exact quote right now), great archicture doesn't always make a great neighborhood. I am also concerned that MBG will suffer from a lack of time diversity. Surrounded totally by day time office and convention uses, who will use it after 5PM?

The same folks that use it now after 5 pm. I was down there at 8:30 the other evening. I had a hard time finding a parking spot. They had a play going on on the stage, they had American Idol contestants all over everywhere practicing believe it or not..... with a large hotel just accross the street (CC), there will be visitors. With all the LED lighting going on, it's quite pleasant walking around at night.
There was a basketball crowd at the outdoor court just accross the street.

Think about it, right now, you have 3 sides that are more or less vacant, only the Colcord is active after 5 pm.

Now when winter rolls around, it could be a different story, except for the skating rink.

I don't know many conventioneers who hang out in parks at night. Of course, if Stage Center becomes residential it might not be as big an issue. It would be bad if the MBG restaurant was closed after 1:30 PM everyday because all they have for a customer base is the business lunch crowd.

I don't know many conventioneers who hang out in parks at night. Of course, if Stage Center becomes residential it might not be as big an issue. It would be bad if the MBG restaurant was closed after 1:30 PM everyday because all they have for a customer base is the business lunch crowd.

Can you imagine the increase in pedestrian traffic inside the botanical tube due to conventioneers ? It will be 10 fold compared if they stayed at the Skirvin or any Bricktown hotel. They will spend time in the entire park also. They have lately put up some pretty cool life size sculptures, the park just keeps getting better.

Again, the park is well used now, while surrounded by a whole lot of empty. If anything, the concern ought to be will it become overused, not will it be barren after 5. It is no where near barren now. You've kinda stopped beating your new urban drum and started whacking your own noggin on this (non)issue.

fwiw, the MBG is most definitely not suffering from a lack of visitors at present.
And, at present, the proposed cc/hotel site is a dead, empty parking lot.
And, at present, the nearby Stage Center site (RIP) is a dead, empty unused structure.
And, at present, the proposed elementary site is an empty grassy lot.
And, at present, the proposed central park to the south is still a blighted mess.
And, at present, neither the Peake nor the Cox center are active every night.
And, at present, Vast has not started its operations.

So, I'm gonna go not real far out on a limb and predict that once there is a cc/hotel and something else where the sadly dead Stage Center now stands, and an elementary school, and a proposed park, and increased activity at the Peake and Cox and Vast opens, that MGB is not going to suddenly develop a bad case of nobody wants me, everybody hates me, I'm gonna rot in my earth worms blues.

Yes, I would be more concerned about the new Central Park being underused, if anything.

From my experience, MBG is barren from about 5PM to 7PMish. I am guessing that is between when the workers flee downtown and when the suburban tourists make their run for downtown.

From my experience, MBG is barren from about 5PM to 7PMish. I am guessing that is between when the workers flee downtown and when the suburban tourists make their run for downtown.

Any idea what is attracting the crowd after 7PM?

On second thought - never mind. We strayed along way from Convention Center Hotel.

From my experience, MBG is barren from about 5PM to 7PMish. I am guessing that is between when the workers flee downtown and when the suburban tourists make their run for downtown.

And that's also dinner time, so plenty of people are at home or eating in a restaurant.

I don't know many conventioneers who hang out in parks at night. Of course, if Stage Center becomes residential it might not be as big an issue. It would be bad if the MBG restaurant was closed after 1:30 PM everyday because all they have for a customer base is the business lunch crowd.

If by night you mean when the sun sets, then yeah, i see what you're saying. But if by night you mean 7PM when it's daylight...I think you'd be pleasantly surprised by the number of people looking to blow a little time after the convention day is over and would be willing to go to the small park and walk around for a bit. It may not be 100 people of a 1000 person convention between 5 and 7, but even 50 people is a lot of influx for MBG.

Any idea what is attracting the crowd after 7PM?

On second thought - never mind. We strayed along way from Convention Center Hotel.

It's a world class park designed for people. People are naturally attracted to it. I find myself gravitating to it for no reason sometimes if I am in the immediate area and have time to walk around.

yeah, dinner time, happy hour time, kiddo sports/scouts/music time, still hot in the summer time, lots of things get pressed into those early eve hours.

I don't know many conventioneers who hang out in parks at night.

Huh? I'm not sure I understand how going to a convention tempers someones taste for going to a park at night. I know I have done it. In fact, I went to a park at night while in Chicago for a convention just two months ago. There were plenty of people there, but no one was wearing their convention badges, so I can not speculate how many of them fell into the "conventioneer" demographic. What exactly do you think it is about going to a convention that would suddenly make someone not want to go to a park at night, especially if it's right across the street and has public attractions? I could even see some convention hosts or exhibitors holding an event in the park at night. IMO, the park is probably one of the few things that makes the site they picked for the convention center make a little sense.

duplicate

It is really pretty simple. Any facility/service/business needs a steady stream of customer throughout the day. When one customer base leaves it needs to be followed up by another incoming customer base. This allows goods and services to remain available throughout the day. Ideally, both waves of customer need to be about the same size in order to support the same amount of commerce or activity. When downtown office workers go home nearly every business in downtown OKC closes the doors with them. The 2,000 downtown residents simply can't provide the same level of economic support that 15,000 office workers can, so naturally business drops off and most shut down at 5PM (if not well before that). Devon is great but pretty much closes to the public at 1:30PM for example.

As available space is taken up by office space, or in this case convention space, it move the customer necessary to keep existing business open past 1:30PM further away. In the case of MBG, the people are actually being moved closer to another park that will also be across the street from the convention center AND caddie corner from the arena. So now we will have a day-use park (MBG) and an after 5PM park (Central Park). Neither one will have a steady stream of visitors to provide the necessary activity adjacent business will need to rely on. That is the only point I was trying to make

I'm pretty sure it will be at least a decade after the completion of the convention center before the MAPS 3 park is a more attractive place to hang out in at night than MBG. I don't think some realize how long it will be before anyone is hanging out in the C2S park at all, let alone when it will have any added amenities that attract tourists.

Even in NYC every neighborhood isn't fully active 24 hrs a day. It is okay to have predominantly business areas. Or does new urbanism dogma dictate sameness in all areas?

But not when you just renovated an exceptional city park in the middle of the area. Otherwise, the park should have gone somewhere else...

I guess because we are so small we think of neighborhoods in terms of a few feet, not a few blocks. If MG is a draw, then all the new tenants of deep deuce and mid town, not to mention all the new hotel quests, should walk or ride a couple of blocks to go use it. It shouldn't rely strictly on what is across the street. This should be especially true when the mass trans is in place. Downtown needs to be a neighborhood and we should look at what is happening throughout the downtown and not just block by block.

I walk over to the Myriad Gardens from Deep Deuce with my dog fairly frequently. We walk from there to Joey's Pizza for dinner when the weather is agreeable.

I walk over to the Myriad Gardens from Deep Deuce with my dog fairly frequently. We walk from there to Joey's Pizza for dinner when the weather is agreeable.

Exactly!
This is why I think people get too bent out of shape over EXACTLY what goes where. We need to develop an urban AREA, not an urban block.

I'm pretty sure it will be at least a decade after the completion of the convention center before the MAPS 3 park is a more attractive place to hang out in at night than MBG. I don't think some realize how long it will be before anyone is hanging out in the C2S park at all, let alone when it will have any added amenities that attract tourists.

Sometimes the only amenities you need for a park that attracts tourists is trees and a sidewalk. We're not that far off from trees and a sidewalk/trail. Programming is overrated, IMO.

Even in NYC every neighborhood isn't fully active 24 hrs a day. It is okay to have predominantly business areas. Or does new urbanism dogma dictate sameness in all areas?

You are so obtuse.

You are so obtuse.

sg, again your personal attacks are not apprciated. If you have a point to make you can do it without that.

Rover... No, this is an important project. It's on the blvd, on he park, across from the Peake... Come on now.

But I agree with you that I want blocks to be diverse. there are a lot of blocks that aren't as vital as this site.

Rover... No, this is an important project. It's on the blvd, on he park, across from the Peake... Come on now.

But I agree with you that I want blocks to be diverse. there are a lot of blocks that aren't as vital as this site.

I absolutely agree about the relative importance of getting this block right. But on the subject of diversity and mixed use I think the subject gets too myopic sometimes.

Even with the cc on this block (and that isn't still a certainty if they can't arrive at a price), there will be a great deal of night traffic in the area with the Peake and all its activity, the immediate proximity of 4 and possibly 5 fairly major hotels, the Montgomery, Legacy, and the new parking garage/apartments within a couple of blocks, and being a couple of blocks from both Bricktown and Film Row. With the west edge still to be determined and future possibilities with the old Cox center, I think it is way too early to predict the death of MG or the area based on the CC and CC Hotel being placed there.

You are so obtuse.

So, when a reasonable argument can't be presented by you, this is the best answer you have...to insult. Does that get you serious consideration in your circles?

So, when a reasonable argument can't be presented by you, this is the best answer you have...to insult. Does that get you serious consideration in your circles?

Not much consideration, if you re-read his posts, at times he seems to be venting, even though he has good points every now and then.

Back the truck up....



Juel
10:38 a.m.

I am hearing the asking price of the proposed convention center site is cost prohibitive and alternatives are beginning to be considered. Any validity to that.
Steve Lackmeyer
10:39 a.m.

I've asked City Manager Jim Couch last week about whether other sites are getting second look. He denied that the city is doing anything other than proceeding with ttrying to buy he site chosen south of the Myriad Gardens and move forward with designs. But those rumors are out there.


Read more: http://newsok.com/unedited-transcript-of-okc-central-chat-with-steve-lackmeyer-august-24-2012/article/3703781#ixzz24l5ItkZN

Did Steve hear the same rumor last week which prompted his question to Jim Couch?

Back the truck up....



Did Steve hear the same rumor last week which prompted his question to Jim Couch?

It should be clear with Couch's comical recent failures in budget planning and project management that ANY figure or projection his office makes should be heavily scrutinized. A ton is riding on this project. It's already the biggest MAPS III albatross.

Check out Steve's blog. He just posted two flashback items regarding the convention center. He usually posts these flashback items as a prelude to new information coming out or a renewed debate/discussion occurring.

http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/

I think reality is setting in with the cost. Plus, the Stage Center site coming available, the discussion resulting from the boulevard, and an elementary school being built a block away screams - Mr Nichols, move this convention center.

I absolutely agree about the relative importance of getting this block right. But on the subject of diversity and mixed use I think the subject gets too myopic sometimes.

Even with the cc on this block (and that isn't still a certainty if they can't arrive at a price), there will be a great deal of night traffic in the area with the Peake and all its activity, the immediate proximity of 4 and possibly 5 fairly major hotels, the Montgomery, Legacy, and the new parking garage/apartments within a couple of blocks, and being a couple of blocks from both Bricktown and Film Row. With the west edge still to be determined and future possibilities with the old Cox center, I think it is way too early to predict the death of MG or the area based on the CC and CC Hotel being placed there.

There is a difference between an area dying and failing to live up to its potential....

The City paid Populous and GSB just under $500,000 to properly identify, study, and vet several sites ultimately choosing the "best one". "If" the City and powers that be honestly allowed that process to unfold as it should have, things like enhanced site costs due to the soils conditions, water table and/or environmental issues should have been well known and documented and taken into account from a budgetary standpoint. If any city is truly trying to identify the "best" and most viable site for an important project such as this, there should be few "ut-oh" surprises if the analysis process and due diligence was allowed to take the proper course. Then again, if the answer was known beforehand and the site analysis worked in reverse to validate the answer, then all kinds of issues and ut-oh's can creep into the equation. I'm not saying that's happened here, BUT, if news come out to support the rumors, it certainly would appear the City wasted taxpayer money it paid for a “mirage” report. I think if you looked in any city that's embarked on a large urban project like this that will ultimately change the entire urban dynamics of the city; it's always a mix of politics, money, power, and sensible urban design. I think politics and money usually win out, but not always. Then the best design within that scenario is the result. Which scenario has played out in OKC? Time may tell.........

Then again, if the answer was known beforehand and the site analysis worked in reverse to validate the answer, then all kinds of issues and ut-oh's can creep into the equation. I'm not saying that's happened here, BUT, if news come out to support the rumors, it certainly would appear the City wasted taxpayer money it paid for a “mirage” report. I think if you looked in any city that's embarked on a large urban project like this that will ultimately change the entire urban dynamics of the city; it's always a mix of politics, money, power, and sensible urban design. I think politics and money usually win out, but not always. Then the best design within that scenario is the result. Which scenario has played out in OKC? Time may tell.........

When I attended the Populous presentation and looked at their scoring system, my thought certainly was that the "answer" was known beforehand and the site analysis worked in reverse. There were some numbers that made no sense.

I can't stress enough that if the CC proceeds as planned it will be an utter failure and disappointment to OKC taxpayers. With site acquisition costs, and other undetermined costs will only allow the city to build a mediocre CC, and we will still be in the lower tier in the convention center business.

The best thing they can do is rehabilitate and expand the Cox Center. They already own the land so there is no site acquisition costs, its at a perfect location, and they already have a shell to work with. They just need to gut the The Cox Center and start over. By doing this our $250 million will go a lot further, and could actually have money left over to fund $50 million to lure CC Hotel.

It's been obvious for a very long time that this old Ford site could not be done within the established budget.

To not even consider this while proceeding down a long and expensive road is ridiculous.

I still believe the CC needs to be moved south of the arena and eastward where the loading docks back up to the BNSF viaduct. It will get it out of the way of better development, but still be close enough to hotels, Bricktown, and the park to be accessible to them without overwhelming those places.

A OKCTalk member named BG918 posted an excellent CC concept a year ago or longer that would fit perfectly in that footprint.

The bigger issue is that if they botch the CC, the least popular MAPS3 item that has curiously been prioritized, they may turn public opinion against future MAPS projects. I'm very worried that the hubris of a few leaders is going to end the public investment that has greatly assisted OKC's renaissance. ;(

When I attended the Populous presentation and looked at their scoring system, my thought certainly was that the "answer" was known beforehand and the site analysis worked in reverse. There were some numbers that made no sense.

I mostly read this particular thread, but couldn't help but chime in here, especially when it comes to pre-determined conclusions on its location...all I can think about is how someone I know and respect that used to work downtown told me years ago exactly where the CC was going to go, and darned if the "selected" site didn't just prove him to be exactly right. Must have been clairvoyant, right? (intense sarcasm light on). He even relayed at the time in a half-joking manner, not even appreciating the gravity of what he was saying, that certain companies had been made aware of the location so they could buy up the land now, and sell it back to the city at a sizeable profit in future years.

Maybe that was all just an astonishing coincidence, lucky guess, or whatever, but its becoming just about impossible for me to believe this has been a legitimate selection process. Just my opinion.

So the Ford dealership was a long standing con job? Interesting accusation.