And if I post them they will just be dismissed as 'not applicable', which is why I didn't want to go down this rabbit hole in the first place.

It's completely fine if people think that these small group meetings are not problematic. What I'm saying is that I've been following this matter for several years and have consulted attorneys and FOI experts who all agree that if this matter was pressed in court, at the very least the city would almost certainly be forced to stop the practice. And they base that on previous rulings and opinions.

I also have a great deal info that I am not going to post at this point.

So, are you going to turn your findings over to the DA?

I will add that I count among my friends a previous OKC city attorney. I personally know him to be a man of great, great integrety. I would be shocked beyond belief if during his tenure he would have allowed shady inside dealing and circumventing of public interests to go on. I can't speak personally of others, but I would be careful of a broad brush accusation of involved individuals and implications of their ethics. I read Urbanized's post just preceding this and agree wholeheartedly.

That said, if there are bad actors, let's root them out.... not with inuendos but with real accusations and identifications of persons and actions, and get them charged with a crime. If it is as bad as Pete implies, then let's do a housecleaning. Let's just be sure we sweep out the dirt and not the collateral.

There is nothing shady/unethical and certianly not illegal about the alliance in general or this action in particular

And of course most of what the alliance proposes is as adopted. The reason is people are informed as the process goes along

Meeting between the city manager and his staff and members of the council of course take place and they take place often. As the council stays informed of what the city is doing on any number of projects. From. A individual street in their ward. To a massive economic development issue

That is how government works. From a HOA. All the way to the largest body’s.

The argument on here is the PUBLIC of Oklahoma City is not informed; be it along the way, in the beginning, or at the end. We're not informed until it's a done deal, meaning just before the council meeting to adopt said initiative(s). This wreaks of corruption, even if the Alliance is well meaning (and I do believe they mean well).

The public has a right to know how its dollars are spent AND PLANNED to be spent well ahead of the actual votes - this is what people are arguing for and is why some of us are likely critical of Couch, Cathy, and this whole setup.

Look, I think everyone understands there's proposals that are discussed with city officials and agencies without release to the public. This is fair and happens in every major city.

That's not the issue. The issue I'm talking about is AFTER the proposal begins to receive consideration from the city or the Alliance, it should be adopted as a Development Proposal which is subject to public record. This is EXACTLY how it's done in Vancouver BC, BTW. The official development proposal is detailed out, line by line, and there's usually also a large development poster that is placed at said property. Time-frames are in place to allow the public to be informed of the development, know of public meetings where thoughts can be voiced, and then the timeline for adoption and vote by the city. Again, this is more or less paraphrasing Vancouver BC's development process - which is widely regarded and similar is used by other cities.

OKC is the exact opposite. Development proposals are discussed (fine), but then everything disappears into a black hole until "things are worked out". Then, there is a tease from the daily newspaper. Then very soon after publish, there's the rush from the Alliance to have council approve it the following week, which typically IS approved without voice or opinion. Then the daily newspaper "reports" the development as breaking news and the article often has praise for the backroom players who if interviewed continually highlight the transparency of the process and that they acted for the better of OKC.

I think this is what needs to change. There needs to be a formal process by which the public can have SOME notice aside from the late breaking newspaper and some TIME to voice an opinion. I also think there needs to be an initial hearing if you will from city council for every single development proposal so the public can see where council members stand or constituents can lend voice to help. If the Alliance wants to be backdoor, fine. But after the 'deal', there needs to be a formal adoption into city record and there needs to be a series of public meetings some length of time prior to council vote.

You can't have a Backroom Alliance that pushes development to the Council for immediate and unilateral adoption. Let's do better, OKC!

Remember, in the case of these two significant transactions involving multiple public bodies and with far-reaching and long-term implications, approval will be sought on Tuesday for something that -- without our reporting -- would still be completely unknown to the public.

I will also say that one of the council members I talked to did not remember most of the key details from the small group meetings because they never are left with documents; it's all verbal.

Yet, this will be on their agenda on Friday with dozens of other items and they are expected to take a binding vote on Tuesday morning. Even if the press is all over these agenda postings, about the best you can hope for is an report on Saturday or Sunday about a public meeting that is to take place at 8:30AM Tuesday morning. But of course, many things slip completely past without any public knowledge whatsoever.

I will also add that these agendas come out Friday but that is the very last day that satisfies public notice laws. Other agencies put out their agendas well in advance. But OCURA and the Economic Development Trust (and City Council) almost always wait to the very last hour and there has been more than once that the 2-day period was not met and I had to call their offices to prompt them to post. And importantly, these are the public bodies involved in advance 'small meetings'.


This happens all the time. There are two more important examples in just the last few weeks regarding millions allocated to the Boathouse Foundation and Scissortail Park even though the need for both were well-known to the city while the budgeting process for the next fiscal year was in full swing.

As it happened, the budget was approved with no mention of either item, then they were introduced separately with almost no prior public notice.


I will not pass judgment on why this happens many times during the year, but it does on matters of great importance to the public.

BTW, I just looked at the agenda for the last city council meeting.

There were almost 150 items.

Sorry Jersey Boss I wasn't ignoring this post; I was rushing off to get my ears lowered and didn't have time to give it a worthwhile response. :)

I think I would need to answer your first question conditionally. That is, do I think the City is perfect and does everything in a way that I agree with? If that is they question I would say absolutely not. I am very much on record and outspoken here, on social media, in meetings both public and private, via communications with City Staff, Council representatives and even the Mayor taking issue with the City's approach to issues such as our land use, automobile prioritization, accessibility issues, streetlights, and sidewalk closures, willingness to require historic preservation and adaptive reuse of certain buildings, among many other things. I think at this point plenty of people probably think I'm half a crackpot (or maybe even full-crackpot) and dread hearing from me on some of these topics.

I stay very involved with these and other issues, and I won't lie; I routinely get frustrated by inertia, silo effect, turf battles and bureaucracy. I think this probably exists to some extent in every major city's government, so I just grit my teeth and try to remain dogged. This has resulted in plenty of successes, but of course also continual frustration.

If your question is, do I think that OKC's level of transparency, openness and respect for the interests of taxpayers is a rough approximation or better than most cities of its size or larger? In this case my answer is a definite yes. I believe the way things are handled here is very typical of most cities, and this applies to respect for and overall compliance with meeting laws in both letter and spirit, the creation of and application of incentives, and a litany of other areas of governance. I've also sat through many, many meetings where City Legal was in attendance, and I believe them to be VERY conservative and quick to speak up and advise staff or elected officials if they are treading in an area that is questionable from a legal or procedural standpoint. I don't believe for a second that the people I have seen would be complicit in demonstrably corrupt behavior.

I think if there is an area where our city is perhaps unusual it is that there is generally a very close alliance in purpose between the business community and city officials, which leads to very little public squabbling and/or dissent. This can be very powerful and accomplish great things, and you only have to take in the overall successes of MAPS and many other public/private efforts over the past 25 years to see this. I think much of this is cultural and can be traced back to bootstraps-based bust recoveries and even the bombing recovery, which serve to remind us that we are only one bad turn away from disaster and at the same time that we can accomplish most anything here by pulling together. At the same time it can leave dissenters feeling steamrolled. So I do believe that we need to always pay attention to the needs and desires of the entire community and make sure every voice is being heard and considered. I also think it is valuable to have cranky contrarians sifting through our business with a watchful eye.

Finally, if you are asking if I believe that overall our public officials are acting in what they believe is the best interest of the community they serve rather than in self interest or the interest of the few, I believe wholeheartedly the answer is yes. I've sat through way too many meetings, had way too many private conversations with the people involved in the running of our community to believe anything different. I think we are pretty blessed with a lot of highly qualified people who deeply believe in OKC and its potential, and the gravity of the roles they themselves play. I think bad actors, when they occur, are very much outliers.

Regarding your question addressing Mayor Holt's tweet, I must have missed that. Where can I find it?

Post # 68
If i misconstrued what was said or misunderstood what was posted I extend apologies.

"This is what Mayor Holt posted on Twitter when someone tagged him my my article post, asking why the city was selling:

"Well, first of all, “the city” doesn’t “want” to do anything yet. This story is just reporting preliminary conversations. All of this would have its day in front of the Council should it advance. "

That is simply not true.

There is a negotiated Memorandum of Understanding for the Santa Fe Garage that the coucil will be voting on next Tuesday. These are absolutely not "preliminary conversations" and Holt knows that because he has been briefed as well."

Thank you for the well thought out response.
There seems to be a tug of war between those who want more openness and transparency and those who feel that the openness and transparency is there and the fact that we have elected reps who conduct business in the best interest of the citizens.
I would like to ask you, Pete, and others who care to comment on this. Do you feel that the current form of governance of a part time weak mayor-city council form of government has been outgrown by the population and mult-million dollar budgets? Should OKC, Tulsa, Norman and any other cities with a pop of at least 100k be granted home rule? Is home rule something the state reps be championing or should the citizens petition for a constitutional amendment for this issue? Do you feel home rule is something that should be sought?
Thanks again.

Maybe the city needs a policy where any possible land transaction between the city and a private party over say $10 million must be presented at council for public comments, and then voted on a week or two later.

Introductory memo for the Karchmer agreement headed to city council on Tuesday.

Note that the city would bear the cost of a pedestrian connection (underground or overhead) to span the RR tracks:

************

Memorandum of Agreement with Bricktown Parking Investors, LLC and BancFirst Corporation to set
forth terms and conditions for the sale of the Bricktown Parking Lot, located east of the Burlington
Northern Santa Fe Railroad tracks between NE 2nd Street and East Main Street, $2,400,000. Ward 7.

Background
The City of Oklahoma City owns a parcel of land in west Bricktown
located between the BNSF railroad tracks on the west, Walnut St. Bridge
on the east, NE 2nd Street to the north and East Main Street on the South.
This property, through the OCPPA, is leased to Bricktown Parking
Investors, LLC, on which Bricktown Parking Investors have developed a
surface parking.

In 2014, a study lead by COTPA, ACOG and The City of Oklahoma City
with URS consultants (now AECOM), examined the property described
above that is leased to Bricktown Parking Investors to identify the areas
of the property that should be permanently preserved as a future railroad
right of way in anticipation of future potential train service to the Santa
Fe Intermodal Hub, specifically commuter rail and high speed rail
approaching the hub from the east using existing ROW and curving to the
south to serve future platforms at the Santa Fe Hub.

The Agreement sets forth the framework and terms under which a to-be
formed limited liability company will be formed, and which company
will be owned in part by Bricktown Parking Investors, LLC, and in part
by BancFirst Corporation or its designated affiliate, and in part by
BancFirst Corporation or its designated affiliate. The limited liability
company would like to purchase the land where the existing surface
parking lot is located to build an 800-900 space structured parking garage
in an area on the parcel that would not obstruct or be located in the future
rail road right of way. The impetus for the construction of a new parking
garage is BancFirst’s proposed purchase of the Cotter Tower. Although
BancFirst is committed to jointly purchase the Santa Fe parking garage
with Continental Resources, Inc. additional parking beyond what is
available in the Santa Fe parking garage to BancFirst is needed to address
the Tower’s full potential. BancFirst intends to satisfy its full parking
needs by occupying a significant portion of the new garage. It is
anticipated that other users of the garage will be surrounding hotels,
downtown business and the public.

BancFirst’s due diligence period for purchasing the Cotter Tower has
begun and an important part of their due diligence is to secure a
permanent parking solution for the building, they, in partnership with
Bricktown Parking Investors, LLC, have requested the City Council
approve a Memorandum of Agreement outlining the terms of a sales
transaction to be negotiated between the City and the to-be formed
limited liability company. The Memorandum of Agreement includes a
sales price of $1.4 million, or the current appraised value, as well as the
obligation to create a permanent easement to The City of Oklahoma City
to protect the future railroad right of way, and a potential commitment
from the City to construct a pedestrian connection from the west side of
the BNSF railroad tracks to the Santa Fe parking garage for access to the
underground system.

im honestly SICK of these pedestrian bridges.

Goodness sakes, does EVERY single garage in downtown OKC need to have a bridge to another building/garage? Can't people walk outside already???

Even though it may be costly, I say the city ONLY accept this if it is to build a tunnel. NO MORE SKY BRIDGES in DOWNTOWN OKC!!!!!

This would be a great time to re-do EK Gaylord to make it more pedestrian friendly. I say that half-jokingly because 30 years ago would have been a great time. Regardless, the street level pedestrian connections in this are should be made safe and more friendly.

This would be a great time to re-do EK Gaylord to make it more pedestrian friendly. I say that half-jokingly because 30 years ago would have been a great time. Regardless, the street level pedestrian connections in this are should be made safe and more friendly.

That was to be part of Project 180 and it was cut, apart from the section in front of Santa Fe Station.

There are no plans to do this now.

That was to be part of Project 180 and it was cut, apart from the section in front of Santa Fe Station.

There are no plans to do this now.

That is frustrating considering that was one of the stretches that really needed it the most, considering a total lack of sidewalk on a huge stretch of the street.

That is frustrating considering that was one of the stretches that really needed it the most, considering a total lack of sidewalk on a huge stretch of the street.

It's my biggest gripe about P180 other than going way over budget and only completing about 60% of what was promised.

The city did a bunch of streets in west downtown before telling city council they were close to exhausting the budget. By the time this came out, there wasn't enough money left in the budget to do any of EKG so it was completely dropped.

The only reason the SF stretch was done was due to a federal grant that was tied into the station being a transit hub.

That was to be part of Project 180 and it was cut, apart from the section in front of Santa Fe Station.

There are no plans to do this now.

Yes. I am aware of that. I just thought we could assign funding from the MAPS short term extension to rectify this. Correct me if I am wrong, but there aren’t specific assignments for all of those Street and sidewalk goals yet.

Yes. I am aware of that. I just thought we could assign funding from the MAPS short term extension to rectify this. Correct me if I am wrong, but there aren’t specific assignments for all of those Street and sidewalk goals yet.

Wasn't arguing your point, just saying it was once planned, then it was cut, now I'm not aware of any plans.

Could always be done down the line but there doesn't seem to be anything in the works.

im honestly SICK of these pedestrian bridges.

Goodness sakes, does EVERY single garage in downtown OKC need to have a bridge to another building/garage? Can't people walk outside already???

Even though it may be costly, I say the city ONLY accept this if it is to build a tunnel. NO MORE SKY BRIDGES in DOWNTOWN OKC!!!!!

There would be one relatively minor benefit if there was a skybridge here connecting the Karchmer Garage to the Santa Fe Garage... Railfans would love it! It would be pretty awesome to have a bird's eye view of trains on the BNSF viaduct.

I'm not saying that the skybridge should be built - I'd prefer it if it wasn't - but still, that would be one cool thing about it.

14860

I saw this question in Steve's chat. I thought I would answer the question and prevent any additional confusion. The question also sounds like may have been asked by an OKC Talk user.

1) Valuation consists of three interdependent approaches that are utilized to value real estate: the Cost Approach, the Sales Comparison Approach and the Income Capitalization Approach. The methodology utilized is typical and as I'll explain, probably the most reliable indicator of value in this situation. Appraisers value property rights. Value is derived from the utility provided by the rights conveyed. It's very important to consider the rights conveyed when discussing this transaction. This is not a typical sale due to the City retaining an easement for the rail right-of-way.

The Sales Comparison Approach would be applicable if the sale included all of the rights to the property. Because the city is retaining the rights to the rail right-of-way, an appraiser would be hard pressed to find sales of properties with similar characteristic to provide a reliable indication of value. In addition, if an appraiser utilized land sales in Bricktown, the most recent sales would be from 2014 and 2015 and most of those sales, (with the exception of the Steelyard Hotels) have seen little to no movement since they were purchased. The Sales Comparison Approach is the most commonly utilized approach, but in this situation looking at sales may not produce the most reliable opinion of value.

The Cost Approach doesn't tell you anything in this situation. You need a land value (typically utilizing the Sales Comparison Approach), and then add the cost to replace the improvements. That doesn't really help, so you can throw that approach out. The Cost Approach is typically useful if the property is proposed, under construction, or relatively new.

The Income Capitalization Approach is applicable because regardless of the rail right-of-way the most likely use is an income producing parking lot until sufficient demand for a higher and better use. An appraiser can capitalize the income stream utilizing typical rates of return on similar properties. It's the only option that can produce a reliable indication of value in this situation. The Income Approach is typically used for leased properties and probably the second most utilized approach.

2) I think there is a simple economic explanation and the idea that Cotter Tower has the City over a barrel is flawed.

My theory is that the value some assume the property is worth includes full right and title, but the City is only selling some of the rights and title. The City is retaining an easement for the future commuter rail right-of-way which has value. I think some people are underestimating the value of those rights, and the costs they impose on the rights conveyed to Karchmer.

Lackmeyer also said this:


It's easy - and lazy - to portray this as "is this the best sales price for the city?" when these matters are really far more complicated.

What is easy and lazy is to merely repeat the pitch the city is making for selling a property for a very low price and to state binary assertions like he makes here:


You have an aging Cotter tower and we have a chance for BancFirst to buy it and save it from what would be a free-fall if it fell into the wrong hands.

There were many buyers who bid on Cotter Tower, not just BancFirst. And as a reporter it's your job to present the full story by doing some actual homework instead of waiting for other outlets (such as OKCTalk) to tip you off that this deal was going down in the first place -- completely in secret -- not do any real research or legwork, but still feel entitled to use a huge platform to make strong statements on the entire subject.

And it's particularly bad for the community when someone with that type of exposure uses his influence to insult the idea of asking highly relevant questions and instead merely advances the public relations of government bodies you are supposed to be covering in an objective way.


In many ways the Oklahoman's relationship with City Hall is completely inappropriate. They are often fed information and stories in advance in what is an unethical practice called Access Journalism. And it shows in many of the stories they 'report', including this one.

*mic drop GIF*

Um another great example why OKCTalk needs a “like” button.

Century-old Bricktown warehouses to be demolished (https://www.okctalk.com/content.php?r=628-Century-old-Bricktown-warehouses-to-be-demolished)

Yesterday, the Bricktown Urban Design Committee voted to approve the demolition of two abandoned century-old warehouses.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/karchmer062119b.jpg

The structures owned by Don Karchmer are located at 1 E Main and have not been occupied for several decades.

When the application was filed last month, Karchmer told OKCTalk that the buildings were unsound and very difficult to secure. He also mentioned that the property was in the path of a future rail line and would need to eventually come down.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/karchmer062319d.jpg


Karchmer operates the surface parking directly to the north on behalf of the city of Oklahoma City and has an agreement with the city and BancFirst to develop that lot into 800 to 900 space parking structure which would likely be connected via a skywalk or lower level tunnel to the Santa Fe Garage on the other side of the BNSF railroad tracks.

The parking development agreement was forged in conjunction with the BancFirst purchasing the 36-story former Cotter Ranch Tower last summer. At the same time, the bank and Continental Resources negotiated the purchase of the Santa Fe Garage from the city.

Karchmer indicated he had no plans to develop the soon to be vacant warehouse property and that there is no set timetable for the parking structure.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/karchmer062319ca.jpg

Looks like they are getting close to demo:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/karchmer120319a.jpg

It's great that we're building so much more parking. Did you know that during peak times there are 101 football fields worth of unused parking spaces in Downtown OKC? (according to the parking study recently completed by the city)

It's great that we're building so much more parking. Did you know that during peak times there are 101 football fields worth of unused parking spaces in Downtown OKC? (according to the parking study recently completed by the city)

This was the deal the city struck with BancFirst and Harold Hamm and our mayor was very much in the middle of it. This in addition to selling them the massive Santa Fe Garage at a bargain price.

What big corporations want in this town, they get.

The buildings on this site have been demolished.

https://i.imgur.com/jdEE0aT.jpg


https://i.imgur.com/SKCiV5g.jpg

I wouldn’t be as mad about this if it weren’t for the fact there was a massive fu€king parking lot behind it. I don’t understand why we must tear down every old building before we utilize vacant and parking lots first.

I wouldn’t be as mad about this if it weren’t for the fact there was a massive fu€king parking lot behind it. I don’t understand why we must tear down every old building before we utilize vacant and parking lots first.
This.

I wouldn’t be as mad about this if it weren’t for the fact there was a massive fu€king parking lot behind it. I don’t understand why we must tear down every old building before we utilize vacant and parking lots first.

If I understand correctly, the parking wont be built where the warehouse was but north of it, where it is surface parking for now.
This warehouse needed to go and was on the owner of the parking land.

I've long thought the massive, sprawling parking lot between Bricktown and Deep Deuce offers such an incredible opportunity for residential and to connect the two districts. At least if they're going to build garages then I'd love to see the surface parking turned into developments...

I have looked at this building, and I can't work up any vision, love or outrage. If it had corrugated steel on the outside, instead of brick, we would not have given it a second glance.

First look at new downtown garage (https://www.okctalk.com/content.php?r=698-First-look-at-new-downtown-garage)

Plans are moving forward to construct a 7-level parking garage in Bricktown.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/parcfirst1a.jpg


The garage is part of a deal with BancFirst which recently purchased what was most recently named Cotter Ranch Tower, the city's second-tallest building.

BancFirst bought the tower out of bankruptcy and along with Continental Resources, negotiated with the city to also purchase the neighboring Santa Fe Garage. As part of the same deal, BancFirst and local developer Don Karchmer worked with the city to obtain property just to the east of the railroad tracks, as Karchmer owned property along Main Street and had been operating the surface lot on a lease with the city.

BancFirst told the city they would not move forward with purchasing the tower unless they could also control Santa Fe Garage and come to terms for building a new parking facility nearby.

The new parking structure is a part of that complex deal and plans have been drawn to build it on the westernmost section of the surface lot.

The configuration will allow for easements to serve future commuter rail lines as Santa Fe Station has been envisioned as the hub, although there are currently no set plans for commuter trains.

At the time of the deal with the city, it was stated the new garage would include a connection via tunnel or skywalk to the Santa Fe Garage and thus the BancFirst Tower.

The structure has been named ParcFirst@Bricktown and would contain 799 spaces, although 148 surface spaces would be lost.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/parcfirst6a.jpg

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/parcfirst2.jpg

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/parcfirst3.jpg

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/parcfirst4.jpg

Lately, most news seems to be about parking structures... I just don't see the need for more of these. Especially with businesses changing their position on how much physical office space they want amid this pandemic.

So what is your best educated guess... tunnel or skywalk?

A tunnel would be awesome. They need to expand the underground.

So what is your best educated guess... tunnel or skywalk?

Not sure because either is tricky due to dealing with the railroad.

The city could never work things out for the proposed tunnel from Santa Fe station into Bricktown, which is why that plan was abandoned.

^^^ The portal beneath the tracks is permanently abandoned!? I thought it was only shelved.

^^^ The portal beneath the tracks is permanently abandoned!? I thought it was only shelved.

Anything is possible but there is no present plan to do it. And the federal grant money has already been spent.

Hopefully once they get commuter rail up and going the tunnel is brought back.

I saw a crew out doing a survey last week so I figured something was coming soon on this.

The Cox (not going to be demolished anytime soon), Santa Fe, and Sandridge garages all have huge vacancies. I get this is part of the deal, but things have changed drastically since then. This garage seems like a waste. Oh and it is ugly.

Thumbs down.

More parking. Yay........

Putting aside any discussion of parking requirement/provision, or even the materials and appearance, that is a truly terrible piece of building placement. It has no relationship to the railroad or the footpath that runs along side it, the old elevated tracks off 2nd Street, the surrounding streets; it's just whatever they could fit between easements. No wonder the visualizations show it without context.

The Cox (not going to be demolished anytime soon), Santa Fe, and Sandridge garages all have huge vacancies. I get this is part of the deal, but things have changed drastically since then. This garage seems like a waste. Oh and it is ugly.

Thumbs down.
This.

regardless of the need for more parking, I see this structure as a improvement over the multitude surface parking in and around DT OKC. I'll take a structure over flat parking any day

regardless of the need for more parking, I see this structure as a improvement over the multitude surface parking in and around DT OKC. I'll take a structure over flat parking any day
I agree as this will allow for more developments to be built without parking.

Question: are there no parking minimums in bricktown?

I am happy to see a rail spur is being preserved. At some point we should see more developments with no parking given the sea of parking that exists in the form of parking garages.

^

There are no parking requirements in Bricktown or in much of the core.

There are no parking minimums downtown.

Good to know!

I am happy they came up with a design that preserved the railway easements, aside from that it looks okay enough. LOL at the name, but it may be corny in a good way.

Amazing how two parking garages can look so different. The new garage for the Convention, check out the post on that one, is going to be awesome and a real head turner. I realize this garage is reflecting the heritage of Bricktown but a few glass and metal elements could go a long way.

By far the strangest thing about this will be a parking garage with absolutely nothing around it.

It will just be sitting there like an island. I suspect it's going to look very odd.

I think that's going to be temporary. If anything, they're just consolidating the parking space. So instead of having this massive field of empty lines and asphalt, they can keep better track of who goes in and comes out, while also opening up Bricktown to have more establishments and venues. No doubt ParcFirst will sell the land to developers who will build either residential or commercial properties.

If anything, this gives the city the opportunity to add to their skyline. If the Bricktown Marriott is already breaking the glass ceiling, then this opens the door for a larger development to take place. A mid-rise or two would be great at that spot.

I mean, it would still be nice to have some retail on the ground level. If there is more development in this area this garage could be an unnecessary dead spot for pedestrians. Not a big deal for this ñocation, but it would still be nice.

I mean, it would still be nice to have some retail on the ground level. If there is more development in this area this garage could be an unnecessary dead spot for pedestrians. Not a big deal for this ñocation, but it would still be nice.

This will be in the middle of a sea of surface parking, rail tracks on 2 sides will be connected to the underground via tunnel or skywalk.

I seriously doubt any pedestrians will be anywhere near this.

This will be in the middle of a sea of surface parking, rail tracks on 2 sides will be connected to the underground via tunnel or skywalk.

I seriously doubt any pedestrians will be anywhere near this.

I understand that’s what this end of Main is now, but it’s less than a block from lots of activity, investment, and development in the core. OKC is too quick to give up an area to cars and condemn it as a dead zone.

There is likely to be another rail line to the south; that's why this is set very far back from Main.

For anyone living in the Maywood Lofts, there goes the Bricktown view in favor of yet another ugly parking garage. Awesome.

Views aren't guaranteed and should be expected to change in a rapidly developing area with a ton of undeveloped or underdeveloped land. You really need to purchase in a highly established area to guarantee yourself a view.

Views aren't guaranteed and should be expected to change in a rapidly developing area with a ton of undeveloped or underdeveloped land. You really need to purchase in a highly established area to guarantee yourself a view.

I never said anything about expecting guaranteed views, not sure where you are getting that? I'm quite aware of how development works. That doesn't mean you can't still be disappointed with what ends up taking said views.