^^^
That is the way Classen Curve is built

ON EDIT: Questor posted right before me, my ^^^ was to JTF...LOL

...if you're in Bricktown for dinner or to go to a bar, stores are unlikely to be open.
I have 7200 sq ft of retail in Bricktown (the largest locally-owned retail floorplate in downtown, if I'm not mistaken). The stores are both open 7 days a week, 12 months a year. Like most retailers, during January and February we have limited winter hours (12-6 or 12-7), but currently we are already operating on our regular schedule (10 AM to 9 PM), and do so for 10 months of the year.

The smaller of the two, Oklahoma's Red Dirt Emporium, is open until 10 PM on Fridays and Saturdays, and will be open until 10 PM 7 days a week come summer. The only reason the marketplace doesn't stay open until 10 is that it is directly below Rok - which starts at 9 PM on weekends - making it unbearably loud in the store.

We often do much of our daily business between 8 PM and 9 PM, when people are finishing dinner and strolling Bricktown.

I know Bricktown Candy Company and Guestroom have similar hours. The Painted Door Gallery is open 6 days I believe, and also extends hours in the summer months. Put a Cork in It winery is open 6 days and extends hours during the busy months. Not sure yet what House of Bedlam's hours will be, but suspect they will be aggressive. Also not sure of Coco Flow. Bass Pro of course also has long hours, though it is obviously a different animal altogether.

I'm pretty sure the shops in Bricktown as a group stay open more hours than retailers anywhere else in downtown. Most stores elsewhere in downtown are closed at 5 or 6 PM and often not open at all on weekends.

I guess if you're wanting Bricktown stores to be open for people stumbling out of clubs at the end of the night, we've failed. Otherwise your statement is not accurate, and inadvertantly discourages readers from even bothering to TRY to find open retail in Bricktown.

I'm glad your stores are open that late. I did not know that. But I don't consider any of them destination retail that will bring people in specifically to shop in Bricktown. And really, I was talking about new, as opposed to existing retail, as I thought that was the point of this thread. I would like to see Bricktown as a destination for shoppers, personally. And i think it would be great if people who come downtown to have dinner can also shop - that's icing on the cake. Most of the single store retail I'm familiar with close at 5, or certainly 9 at the latest, so if survival is dependent on casual shoppers who pass by on their way to dinner, that's a problem. And something like that was a problem for Envy, Firefly and Lit, all of which should have been successful in the right location. I would have liked to see them adjacent, as that would have created more of an impetus to travel there to shop. I drive up to Nichols Hills Plaza to shop, and frequently stop in a store I might not have visited had it been in an isolated location. I have to make an extra effort to go there, but it's worth it, for all the unique retail that is in close proximity.

With the new transit hub, I hope this happens now more than ever. Sorry, that is a little more "dreamy" than the current strategy discussion.

That's what's planned to happen with the hub though, so it's totally realistic within the next 5-10 years.

With the limited retail options in Oklahoma creating 'destination retail' is the easy part. Half the city went ape **** over Whole Foods and the other half went ape **** over an outlet mall. A World Market opening would get two days of front page coverage and they have stores in Wichita, Amarillo, and Lubbock. You have to admit, the bar is set pretty low.

Yes Whole Foods has done well...it is smack dab in their demographics in Nichols Hills. You can put a destination store like Bass Pro which will attract a wide demographic, but high end retailers won't sniff Bricktown for some time. Bricktown is not a retail destination area and there isn't enough adjacent population yet to attract and make successful very much retail. Retailers have to make money and the $'s just aren't there....YET. Someday, maybe. Local owners with cute businesses that can survive on low volume and will be extremely frugal will have a chance.

I don't know Rover, here in Jax we put a shopping center in the middle of a field with no adjacent housing and it is now the #3 shopping center in the US and draws people from over 200 miles away. The closest housing is all apartments. They picked the location because it was at the intersection of two freeways - which is a bit odd since it was marketed and named "Town Center" and touts its pedestrian feel, but has parking for 5,000 cars.

I don't know Rover, here in Jax we put a shopping center in the middle of a field with no adjacent housing and it is now the #3 shopping center in the US and draws people from over 200 miles away. The closest housing is all apartments. They picked the location because it was at the intersection of two freeways - which is a bit odd since it was marketed and named "Town Center" and touts its pedestrian feel, but has parking for 5,000 cars.

But you want no highways or roads to service downtown and want to discourage cars, right?

Seriously, they had traffic count or reason to suspect a huge traffic count there. And what was the constructions costs? I don't think any major developer is going to come into OKC and put up a major mall in the middle of the city. I didn't think that's what you want anyway. I don't know of downtown malls that have or are doing very well. Mostly the downtown shopping fits the demographics of the locals.

With the possibility of 4 new Bricktown hotels all in the near future, the Bricktown strategic plan seems to be working.

Sid, you hit on what I have said for a long time. The canal is a place you go TO. To have the type of success we all want to see, it needs to become a place people go THROUGH. Locals (rightly) see it as an unnecessary side trip to a visit to Bricktown. If it instead became a shortcut and was used as a nice way to get from point to point -- a super-sidewalk if you will -- it would fundamentally change the viability of canal-front property.

One of the challenges of businesses on the canal is that they are only serving people who are coming specifically to see them or are strolling along. I have walked along other canals or river walks when it acted simply as a pedestrian walkway. Because you have to walk off of Sheridan or Reno to get to California, it makes it a little more challenging to tap into the walking traffic of Bricktown. Have always wanted to see a pedestrian tunnel under the tracks and west from Bricktown to EKG and into the CBD. Make that route more prominent for people walking east out of downtown.

With the new transit hub, I hope this happens now more than ever. Sorry, that is a little more "dreamy" than the current strategy discussion.

You are exactly right. The canal is like a private sidewalk now and has no high count business that opens onto it. For instance, it seemed like the riverwalk in San Antonio got a lot more foot traffic when the Hyatt opened up on the river and had a main opening to it.

...I don't consider any of them destination retail that will bring people in specifically to shop in Bricktown...
That's never something we have really positioned them to be. Most shopping in Bricktown is currently impulse/opportunity based, and will be for the foreseeable future. As I have said in another post, it will be strong uphill sledding before a national "destination" retailer appears here. I hope I'm wrong, but the demographic numbers and the way nationals choose sites would indicate we are years if not a decade + from seeing this.


...if survival is dependent on casual shoppers who pass by on their way to dinner, that's a problem.
You're right; it is a problem, and one that won't be changing until lots more high earners live downtown. It's the cold hard truth. Therefore, in the meantime the best bet for a retailer to survive is to acknowledge, study and cater to this impulse market. Hopefully the retailer does so in a way that also interests and engages locals, and hopefully some of them WILL treat the retailer as a destination. We have seen an encouraging trend in this regard, with steady upticks every year in holiday shopping, for example.


..and something like that was a problem for Envy, Firefly and Lit, all of which should have been successful in the right location...
I think Envy's demise had more to do with a divorce and the opportunity to put Pinkitzel in the same space, but the other two locations failed (in my opinion) because they didn't listen to the market. They were mall stores plopped in Bricktown, and frankly I don't see that working here anytime soon if ever. The thing that will make retail work in Bricktown is offering something YOU CAN'T FIND at the mall, and offering products that will resonate with the many hundreds of thousands of people already walking around down here on an annual basis. If you ignore them and try to create some brand new market out of thin air, you've already got one foot in the grave.


I would have liked to see them adjacent, as that would have created more of an impetus to travel there to shop. I drive up to Nichols Hills Plaza to shop, and frequently stop in a store I might not have visited had it been in an isolated location. I have to make an extra effort to go there, but it's worth it, for all the unique retail that is in close proximity.
It's obviously not Nichols Hills Plaza, but the Bricktown Marketplace was designed specifically with this idea in mind; 50+ "micro" stores - each merchandised by a different merchant - in one location, with diversity of product and hopefully something for everyone. It's nowhere close to the ultimate goal for Bricktown, but we hope it is a step in the right direction.

I don't think we need a national retailer to make Bricktown more of a shopping destination. And I agree that the Bricktown Marketplace is a microcosm of exactly what is needed. I'm going to go shopping there next week to try to find something unique to put in gift bags for out of town visitors to my daughter's wedding. But I can't shop for shoes, a dress or a wedding gift. For all of those items, I prefer local merchants like we have along Western, in Classen Curve and the NH Plaza. And, with the right renovation, promotion and perhaps help from the city, we could recreate shopping like we find along Western in Bricktown. We're going to have some great downtown demographics soon. A store like Lit could thrive, as long as the owner sought out brands you can't find at the mall. A store like Bebe's might be too upscale, but something like the French Cowgirl could thrive adjacent to a store like that. A shoes store like the one on Campus Corner (forgot its name) or the Shoe Gypsy would work as well. People wouldn't drive to Bricktown to shop at one of those, but they would for all 3, especially if they could pick up lunch as well.

If I had enough money, I'd renovate Main Street and seek out tenants because I believe we're very close to there.

Downtown retail is a very complex equation. I would be very wary of anyone who says, "It's simple, all we have to do is focus on _____!"

However, the bottom line is we need to create retail destination somehow. You can create destination in a number of ways, with an anchor, with a high-profile retailer, etc. I think that at some point the city and a cadre of developers are going to have to sit down and offer incentives to different retailers (hopefully locally-owned retailers that are established, ie., Full Circle), and it MUST be done in a very coordinated, concerted manner.

If one developer offers discounted rent on NW 10th and another makes a competing deal in Bricktown, then you create zero destination, haven't identified the best retail slate, and all that you HAVE done is driven down your potential leasing market for retail in the future by throwing money in a haphazard way at retailers that one person liked, but clearly aren't the best strategy for downtown retail as a whole.

So that's the dilemma. Something bold has to be done, but a lot of planning has to go into whatever is done, and everyone has to be on the same page.

I think Betts also has a great point. Past attempts at downtown retail (and in the past we did have a decent concentration in Bricktown at times) may have been hindered by the relative new-ness of downtown at that time. Now downtown is more established, and most important of all, has great demographics. Each year, thousands of people move into downtown living units, so each year undoubtedly makes a huge difference in attracting the right mixed-use mix.

With retail it IS very simple...feet on the street with money in their pockets. Cheap rent pales in comparison to their large costs of inventory and inventory has to turn many times. When btown can prove real traffic made up of shoppers, retail will follow. Until then, small shops with limited merchandise will be possible, but it will be a slow progression. The more high end apartments and condos, the better to drive it.

...Now downtown is more established, and most important of all, has great demographics...
Unfortunately right now that is far from true. The zip codes a site selector would use (locals go with their gut/heart, regionals and national chains with cold hard data) are far, far from good. In fact, the appropriate term would be bad. That said, they are improving every day. Hopefully there will be good advancements in the retail sector in the next decade as downtown fills with residents. But it probably won't happen this year, or next year, or the year after. And it's nobody's "fault" that it hasn't happened to date. It's a process, and for downtown it's likely to be a long one.

Until then, the proven "real traffic made up of shoppers" that Rover refers to is limited to visitors (high numbers in season) and locals who are visiting downtown/Bricktown for events, dinner, etc. These are opportunistic shoppers who are buying more on impulse than anything else. It's still a significant opportunity for some retailers, and improving sales tax numbers will help in the recruitment of more mainstream retailers.

As a side note... This morning I noticed new signage for the Bricktown parking lots along Main Street. It looks really good, a retro type design with good lighting placement.

Unfortunately right now that is far from true. The zip codes a site selector would use (locals go with their gut/heart, regionals and national chains with cold hard data) are far, far from good. In fact, the appropriate term would be bad. That said, they are improving every day. Hopefully there will be good advancements in the retail sector in the next decade as downtown fills with residents. But it probably won't happen this year, or next year, or the year after. And it's nobody's "fault" that it hasn't happened to date. It's a process, and for downtown it's likely to be a long one.

Until then, the proven "real traffic made up of shoppers" that Rover refers to is limited to visitors (high numbers in season) and locals who are visiting downtown/Bricktown for events, dinner, etc. These are opportunistic shoppers who are buying more on impulse than anything else. It's still a significant opportunity for some retailers, and improving sales tax numbers will help in the recruitment of more mainstream retailers.

Yes, and unfortunately, people on their way to a Thunder, Baron's, or concert event aren't going to shop first and carry merchandise with them to the game/concert, and the shops are closed at 10:30 when they leave. I doubt families going to dinner are going to go shopping much either (Mom doesn't like to shop with 3 kids and Dad in tow). So, right now, serious shoppers are in short supply. When locals (immediate area) aren't even populous enough to support a CVS, it is doubtful they will support much of a retail operation. So, small local boutiques, specialty book stores, kitschy souvenir and novelty stores, etc. is what will be more realistic for the time being.

Unfortunately right now that is far from true. The zip codes a site selector would use (locals go with their gut/heart, regionals and national chains with cold hard data) are far, far from good. In fact, the appropriate term would be bad. That said, they are improving every day. Hopefully there will be good advancements in the retail sector in the next decade as downtown fills with residents. But it probably won't happen this year, or next year, or the year after. And it's nobody's "fault" that it hasn't happened to date. It's a process, and for downtown it's likely to be a long one.

Until then, the proven "real traffic made up of shoppers" that Rover refers to is limited to visitors (high numbers in season) and locals who are visiting downtown/Bricktown for events, dinner, etc. These are opportunistic shoppers who are buying more on impulse than anything else. It's still a significant opportunity for some retailers, and improving sales tax numbers will help in the recruitment of more mainstream retailers.

I'm not sure they'll be BAD per se. Hundreds of new folks moving into LEVEL, hundreds of people moving into the Edge, hundreds of new folks will be moving into Bradshaw's new apartment project, as well as Gary Clark's East Bricktown project. Then consider the number of smaller-scale projects that don't take up entire blocks, probably at least a dozen housing developments there right now. That does translate into some decent demographics IMO, especially when you question just how many people should be living in a ZIP code. We don't really have uber-high population ZIP codes in OKC because of how sprawled our city is, maybe along the NW Expressway? Still, I wouldn't be surprised if Norman or Stillwater have the highest population density ZIP codes in the state, and look at how that's translated into elite retail for them...

So I just don't think that a huge number in a single ZIP code is the recipe. The presentations I've seen to retailers and developers usually use a 3-mile radius, then a 5-mile radius, and then go as far out as the developer is wanting to make a point.

As for tourist business, because that's basically what it is, I'm going to go ahead and say you undoubtedly know more than any of us about that base. That said, I just don't believe it's as significant as you say it is, but I could be wrong. I have seen you say a few times that it's a lot more people than we'd think, so I'll take your word for it there. I am sure though that no matter how big it is, it's nowhere near big enough to grow the kind of downtown retail that I think we all want to see take root.

Yes, and unfortunately, people on their way to a Thunder, Baron's, or concert event aren't going to shop first and carry merchandise with them to the game/concert, and the shops are closed at 10:30 when they leave. I doubt families going to dinner are going to go shopping much either (Mom doesn't like to shop with 3 kids and Dad in tow). So, right now, serious shoppers are in short supply. When locals (immediate area) aren't even populous enough to support a CVS, it is doubtful they will support much of a retail operation. So, small local boutiques, specialty book stores, kitschy souvenir and novelty stores, etc. is what will be more realistic for the time being.

Now hold on. I wouldn't use CVS' absence as a dig, or anything definitive, for that matter. I doubt CVS has even been asked in a few years, or given a proposal. And if they have and said no, that's their loss. The point being though, I'm pretty sure that downtown could at least support a CVS, the prolonged absence of which is now becoming puzzling.

Now hold on. I wouldn't use CVS' absence as a dig, or anything definitive, for that matter. I doubt CVS has even been asked in a few years, or given a proposal. And if they have and said no, that's their loss. The point being though, I'm pretty sure that downtown could at least support a CVS, the prolonged absence of which is now becoming puzzling.

CVS' absence is actually very perplexing considering their new approach to how their stores are setup and their product inventory. Their urban stores have added significantly to their food section, taking away from a lot of the miscellaneous things that are often seen in a CVS. It seems like there should be one in one of the up and coming districts of OKC.

CVS' absence is actually very perplexing considering their new approach to how their stores are setup and their product inventory. Their urban stores have added significantly to their food section, taking away from a lot of the miscellaneous things that are often seen in a CVS. It seems like there should be one in one of the up and coming districts of OKC.

I was shocked when I went into a CVS in Philly - it was more grocery store than drug store complete with a fresh produce section. Blew my mind!

Now hold on. I wouldn't use CVS' absence as a dig, or anything definitive, for that matter. I doubt CVS has even been asked in a few years, or given a proposal. And if they have and said no, that's their loss. The point being though, I'm pretty sure that downtown could at least support a CVS, the prolonged absence of which is now becoming puzzling.

Not making a dig. But your statement is my point exactly. WHY haven't they? And like anything, there are trend setters whom other retailers respect (or envy) and whom they follow (they are different than innovators/pioneers). When one or two trend setter retailers agree to move in, others will quickly follow. All retailers have their guidelines..some stupid, but they have them. And demographics isn't just number of people and not even always about income, but more about the specific demographics and what they buy, and disposable income as much as income. The new developments and growing market size helps, but it may take awhile...or subsidies to help convince a trend setter to come and show what the neighborhood REALLY will support. Chesapeake subsidized the entry of Whole Foods and guess what....they found they can be VERY successful here. Now they are looking for other sites. Downtown needs their "Chesapeake" to kick start the retail side, and then hope that everyone responds and supports them.

This sounds like a circular argument. We don't have retail downtown because we don't have enough people and people dont come downtown to shop because we don't have enough retail. I still believe we could create the impetus for people who don't live downtown to come to shop, which might encourage more people to move downtown. I think, if someone had enough vision or the city helped out financially, that we could create enough interesting retail (not national chains) that it could be destination shopping. I don't think it is likely to happen by itself, which is why I thought the title of this thread related to strategic planning. Maybe we need some of that.

If the plan is "it's not gonna happen", then it won't.

Not making a dig. But your statement is my point exactly. WHY haven't they?

I just think you're giving way too much credit to the CVS and other low-level retail site selectors, who frankly aren't experts or else they would be site selectors for better retailers than CVS. Especially to let them characterize the potential of downtown retail for us??

It sounds like you're agreeing with my suggestion that subsidies will need to be involved. I was saying though that subsidies need to be applied very diligently and selectively, to prevent that train from leaving the station. Subsidies are a risky thing to lose control of, especially when you have a city that is run the way OKC is (not very well).

But I do not believe that CVS should be given a subsidy to come downtown. Or even an equivalent. Honestly, it sounds like some of you all are just being overly-contrarian. I have been arguing all along that the retail picture is complicated, then you all said no it's very simple. Now that I've brought up that downtown demographic picture is actually not as bad as it is made out to be, now it's not simple, it is in fact very complicated--see these reasons, which come from Spartan's post earlier. So it is frustrating that we're circling the wagons here and to see reasoning that I've already put out there.

That said, I think there's a lot to be said for downtown's demographics. I would argue that instead of controversial "stakeholder" studies and recommendations to bury the streetcar project in a barrage of repetitive studies, perhaps a study should be done on just what is the downtown retail demographic. How can all of these restaurants set up shop and thrive, very few of them ever going out of business, and yet retail is just non sequitur? Retail and restaurants are usually considered very similar uses in the planning picture, so on the business side of it, it would be interested to examine the disconnect there.

I think we would be pleasantly surprised. There are a lot of things that are never as bad as they're chalked up to be. Sometimes, the court of public opinion is a vicious thing, and it's often wrong as well. Granted, O.J. did in fact do it, I think downtown's demographics is a great example of where some people who aren't part of that demographic, haven't studied it fully, and just aren't as connected to reality as they should be to make such a definitive statement, ended up declaring downtown premature for retail and then the media went with it and got all of us to go with it, and then the question was never revisited again because everybody thinks it was definitively answered.

This downtown demographics issue seems more like a lose-lose proposition than a piece of information that can help us correct the problem. The people from whom this statement comes from are also pretty much saying that there's nothing you can do about downtown retail, the facts are this, just give up (which reminds me a LOT about how we used to talk about pro sports in Oklahoma when I was growing up).

This argument seems to be in no way connected to a strategy to fix the problem, and that's something I have a huge problem with, because it's not helping. It's not a constructive issue. And this issue seems to exist, in the minds of people, in a vacuum that is totally oblivious to the fact that we're seeing about a thousand move-ins a year in terms of rooftops downtown. If that doesn't change things in terms of the equation for downtown retail, then I'm going to go ahead and say that the math is wrong, not downtown. If somebody is oblivious, unaware, or just doesn't care about thousands of living units under construction or proposed, then I am either oblivious, unaware, or just don't care about what they're saying about downtown.

Facts are facts. It's not a circular argument. It is not giving up. I have been involved with this issue for a long time (many years before actually becoming a retailer in fact), and I am hardly discouraged about downtown's prospects. I have also been fortunate enough to know many of the people involved - all of them with far more than my own meager horsepower - and I can assure you that some very smart, hardworking and resourceful people have worked incredibly diligently over the years to bring they types of retail being discussed, and at times have been frustrated in their efforts. This is not an issue that is somehow being ignored by the City, and a number of property owners downtown have quietly been very aggressive in trying to make it happen.

I have just come to the understanding that attracting quality retail to downtown is a detailed process, and unfortunately in our case likely to continue to be a lengthy one.

It is NOT a "chicken or the egg" thing where there is a debate as to whether the people attract the retail or the retail attracts the people; it's well-established what has to come first: the people. Lots of them. With disposable income. That simply does not exist in the OKC inner-city in the radius that would be considered by the retailers we all hope for.

The bright side is that it probably will exist one day. Creating a strategy in the meantime is of course very important.

The chain retailers people have been talking about on here (other than services like pharmacies) are very unlikely to be here anytime soon. The inner city zip codes that would be considered in the downtown equation are very sparsely populated overall, and even worse the average income numbers are around $20K, I have been told. The only way that changes is when many more quality developments appear, like the ones we are currently seeing.

If an upscale retailer is going to venture into the OKC market, "taking a chance" on the city at all is as about as much appetite for risk as they will possibly exhibit. They will go to a proven location with the right demographics, not a sparsely-populated, comparatively poor, unproven area they "have a gut feeling about."

You can try all you want to create parallels between downtown and Classen Curve, and talk about incentives like WF supposedly received, but what you cannot change is the amount of relatively high-income housing surrounding CC. There is zero legitimate comparison between the two. It's even more sobering when you consider the fact that they apparently STILL had to provide incentives. Downtown isn't even in that ballgame.

Sorry if it seems like I am a wet blanket, but there is a bit of a need for a reality check here. Realistic expectations will make the journey much more palatable, as the work of the past couple of decades and the next few years finally bear fruit, as they eventually will.

and talk about incentives like WF supposedly received, but what you cannot change is the amount of relatively high-income housing surrounding CC. There is zero legitimate comparison between the two. It's even more sobering when you consider the fact that they apparently STILL had to provide incentives. Downtown isn't even in that ballgame.

Wow, if they say I'm depressing to read, I'd hate to see reactions to this no matter what a good point it is. Here's what I'm wondering, on the bright side: We know how likely downtown retail was 5 years ago when we were looking at our first big wave of infill. There was a 2007 wave, most of which never broke ground due to the recession, but some stuff did. How much progress have we at least made? What have we done right, what have we done wrong? How much has the incredible growth downtown made a dent in the numbers we ultimately will need?

Now we've seen a large 2011 wave that is more in line with our optimistic expectations for development. I'm currently working on lists that will quantify the exact number/costs of development and housing units for downtown. But I suspect once we add up all the small projects with 10/15 units a piece, we'll be surprised at how many new units we've seen. As for how that translates into population, I'll figure that each unit will add 1.5 people, because we know that downtown household sizes are much smaller than average. So, first we need an idea of how many people we have downtown and how many more we KNOW we're adding space for.

Then we need a magical number for downtown housing. Some people have said for a grocery store that it's around 20,000, or else you're looking at incentivizing to make up for however much you're short. But, how much do you think the magical number would be for something like this (you're essentially adding 4 more small stores on Broadway):
1145

I think here is how you can strategically target some small retailers, in this case two national clothing brands (GAP, and Urban Outfitters) that have proven to be urban staples, and then getting a local grocer that has already expressed interest in downtown, and a bookstore that is owned by a downtown developer and probably needs new digs. Instead of $40 million in incentives to get a Bloomingdale's or a Saks that isn't happening anyway (and I'm shocked the City has even thought about it), what if each of these retailers could be made eligible for some very generous tax receipts that would make downtown more than worth their while?

In the case of GAP, I wouldn't be surprised if they're not looking to expand in the metro since they have much more of a presence in other similarly-sized metros, and they've gone in on potentially risky downtown areas before. Like Lawrence, KS (whose downtown was revitalized in the 90s)--which also has a UO on their downtown stretch.

So then, by adding that up with what is arguably our fledgling little retail hub, suddenly I think this stretch provides EXCELLENT retail destination. It also has excellent highway access, which retailers will desire, along with the streetcar and a glut of 4-lane roads with potentially high traffic volume. I would say just by bringing in those four stores, two of which are local (important to make sure locals benefit from retail incentives) and all of which contribute to the kind of cool, unique mix that downtown retail needs in order to succeed--then just sit back and see if creating that retail destination adds to any additional activity from developers once this area gets established and makes a name for itself.

One of the main reasons I like that location Nick is that it acts as a stepping stone back toward Downtown. I have always wondered why we don't think of urban renewal more in the context of a reverse suburban flight. In other words, draw your population rings and start to work inward, building stability and buy-in along the way. Instead of trying to force activity in abandoned areas and hope people will leave their beaten path to participate.

There are other areas too that boarder the peripheral neighborhoods that surround the CBD. Would be a neat experiment to draw a band about 1-2 miles out around downtown and see what opportunities exist today that can be leveraged - especially retail ones.

Granted, this approach takes longer and isn't as sexy as new entertainment districts, but I think it is a viable project that could run parallel to other, downtown-centric efforts. Over time, you could bring that ring in closer to downtown as infill brings people and activity closer.

Well it's just the idea of organic development (what is proven to be successful) versus inorganic development (what we keep trying).

What, microsoft Paint not good enough for you? Fine, I see how it is...

How about building a large parking garage in Btown and surround it with a charming urban shopping with street parking. The cheap parking is not necessarily for the shoppers, but for downtown workers, not the $150k a yr workers, but the others for whom parking is expensive. Make them go past the shopping....either walking or by transport. Get the feet on the street and really encourage them to hang around downtown after work. Add that demographics to that of those who live there. Too many people leave work and go straight home. Make them want to hang around...give them a reason. BUILD the kind of demographics beneficial to retail.

I agree, excellent idea. I would also say that a public parking facility in my little fledgling retail destination would no doubt be necessary and also ensure some degree of success. Available parking is another thing that retailers look specifically for.

It would be very nice if some of these new COTPA parking garages would address non-office land uses, but that seems to be asking for too much. Exnay on the transit, retail, and mixed-use areas apparently.

In many places, the parking is for pay during the day and free after 5. Make it cheap for the office workers to hang around. Keep them downtown rather than trying to get other people to come downtown. Build the garages in areas you want people to be in. If you build them adjoining the offices, they leave the office and drive on out to the burbs. Give them financial incentives to wak from downtown thru btown.

How about building a large parking garage in Btown and surround it with a charming urban shopping with street parking. The cheap parking is not necessarily for the shoppers, but for downtown workers, not the $150k a yr workers, but the others for whom parking is expensive. Make them go past the shopping....either walking or by transport. Get the feet on the street and really encourage them to hang around downtown after work. Add that demographics to that of those who live there. Too many people leave work and go straight home. Make them want to hang around...give them a reason. BUILD the kind of demographics beneficial to retail.

Thank you. The point I was trying to make is that if we're simply going to say Bricktown isn't ready for more retail and won't be for some time, why bother talking about a strategic plan? If retail can succeed at the Old Market in Omaha, and from my admittedly limited experience with it it has, then we should be able to make it succeed in Bricktown. I'd rather see people throw out ideas, which perhaps might make people think outside the box a little, than assume it can't be done.

Oh, and as far as CVS is concerned, I actually contacted their management about a possible Deep Deuce store. This was despite the fact that I consider most of their stores decidedly ugly. They gave me population figures they require for a new store, and it was far higher than what we can expect in the next few years. I suggested they alternatively consider 10th St, because it is an arterial between the Health Sciences Center and St. Anthony's and got no response.

That would seem like a pretty easy conundrum to solve to me. Tell CVS and Walgreens that neither of them can expect a building permit for a new store anywhere in OKC unless they look at downtown. Either they go downtown, or they stop littering our city with their ugly suburban stores, so I don't see how we could lose there. I would sure hate to see incentives for a CVS, not that Cathy O'Connor would go there.

And...

The point I was trying to make is that if we're simply going to say Bricktown isn't ready for more retail and won't be for some time, why bother talking about a strategic plan? If retail can succeed at the Old Market in Omaha, and from my admittedly limited experience with it it has, then we should be able to make it succeed in Bricktown. I'd rather see people throw out ideas, which perhaps might make people think outside the box a little, than assume it can't be done.
Yes!!

That would seem like a pretty easy conundrum to solve to me. Tell CVS and Walgreens that neither of them can expect a building permit for a new store anywhere in OKC unless they look at downtown. Either they go downtown, or they stop littering our city with their ugly suburban stores, so I don't see how we could lose there. I would sure hate to see incentives for a CVS, not that Cathy O'Connor would go there.

And...

Yes!!


wow .. just wow

That would seem like a pretty easy conundrum to solve to me. Tell CVS and Walgreens that neither of them can expect a building permit for a new store anywhere in OKC unless they look at downtown. Either they go downtown, or they stop littering our city with their ugly suburban stores, so I don't see how we could lose there. I would sure hate to see incentives for a CVS, not that Cathy O'Connor would go there.

And...

Yes!!

That's right, because we all know Bricktown will cease to exist without a 24 hour Drug Store.

wow .. just wow

Don't tell me you're defending precious CVS..

Don't tell me you're defending precious CVS..

no but your comment that the city should/could tell CVS and walgreens that neither of them can expect a permit unless the look downtown .. is so out there that is deserved a couple of wow's

It's also called hardball in bigger cities. If you're going to litter our city with 50 of your crappy suburban boxes, and OKC can't do anything to control that, then at least look downtown. There are a lot of cities that have begun "discriminating" against retailers (like Walmart) who have "too much" market share.

You think it's radical, but it's totally viable. And really, how much "sway" does CVS or Walgreens have in this city? Some cities in Canada are now implementing a "no more than 10 locations" rule (darn you Harvey's), which I think is an awesome idea.

it very much would be not legal .... and very much effects the rights property holders that lease to CVS/Walgreens ..

Wow, quite the crowd. Thanks for sharing!

That was a SMALL fraction of the crowd at the St. Patty's parade. I went this year for the first time and was blown away how big an event this is. Several thousand street spectators from AA all the way through Bricktown to Joe Carter. It was packed, the parade itself lasted about 2 hours.

...Oh, and as far as CVS is concerned, I actually contacted their management about a possible Deep Deuce store. This was despite the fact that I consider most of their stores decidedly ugly. They gave me population figures they require for a new store, and it was far higher than what we can expect in the next few years. I suggested they alternatively consider 10th St, because it is an arterial between the Health Sciences Center and St. Anthony's and got no response.
You're confirming the point I have been making, which is not so much about Bricktown, but about downtown in general. CVS won't come to downtown due to sparse population (you heard it with your own ears), but Whole Foods or Urban Outfitters will? Sure, UO isn't afraid of urban areas, but in THOSE cities, there is dense and typically affluent population surrounding the site.

We have to crawl before we can walk. Build residential, build residential, build residential. Beyond that, entice other locals to set up shop, and then SUPPORT them. That is the path. Spending a bunch of time hoping for West Elm to be here tomorrow is wasted energy.

One other thing that might be instructive to those who keep bringing up relocating Full Circle Books (which I personally have great affection for and would love to see as much as anyone) is that the owner, Jim Tolbert, already owns multiple buildings in downtown and specifically in Bricktown. He has been deeply involved in the redevelopment of Bricktown nearly since the Neal Horton days, and is a downtown treasure.

Since we opened the Emporium in 2007 he has been kind enough to partner with us on our Oklahoma-themed book collection. When we opened the marketplace in 2010, we actively sought him out and offered him space in one of our large booths, hoping he would do a scaled-down version of Full Circle. After a lot of thought he politely declined.

If he desired to move Full Circle to Bricktown, he would have done it already.

You think it's radical, but it's totally viable. And really, how much "sway" does CVS or Walgreens have in this city? Some cities in Canada are now implementing a "no more than 10 locations" rule (darn you Harvey's), which I think is an awesome idea.

That would be counter-productive in OKC. That strategy works in Canada becasue they don't have urban sprawl the way we do so limiting retail outlets forces chains to locate in high density areas and not spread out. OKC is already spreadout so limiting the chains to 10 stores would actually prevent them from expanding in the urban core. If you want to try something radical then limit the number of parking spaces (no more than 1 parking space for every 5,000 sq feet of space). They could build all the CVS' they want but they could only put in 2 parking spaces which would force them to only locate in walkable areas.

it very much would be not legal .... and very much effects the rights property holders that lease to CVS/Walgreens ..


That would be counter-productive in OKC. That strategy works in Canada becasue they don't have urban sprawl the way we do so limiting retail outlets forces chains to locate in high density areas and not spread out. OKC is already spreadout so limiting the chains to 10 stores would actually prevent them from expanding in the urban core. If you want to try something radical then limit the number of parking spaces (no more than 1 parking space for every 5,000 sq feet of space). They could build all the CVS' they want but they could only put in 2 parking spaces which would force them to only locate in walkable areas.

But BoulderSooner would tell you that doing that, or exercising any kind of planning on private property, "very much would not be legal."

And you could also include code enforcement, zoning regulations, urban design overlay districts, the entire city building permit process, not to mention HOAs, all under this very broad umbrella of "very much would be not legal." Or property tax.

I'm sorry, but you don't have complete private property rights in a city. Cities have the right to enact ordinances and govern their land however they see fit. OKC is ridiculously lax in terms of its building standards, and I can't drive that point home enough. There are U.S. cities as well that limit the number of franchises in a city. Seriously, a growing list of cities including San Francisco don't even allow plastic bags to be given out in any of their retail establishments, and I'm not even proposing exercising that much control.

I'm sorry, but you don't have complete private property rights in a city. Cities have the right to enact ordinances and govern their land however they see fit. OKC is ridiculously lax in terms of its building standards, and I can't drive that point home enough. There are U.S. cities as well that limit the number of franchises in a city. Seriously, a growing list of cities including San Francisco don't even allow plastic bags to be given out in any of their retail establishments, and I'm not even proposing exercising that much control.

WalMarts are banned in towns all over the country. South Central LA has banned all fast-food restaurants.

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/local/los_angeles&id=7831475


EXPOSITION PARK, Calif. (KABC) -- New stand-alone fast food restaurants have been banned from setting up shop in South Los Angeles, due to rising health concerns by the city council.

WalMarts are banned in towns all over the country. South Central LA has banned all fast-food restaurants.

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/local/los_angeles&id=7831475

The only place I can find considering banning Wal Mart is California and mostly the supercenters, and it is mainly a tax situation, not real estate (has to do with non taxed grocery sales ) . Btw, the permit was just issued for the one in LA. I can find no evidence off them beings banned "all over the country".

And the area ban on fast foods was because the fast food business already made up 75% of the restaurant business...twice the national average. And, it would be doubtful it would hold up if it ever went to the supreme court. Cali is famous for overreaching.

Didn't Norman just tell Chuy's they couldn't build in UNP? Seems like it happens.

Yeah, I'm not suggesting that we become like Edmond, which we all know uses a tight stranglehold on developers to ensure... that only low-quality developments are built there.

I didn't know Norman said no to Chuy's. Chuy's would have been the one good thing about UNP.

If I remember correctly they told them they weren't a good fit for UNP, which was where they originally scouted. I don't understand it either. So Chuy's is building on Ed Noble, right next door to Ted's. Norman seems to love placing competitors right next door to each other.

If I remember correctly they told them they weren't a good fit for UNP, which was where they originally scouted. I don't understand it either. So Chuy's is building on Ed Noble, right next door to Ted's. Norman seems to love placing competitors right next door to each other.

They were denied based entirely on construction material and neither side would budge.

You're confirming the point I have been making, which is not so much about Bricktown, but about downtown in general. CVS won't come to downtown due to sparse population (you heard it with your own ears), but Whole Foods or Urban Outfitters will? Sure, UO isn't afraid of urban areas, but in THOSE cities, there is dense and typically affluent population surrounding the site.

We have to crawl before we can walk. Build residential, build residential, build residential. Beyond that, entice other locals to set up shop, and then SUPPORT them. That is the path. Spending a bunch of time hoping for West Elm to be here tomorrow is wasted energy.

Ahem. Smart residential. The failed/underperforming high end residential housing developments in and around Bricktown/downtown are the reason the area hasn't grown quicker. How much income is "disposable income"? You don't need to be wealthy to have money to spend. Downtown is just now, almost 20 years after MAPS, starting to develop quality, reasonably priced housing for young people, who, yes, aren't rich, but have money to blow.

I think you're going to find that the underperforming high end residential in and around Bricktown is going to start performing. The Hill and Maywood are starting to fill up, and there is an incredible amount of activity in terms of people looking. As this city becomes more downtown-centric, the concept of living downtown is not as alien to people who are looking for places to purchase. As the people who live in rentals downtown age, they'll be looking for places to purchase and won't find much. The entire problem with the higher end for sale housing was that a lot of people looking for housing in that price range who had lived in Oklahoma City their entire life or who had never lived in a very urban area did not understand the appeal. That is changing, and younger people who will rent downtown will not have that bias against urban dwelling as they age. The people who built the underperforming high end residential were ahead of their time, that's all. And, in 20 years, when all the for rent housing ages, people will be lamenting the fact that we were in such a hurry to populate Deep Deuce and Bricktown that we allowed development that doesn't age well to use prime land. Maybe that's a necessary evil, but I think there are going to be plenty of options for young people. It's time to stop acting as if high end downtown residential was a mistake. In the long run, we'll wish there were more high quality housing that ages well downtown.

They were denied based entirely on construction material and neither side would budge.

What Chuy's is building on the frontage rd isn't ugly, but I tend to agree it would look odd if bundled into the UNP area. Not a bad call overall. The food row along I-35 was already distinctive brand dressed so another one fits in better there and gets rid of the dead SF building. win-win as kate would say.

I think you're going to find that the underperforming high end residential in and around Bricktown is going to start performing. The Hill and Maywood are starting to fill up, and there is an incredible amount of activity in terms of people looking. As this city becomes more downtown-centric, the concept of living downtown is not as alien to people who are looking for places to purchase. As the people who live in rentals downtown age, they'll be looking for places to purchase and won't find much. The entire problem with the higher end for sale housing was that a lot of people looking for housing in that price range who had lived in Oklahoma City their entire life or who had never lived in a very urban area did not understand the appeal. That is changing, and younger people who will rent downtown will not have that bias against urban dwelling as they age. The people who built the underperforming high end residential were ahead of their time, that's all. And, in 20 years, when all the for rent housing ages, people will be lamenting the fact that we were in such a hurry to populate Deep Deuce and Bricktown that we allowed development that doesn't age well to use prime land. Maybe that's a necessary evil, but I think there are going to be plenty of options for young people. It's time to stop acting as if high end downtown residential was a mistake. In the long run, we'll wish there were more high quality housing that ages well downtown.
There was a great article at a new urbanism web site that pointed out that without decent amounts of development on the higher end, as urban living became more popular it tends to drive prices up for all properties and tends to force the lower economic groups out. The higher economic class merely bids up what is on the market because they have the money to do so.

I think you're going to find that the underperforming high end residential in and around Bricktown is going to start performing. The Hill and Maywood are starting to fill up, and there is an incredible amount of activity in terms of people looking. As this city becomes more downtown-centric, the concept of living downtown is not as alien to people who are looking for places to purchase. As the people who live in rentals downtown age, they'll be looking for places to purchase and won't find much. The entire problem with the higher end for sale housing was that a lot of people looking for housing in that price range who had lived in Oklahoma City their entire life or who had never lived in a very urban area did not understand the appeal. That is changing, and younger people who will rent downtown will not have that bias against urban dwelling as they age. The people who built the underperforming high end residential were ahead of their time, that's all. And, in 20 years, when all the for rent housing ages, people will be lamenting the fact that we were in such a hurry to populate Deep Deuce and Bricktown that we allowed development that doesn't age well to use prime land. Maybe that's a necessary evil, but I think there are going to be plenty of options for young people. It's time to stop acting as if high end downtown residential was a mistake. In the long run, we'll wish there were more high quality housing that ages well downtown.

In my opinion the rentals being developed are higher-end, or at least upper-middle. $850/mo for 600 sf aint cheap, although I would also defend it as very reasonable to people who think that's a "rip-off." I think we've found a niche that is both successful and "just right" demographically, and I'd venture a guess that it is going to take more than 20 years for LEVEL to deteriorate. I think if the downtown occupancy rate remains above 95% once LEVEL, Gary Clark's East Bricktown project, Bradshaw's new project, and the Edge all go online, then we may see some apartment towers begin to go up.

I want to go back to something though, the topic of incentives. There is almost no way around this, and I'd like to start seeing incentives leveraged because I think it is time (due to all the rooftops AND hotels going up) to develop retail. I realize everyone says it's premature it won't develop the market isn't there yet for it, etc. I get that. That's why I said incentives. Cathy O'Connor needs to offer incentives strategically to UO and GAP as well as perhaps some locals and make it perfectly clear that these are the only incentives on the table for anywhere in the city. They need to be good incentives as well. Certainly nowhere near the $20 million+ allegedly needed for a Bloomingdale, but maybe a million or two. I think UO or GAP, ideally both as anchors around existing retail niches, would be a worthy investment of the city.

There was a great article at a new urbanism web site that pointed out that without decent amounts of development on the higher end, as urban living became more popular it tends to drive prices up for all properties and tends to force the lower economic groups out. The higher economic class merely bids up what is on the market because they have the money to do so.

That is why it is important to get in on the ground floor. If areas like Capitol Hill ever take off new urbanism style the people living/owning there now will be the first to reap the economic rewards. So far the areas in OKC that are seeing the most redevelopment haven't had ANYONE living there for generations. I would love to own a home within 3 blocks of the Plaza District because over the next few years their home values are going to skyrocket. In 10 years they could easily be worth 3X what they are current priced at, especially if gasoline prices keep going up (and it will). What the current owners do with that increase in value is up to them.

Spartan: was thinking that was low but had to look it up. Basically double the incentive amount you mentioned...
http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2011/04/21/uli-and-core-to-shore-destination-retail-is-not-going-to-happen/

Furthermore, very few department stores are being built today, and the incentive packages required to attract one to a downtown location start at $40 million or more.
More than double what it cost us for Bass Pro to put it into some perspective. (Not to detract from the rest of your post)

Well, when you put it like that, it almost seems very worthwhile all of a sudden...

The building between Club Albi and AMCUCO has building permits in the windows. That corner is developing nicely. Are those buildings new?