They should save this area for a future multi-purpose stadium...and develop high density mixed-use around that.

I would hate to see this area turn into a suburban style development like Chisholm Creek or The Half. Something like that, would take away from Bricktown and Strawberryfields. I don't think downtown could support all 3.

Downtown can’t support all three which is precisely why I propose more of a suburban type development. Remember it can be redeveloped. Let’s focus on lower bricktown, strawberry fields, and the air park development for quality urban development.

What would it take for this area to become its own official district, with design guidelines? It will save from select parcels being bought by single developers and basically building what they want, without any type of guidance or symmetry.

Downtown can’t support all three which is precisely why I propose more of a suburban type development. Remember it can be redeveloped. Let’s focus on lower bricktown, strawberry fields, and the air park development for quality urban development.

What is your basis for saying downtown can't support all three, especially given we have no real idea how Strawberry Fields is going to develop?

So I guess its the Producer's District? Is it like a an official district with a committee? Are there design guidelines?

What is your basis for saying downtown can't support all three, especially given we have no real idea how Strawberry Fields is going to develop?
Strawberry Fields can’t even get off the ground after having been proposed for years. Lower Bricktown is absolutely comical and needs a near complete redevelopment. There are tons of other districts that need to be focused on and more density.

Perhaps we can learn a thing or two from Nashville:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nzlGLqvI30&t=165s

^ Your right, Nashville is one of the those cities that doesn't get enough credit. They have really took off in the last decade. The recent & upcoming developments they have in downtown are amazing.

I've said this before and I'll say it again. OKC does not need another "district."

In my opinion, Midtown is the most interesting and dynamic part of the core because it is developing in a somewhat organic way. (and I know Midtown Renaissance exists and is doing a lot there). But within Midtown there are smaller buildings, bigger buildings, a variety of uses, a variety of architectural styles, little retail corridors, bigger blocks of development etc, etc. Even within Midtown there are years and years and years of existing infill opportunities. It's in the right location because of the existing housing stock in Heritage Hills and points north and northwest.

I look at this map of potential development and think a couple of things:

First, it's likely to possess an architectural sameness that will make it look like a huge corporate entity has just plopped down a bunch of buildings that all match.

Second, it is so ambitious-looking from a size perspective that I can't imagine it would get built as it is anyway, and who would fill the retail and would it be new to market or just take from somewhere else? (Because if it just moves something from Bricktown or the CBD, it's not a net-positive for the city)

Third, it is isolated from the rest of downtown and so will seem really disjointed.

I know that this is a free-market town and country and there's a lot that the city can't force. But I just don't think we need development for the sake of development. Let's focus on the existing, densifying districts - and I would include the strip of Strawberry Fields that fronts the park in that.

Finally, OKC is somewhat unique to have such a large piece of land in the core. Let's let the market mature and decide what the best use for that space is. It might be a stadium, it might be offices, it might be a technology park, it might be a use that will explode into the public consciousness in 2025 or 2030 and we'll be happy to have such a prime location ready.

OKC having too many or too little districts makes absolutely no difference. Hell every inch of the city should be classified as a certain district. The issue is demand and one look at the core and around it should tell you what you need to know.

The use of the word "district" is not the primary point I was trying to make. I agree that there is demand in the core, it's a matter of where we should be focusing the demand. I would rather see the existing areas built out in interesting ways than some mammoth entity robbing Peter to pay Paul. You're free to have your own opinion, of course.

I’m just saying all of these services people want in the core so badly like a grocer would be a lot more plausible if we built the COOP to be car oriented with better pedestrian access than what is currently offered in the burbs. Then as time goes and other areas around the core are redeveloped into quality urban areas presumably a decade or more out from now we can come back and redeveloped the COOP site to be more urban.

This would be the absolute perfect place for an IKEA, Lowes or Home Depot, Walmart Super center, and/or a Target. Anyone of those places would murk it here but likely won’t come without ample parking. One of the biggest complaints on this forum about the core is lack of services. Here is the solution.

Several groups have looked at the site for projects. The cost of the dirt is just too high for now.

Several groups have looked at the site for projects. The cost of the dirt is just too high for now.
True but maybe it’s because of the expectations for the development. Many, at least here, want this to be a Wheeler District 2.0. That just isn’t feasible or it would have been done already given the prime location.

PluPan, it might surprise you that I agree with you on IKEA. There is an example of an urban IKEA in St. Louis that feeds off all the apartments and condos in the area. The one here has a parking garage and so they can be built in a way that both accommodates cars and still exist in an urban setting. There are also examples of urban Targets in downtowns across the country.

PluPan, it might surprise you that I agree with you on IKEA. There is an example of an urban IKEA in St. Louis that feeds off all the apartments and condos in the area. The one here has a parking garage and so they can be built in a way that both accommodates cars and still exist in an urban setting. There are also examples of urban Targets in downtowns across the country.
Yep. Here is it’s newest Austrian store: https://youtube.com/shorts/GGzs8QEczzQ?feature=share

Maybe if the city committed to fund half of a streetcar extension and the developer pays the other half it could be a boon for the area.

That Austrian store...wow.

Of course the cynic in me says "they'll never build anything like that in OKC." But OKC is in a unique position with respect to IKEA that most of the bigger cities in the U.S. already have one so if they are debuting a new model, we could be a test market.

I don't want to hijack this into an IKEA discussion. More to the point of the thread, this is why, in my opinion, we are better off leaving that land open for now. The world is going to be changing a lot in the next 10-20 years. We don't want to take up space with an aging paradigm when there are places we can develop in the meantime. Maybe by 2035-2040, there will have been enough of a revolution in the way people shop, live, and work so that what can be built in that space is cutting edge.

Nm

I'd like to propose they just go ahead and build those grid connected streets and let the chips fall where they may structure/tenant wise.

I'd like to propose they just go ahead and build those grid connected streets and let the chips fall where they may structure/tenant wise.

But you dont get any benefit from cutting the space up like that. But you do lose the benefit of having the larger swath of land available for a large project. Even more so than the Myriad plot. There's not actual benefit to restoring that grid pattern but a heck of a lot lost. Speculative construction on the city's dime (streets) is more than just a road. It's drainage, utilities get involved. Once its there, its not coming out and you cant just built a stadium (for example) on top of it.

Hopefully this doesn't end up being another downtown park. We have enough parks downtown.

Hopefully this doesn't end up being another downtown park. We have enough parks downtown.

Totally agree. Myriad Botanical Gardens, Scissortail Park, Bicentennial Park, Kerr Park, on and on.

maybe we could have a few more small scale pocket parks but yes, no more LARGE scale parks.

Totally agree. Myriad Botanical Gardens, Scissortail Park, Bicentennial Park, Kerr Park, on and on.

maybe we could have a few more small scale pocket parks but yes, no more LARGE scale parks.

The MAPS 4 parks package allocates $140 million towards a transformation of our city's parks system. First, $63 million is to upgrade every municipal neighborhood and community park outside of the central business district. Improvements will be based on need and neighborhood feedback.--City of Oklahoma City website.

It still feels like this is just going to end up being the location of the MAPS 4 Stadium, assuming the Energy come back and it does ultimately get built.

I had a dream last night, I saw The Cordish Companies turned this site into this retail park:

https://www.archdaily.com/966837/oct-oh-bay-laguardow-architects?ad_source=search&ad_medium=projects_tab

I had a dream last night, I saw The Cordish Companies turned this site into this retail park:

https://www.archdaily.com/966837/oct-oh-bay-laguardow-architects?ad_source=search&ad_medium=projects_tab

That's amazing! Sorry you had to wake up lol

17672There's work being done just south of OKC Boulevard per the cam on top of the climbing gym. Anybody know what's going on? Looks significant.

There's work being done just south of OKC Boulevard per the cam on top of the climbing gym. Anybody know what's going on? Looks significant.

It's the old lumberyard property that is owned by Fred Mazaheri.

Looks like they are just grading for parking. There haven't been any design permits filed.

Maybe this comes to mind because i was just at the state fair and it was so different out there there this year, it was hard to find my way around the grounds.
So many of the old land marks are gone now. One of them i still miss is the grand stands and race track. Are there any plans to replace this venue? No more do we hear
the cars racing round the track at my house on a fri or sat night, It was something the whole family could go to and have fun together at . There were also other events
held there like monster trucks, tractor pulls,show cars and good size concerts ect....If something could be put in the coop that could hold the space for large scale development later that wouldn't be to expensive to put in or take out that could be used for many different kinds of events may be a new grandstand and race track could work.
Not saying a NASCAR scale track but a track we could be proud of, and bring people in from all over the US,and have lots of fun at. Racing is one of the largest spectator sports
in the USA. just a thought

Maybe this comes to mind because i was just at the state fair and it was so different out there there this year, it was hard to find my way around the grounds.
So many of the old land marks are gone now. One of them i still miss is the grand stands and race track. Are there any plans to replace this venue? No more do we hear
the cars racing round the track at my house on a fri or sat night, It was something the whole family could go to and have fun together at . There were also other events
held there like monster trucks, tractor pulls,show cars and good size concerts ect....If something could be put in the coop that could hold the space for large scale development later that wouldn't be to expensive to put in or take out that could be used for many different kinds of events may be a new grandstand and race track could work.
Not saying a NASCAR scale track but a track we could be proud of, and bring people in from all over the US,and have lots of fun at. Racing is one of the largest spectator sports
in the USA. just a thought

I second this motion. The louder the better. The poshness of the area should be diversified. I think 10 dollar cocktails by the canal can and should coexist with 2 dollar Keystone light cans at the track. OKC can and should do both.

...No more do we hear the cars racing round the track at my house on a fri or sat night...

I get to hear the after market exhausts of both speeding, hot rodders and wanna be super bike champions who use the NW Expressway and I-44 as their personal drag strip/racetrack particularly during the overnight hours. It is rather annoying.

Pete, correct me if I'm wrong but could they be developing this parking area due to the upcoming start of the Dream development across the OKC Blvd? I'm thinking they will take out a lot of parking during construction, which this new lot will make up for.

If this is the case then not only am I all for the new temporary parking but also I'm excited about the start of the new development. :)

^

They are illegally trying to cash in on parking overflow from Bricktown and for Thunder games.

City ordinance does not allow parking on anything but solid (paved) surfaces. The owners are just speculators sitting on property and trying to cash in through improper parking.

This area they are grading and part of SE 3rd used to be free parking for thunder games/thunder alley back in 2010-2012 time. Kind of ironic.

So, we've got OKANA, Chisholm Creek, Oak and The Half signing deal after deal.

And here sits the coop that was available before just about all of them, just a bunch of dirt and weeds.

I'm pretty sure the stadium is going to OKANA, and we already know the aquarium started looking at the coop but will also be going to OKANA.


This group has really let everyone and everything pass them by. Maybe they should give a big chunk of property to IKEA just to get something going here. At this point, they need to do something. They seem to be in competition with Strawberry Fields to have the least forward momentum.

It feels like this is where the new basketball arena will ultimately end up.

It feels like this is where the new basketball arena will ultimately end up.

Not a chance.

It's going to the old Cox Center site and I believe that will be formally announced in July.

Not a chance.

It's going to the old Cox Center site and I believe that will be formally announced in July.

yep with a vote within the next year

yep with a vote within the next year

I know it will pass, but a tiny part of me thinks it will be a lot closer than we realize.

I know it will pass, but a tiny part of me thinks it will be a lot closer than we realize.

There will be a decent sized “the owners should pay for it themselves” crowd

There will be a decent sized “the owners should pay for it themselves” crowd

And they should. Surely the NBA is turning a profit by now. However, I would support a dedicated tax on athletic shoes.

And they should. Surely the NBA is turning a profit by now. However, I would support a dedicated tax on athletic shoes.

So you don't want the city to have ownership of the arena? That hasn't worked anywhere, hence why no owner does it. The city needs the asset, to get good concerts to town and visitors to come for said concerts.

The owners should pay for some of it, but they only use it a portion of the year, 41 days total. Why should they pay for a 365 day asset if they use it for a month and a half, in terms of days?

Why should they pay for a 365 day asset if they use it for a month and a half, in terms of days?

They can lease it to events themselves. If the city owns the area, 20 years from now we'll talk about plan to demolish Paycom Center and build another new arena there for them.

So you don't want the city to have ownership of the arena? That hasn't worked anywhere, hence why no owner does it. The city needs the asset, to get good concerts to town and visitors to come for said concerts.

Isn't this exactly the recent trend? The most profitable NBA arena—the Chase Center—was financed and is owned by the Warriors leadership group. Same thing is happening for the Clippers new arena.

I’m not saying what should happen in OKC, but this is a recent trend, right?

I think there would be a difference between ownership methods of a facility in a megalopolis like LA VS a large city like OKC. LA teams will get revenues OKC could only dream about outside the arena (such as TV revenues and team logo athletic equipment). Even when OKC had Durant, Westbrook and Harden, l bet their athlitic apparel sales were only a fraction of the Lakers.

So you don't want the city to have ownership of the arena? That hasn't worked anywhere, hence why no owner does it. The city needs the asset, to get good concerts to town and visitors to come for said concerts.

The owners should pay for some of it, but they only use it a portion of the year, 41 days total. Why should they pay for a 365 day asset if they use it for a month and a half, in terms of days?

No I don't want the City to own it and it has worked everywhere it has been tried. What was the last professional team in any sport to leave a city where the team owned the arena/stadium?

The best way to keep the Thunder in OKC is for Thunder ownership to own the arena. In fact, I would be in favor of OKC selling the current arena to the Thunder for what the City has put into it. At least we could start collecting property taxes on it.

They can lease it to events themselves. If the city owns the area, 20 years from now we'll talk about plan to demolish Paycom Center and build another new arena there for them.

OKC would probably get better events and more of them because the team would have serious profit motive in seeing the arena used as much as possible.

Do you think there isn't a serious profit motif now? I think you misunderstand who books these things. The city itself doesn't do that. Neither would the team owners. They partner with other companies to do that work. And it's entirely likely it would be the same company, no matter who the owner of the building is. Especially since that same company does a huge amount of that across the country. It's called ASM now, but it was more commonly known before as SMG or AEG (they merged). Talk about cornering the market. It's almost a monopoly in the large class arena world. I guarantee they have more pull than a single arena trying to go it on it own. OKC has gotten events simply because SMG was managing it (and Tulsa too) that we would not have gotten otherwise.

Reflect on bomermwc's comment. AMS can coordinate events because they have the matrix computer that acts as a data base for many arenas from NBA, NHL and Arena football and events throughout the country.

They have access to schedules, times, dates, rental agreements and building capacities; this helps them with schedule recommendations. IIFC this AMS Global is the current firm that manages Paycom Center and possibly several other City owned gathering facilities.

OKC would probably get better events and more of them because the team would have serious profit motive in seeing the arena used as much as possible.

What would those other large scale events be? Or are you of the belief that "build it and they will come"? OKC has a limited population. Oklahoma has a limited population. And, it is one of the poorer states in the country. We can't just wish into existence the same frequency of sold out events you would have in LA, NY, Chicago, Dallas, or other huge cities. We won't have a major concert every week, or two or three events a day. Not happening. And is BECAUSE of profit motives and basic economics of all parties.

I think there would be a difference between ownership methods of a facility in a megalopolis like LA VS a large city like OKC. LA teams will get revenues OKC could only dream about outside the arena (such as TV revenues and team logo athletic equipment). Even when OKC had Durant, Westbrook and Harden, l bet their athlitic apparel sales were only a fraction of the Lakers.

Those arenas are also lower risk because the owners know they will have no trouble finding entertainment to fills those arenas for the markets they are in when basketball is not in session.

I feel like the only way OKC would get private money to finance the area is if the Chickasaws build their own arena and we allow a casino on the property. That's what is happening in Vegas and the same owners of 'Climate Pledge Arena' are doing it.

Those arenas are also lower risk because the owners know they will have no trouble finding entertainment to fills those arenas for the markets they are in when basketball is not in session.

I feel like the only way OKC would get private money to finance the area is if the Chickasaws build their own arena and we allow a casino on the property. That's what is happening in Vegas and the same owners of 'Climate Pledge Arena' are doing it.

I would love a casino downtown, the governor would never let it happen though.

I would love a casino downtown, the governor would never let it happen though.

Agree 100% - Now you're talking my cup of $$$ green tea $$$. No downtown casino; however

an OKANA casino permit from the State of Oklahoma allocated to the Chickasaw Tribe in exchange for an Oklahoma City NBA-NHL Arena partnership not to exceed $1 billion with the City of Oklahoma City, State of Oklahoma and the Thunder ownership group.


Chickasaw Tribe pays $300 million for full gaming/gambling permit on OKANA and Remington Park sites only.
City of Oklahoma City pays $300 million and demolition of 4 square block PSM site.
State of Oklahoma pays $300 million and a large percentage of sports betting proceeds to Public Education.
Thunder ownership pays anything over $900 million with naming rights for construction of new arena--signs an agreement to keep the franchise in Oklahoma City for the life of the new arena and pays for upkeep and upgrades not to exceed $100 million over twenty years.




.

I would love a casino downtown, the governor would never let it happen though.
I agree. It would be awesome and would liven up the area.

I would love a casino downtown, the governor would never let it happen though.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the governor. We have gone over this exact same issue multiple times on a number of threads, especially Okana. There is no land anywhere in downtown OKC where an Indian casino could legally exist.

There is no land anywhere in downtown OKC where an Indian casino could legally exist yet.

I bet if it WASN'T a Native American casino, Stitt would be all 4 acres of his ears.

I bet if it WASN'T a Native American casino, Stitt would be all 4 acres of his ears.

Those aren't allowed in Oklahoma.

Those aren't allowed in Oklahoma.
They should be.

Go talk to Congress about that one.