There was an item on the City Council agenda today (see this post (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Possible%20New%20Development%20 South%20of%20Stage%20Center&page=1#post810086) for the memo from Jim Couch) where the RFP for this property was discussed.

Nothing new was revealed, other than Mr. Couch said that Clayco has been brought in as a "developer" for the Stage Center site and would like to include the south parcel as well.

This is sounding more and more like Clayco is taking an ownership interest in the Stage Center development; and they certainly would be serving in that role when the submit their RFP as part of this process.


Tomorrow, OCURA is expected to approve the RFP and get it issued soon, so Clayco and any other interested parties can submit their proposals within 60 days.

There was an article in the Journal Record today that quoted a principal at Clayco, talking about why they became interested in the parcel south of Stage Center:


“When you start to look at that (property), one: What are they going to build there someday? Because if it’s good, then we’re happy, and if it’s bad, we might want to protect ourselves from it,” Chapman said.

This sure sounds like they are going to have a big ownership stake in the OG&E development.

He also said they are looking at a combination of office, housing and hotel for the southern portion.

There was an article in the Journal Record today that quoted a principal at Clayco, talking about why they became interested in the parcel south of Stage Center:



This sure sounds like they are going to have a big ownership stake in the OG&E development.

He also said they are looking at a combination of office, housing and hotel for the southern portion.

Could this possibly be the full service Marriott that was hinted at?

Could this possibly be the full service Marriott that was hinted at?

Not the one I've been talking about.

Not the one I've been talking about.Are certain it will be Bricktown if built?

It sounds like they want to own the southern portion of this block just to prevent anybody else from buying & building on it. Why do they deserve that right when they themselves are building something that is a complete waste of resources in relation to the value of the property?

It sounds like they want to own the southern portion of this block just to prevent anybody else from buying & building on it. Why do they deserve that right when they themselves are building something that is a complete waste of resources in relation to the value of the property?

They will only receive that "right" if their proposal is the one that OCURA selects, and I doubt OCURA is going to select a proposal for an empty field.

Plus, we still don't really know what Clayco is going to propose and build. The earlier renderings were less than impressive, but were those renderings even from the final design firm?

The only renderings we've seen are conceptual versions from ADG.

A new architectural firm -- presumably Clayco -- is working on the final plans.


I suspect when Clayco makes their formal submission to the RFP for this property, we will also get a glimpse of the Stage Center plans as well, since their stated intention is to bridge the two developments.

The only renderings we've seen are conceptual versions from ADG.

A new architectural firm -- presumably Clayco -- is working on the final plans.


I suspect when Clayco makes their formal submission to the RFP for this property, we will also get a glimpse of the Stage Center plans as well, since their stated intention is to bridge the two developments.

Somewhere I read the interview from the Clayco spokesperson on this site and he made the statement that they realize 'height' matters. I kind of wonder if OG&E will also be a surprise in a good way.

I'm a little worried they are acquiring the south portion to "hold" it. Are there protections against this in the OCURA RFP?

I'm a little worried they are acquiring the south portion to "hold" it. Are there protections against this in the OCURA RFP?

Yes, when OCURA enters into contracts with developers there are all types of date-driven milestones set.

Often, the property doesn't fully transfer to the developer until all terms are completed.

If substantial construction doesn't start within a specified period of time (usually two years) the property is taken back. This is what happened with Chuck Wiggin's never-started project where the Edge is now being built.


Also, the RFP is open to anyone, so Clayco's proposal will have to be the "best". Applicants are not made aware of who else might be applying or what their proposal entails until after all due date, when OCURA reveals them in a public meeting; in this case, 60 days after the RFP is posted.

OCURA meets today to formally approve the RFP process and I would guess the RFP will be issued in the next few weeks.

I really wish local architecture firms would get a shot at some of these larger OKC developments.

But it's an open RFP process. Don't they get the same shot everybody else does?

I really wish local architecture firms would get a shot at some of these larger OKC developments.

Most often, the bigger developers bring in a national/regional architectural firm with great experience and then they partner with locals for various aspects of the project.

It's a little chicken & egg because you can't get the big jobs until you have done them, so at least in this sense a lot of the local firms are gaining much needed experience.

There is definitely some advantages to having out of state architects doing work.

Was Legacy at Arts Quarter designed by a local or out of state architect?

But it's an open RFP process. Don't they get the same shot everybody else does?

I should have clarified. I wish a local architecture firm would submit a winning bid and get chosen.

I should have clarified. I wish a local architecture firm would submit a winning bid and get chosen.

Clayco would be responding to the RFP as a purchaser/developer.

They are very different than typical architectural firms; architecture is merely one part of what they do.

Is Clayco a design/build firm like Benham was?

Yes

Okay, that clears things up (for me).

But in addition to being a design/build firm, they also develop projects on their own in addition to do work for clients.

I suspect when Clayco makes their formal submission to the RFP for this property, we will also get a glimpse of the Stage Center plans as well, since their stated intention is to bridge the two developments.

I hope that's all they will do is literally "bridge" the developments and not create a superblock!

Considering one of the issues mentioned a couple times was creating a bigger parking structure, I'm sure part of the appeal of adding the south parcel is for that reason and thus you can almost bet their proposal will wipe out that California easement.

Sky bridge, or, god forbid, employees walk across a street between their garage and office building. Problem solved, easement saved!

I would be okay with them digging out California, putting some amount of parking structure below ground under "california", and then either restoring the pedestrian corridor OR the street, though I realize that's unlikely.

+1 to both Mr. Cotter and shawnw

I would 100% oppose any skybridge. OKC already has enough problems separating people on multiple levels. We need to get the businesses and people on the same horizontal plane so commerce can take place (and I don't care if it is too hot, too cold, too windy, or too rainy - grow a pair, it's not going to kill you.)

I understand it's not perfect, but it addresses the perceived problem. If it's build a sky bridge or close the easement by building a connected garage, I'll take the sky bridge.

I understand it's not perfect, but it addresses the perceived problem. If it's build a sky bridge or close the easement by building a connected garage, I'll take the sky bridge.

I agree.

I understand it's not perfect, but it addresses the perceived problem. If it's build a sky bridge or close the easement by building a connected garage, I'll take the sky bridge.

I don't think we will need to make that choice. There is no way they would build an uninterrupted 700' long wall opposite MBG.

Let's please not get into this foot traffic / skybridge / underground discussion again here. It's well covered elsewhere.

I don't think we will need to make that choice. There is no way they would build an uninterrupted 700' long wall opposite MBG.


Lol

In yesterday's Economic Development Trust meeting, Cathy O'Connor said that they expect to get the RFP out for this project in August and then they'd be due back in October (60 days after posting).

She also said that if they had multiple proposals, it would take them several weeks to evaluate before moving to the next steps.

I understand it's not perfect, but it addresses the perceived problem. If it's build a sky bridge or close the easement by building a connected garage, I'll take the sky bridge.+1

Skybridges aren't bad, imo anyways.

There is almost certainly going to be a skybridge from the proposed tower at Main & Hudson to the Devon Energy Center.

There is almost certainly going to be a skybridge from the proposed tower at Main & Hudson to the Devon Energy Center.Just curious, would that be difficult to incorporate? Was the Devon Tower designed to have a skybridge connect to it?

Just curious, would that be difficult to incorporate? Was the Devon Tower designed to have a skybridge connect to it?

It would probably connect to the parking garage or Garden Tower.

Devon has already connected itself to the skybridge/underground system via their garage. Probably they'd do that again.

Devon seems to do everything in their power to prevent their employees fron interacting with their downtown environment. I'm hoping OG&E is a better downtown resident.

Devon seems to do everything in their power to prevent their employees fron interacting with their downtown environment. I'm hoping OG&E is a better downtown resident.JTF, that is absurd. Devon cares greatly about the community. They protect their employees and give them the best possible.

Devon seems to do everything in their power to prevent their employees fron interacting with their downtown environment. I'm hoping OG&E is a better downtown resident.

LOL !! You step out there sometimes and this is one time.

Steve's update.

http://m.newsok.com/development-bids-sought-for-oklahoma-city-arts-festival-site/article/5004904


The Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority is moving forward with plans to solicit development bids for the downtown block that is home to several major arts groups and the annual Festival of the Arts, but is also cautioning developers those tenants’ futures must be considered in any proposal.

Devon seems to do everything in their power to prevent their employees fron interacting with their downtown environment. I'm hoping OG&E is a better downtown resident.

This isn't about Devon or Clayco or OG+E. This is about the city which has no standards and thus developers can not be blamed for what they can get away with.

This isn't about Devon or Clayco or OG+E. This is about the city which has no standards and thus developers can not be blamed for what they can get away with.

From Devon's perspective, why would you want to force your employees to go completely out of their way and leave the building rather than take a sky bridge? Companies aren't going to do that just to conform to an urbanist idealism unless the codes require it.

Devon seems to do everything in their power to prevent their employees fron interacting with their downtown environment. I'm hoping OG&E is a better downtown resident.

I agree with you on many things. This one I'm not so sure. I'd say they pull the public in, with Nebu, with the Christmas stuff in their rotunda. I know I, and many other non-Devon employees enjoy Nebu frequently... so I think there is plenty of devon interaction by consequence.

From Devon's perspective, why would you want to force your employees to go completely out of their way and leave the building rather than take a sky bridge? Companies aren't going to do that just to conform to an urbanist idealism unless the codes require it.

I wish there were more sky bridges around the office buildings and hotels downtown (other than the Cox one). Loved that aspect in Indianapolis, you could get from the convention center to a number of hotels and the mall. Would be nice on those bitter cold days and blistering heat.

Generally skybridges minimize foot traffic on the streets. That's not something you want if you have any desire for street level retail.

From Devon's perspective, why would you want to force your employees to go completely out of their way and leave the building rather than take a sky bridge? Companies aren't going to do that just to conform to an urbanist idealism unless the codes require it.

The motivation would be to create more interaction with the community and the surroundings to foster a better environment which can help in recruiting. People like to work in nice locations, not just nice buildings. I still hear that the biggest problem some of our larger corporations have to deal with is convincing people to consider moving to Oklahoma. Obviously, it's better than it has been in a long time, but it is still a very real issue. Oklahoma's natural environment does not have a lot of appeal relative to other locations. Our best chance to offer better quality of life is to manufacture, through good development, an appealing living environment that mitigates the relative lack of natural attractions.

Now I'm not saying that a well developed urban environment is the only option for a desirable community with good quality of life. But, for many, it is the life they desire. Many also want suburban, ex-urban, and rural living, too. The thing is, we got that. Lots of it. What we're trying to do is create an urban option as well and, obviously, downtown is the best place to do that and we've had a lot of success so far. An urban lifestyle is becoming a real option in Oklahoma City. However, we still have developers that come at some of these projects with an approach that doesn't always contribute to the urban renaissance as much as it could. Now, I have nothing against a company wanting an isolated and self contained environment for their employees. That is appealing to some. However, we have about 600 square miles of land already largely dedicated to that. So, I think it makes total sense to want to see the 2 square miles of urban area we have to be developed in a way that is consistent with what is currently considered the best and most desirable urban elements and that includes encouraging street interaction.

Obviously Devon's needs or desires for its workforce may not lend itself to developing in a way that participates more with the surroundings, which certainly could be a reason why they would not want to force employees to use the street instead of a skybridge. However, you asked why would they want to encourage street interaction more. Well, one reason would be to encourage a better urban environment around their headquarters for their employees to enjoy and for prospective employees to be attracted to. Maybe that's not a priority for them, but I do think the reemergence of urban living as an option in Oklahoma City has contributed to the reversal of net migration numbers here and, at least within our very small urban core, I think we should continue to build upon that in any way we can.

And, I think we should remember that Devon basically agreed tax itself to improve downtown streets and walkability. So, really, why wouldn't they want to encourage their employees to go out and enjoy what they so heavily invested in?

And, I think we should remember that Devon basically agreed tax itself to improve downtown streets and walkability. So, really, why wouldn't they want to encourage their employees to go out and enjoy what they so heavily invested in?

In an otherwise very good post, I cringe every time I see this. Devon did NOT agree to tax themselves. They agreed to spend the tax dollars they were already obligated to pay on the public space around their headquarters.

In an otherwise very good post, I cringe every time I see this. Devon did NOT agree to tax themselves. They agreed to spend the tax dollars they were already obligated to pay on the public space around their headquarters.

Weren't they instrumental in the decision as to how that money would be spent? The separate TIF district was created at Nichols's insistence for the purpose of improving the area. So, it would still make sense that they'd want to make development decisions to encourage the use of that public space, but maybe they were only interested in window dressing.

Instead of saying "agreed to tax themselves", I guess I should say "insisted their tax money was used to improve downtown streets and walkability".

^

Yes, they did insist and it was a condition of them building their HQ in downtown OKC.

I think they actually loaned OKC the money for the improvements, at better than bond rates....? IIRC

Weren't they instrumental in the decision as to how that money would be spent? The separate TIF district was created at Nichols's insistence for the purpose of improving the area. So, it would still make sense that they'd want to make development decisions to encourage the use of that public space, but maybe they were only interested in window dressing.

Instead of saying "agreed to tax themselves", I guess I should say "insisted their tax money was used to improve downtown streets and walkability".

Sorry for turning this into a Devon discussion but I think it is important to discuss what went well and what didn't go well with Devon as we prepare for another large development in the same area.

Honestly, I don't think the powers that be at Devon knew what they wanted from the neighborhood, or if they did know, they didn't fully understand how to make it happen. P180 is a great project. All the ingredient are there for an interactive and vibrant street - bike lanes (except for in front of Devon mind you), on-street parking (except for in front of Devon mind you), wide sidewalks, street furniture, well defined crosswalks, etc... but what is missing is the actual people themselves.

Devon has 2,000 employees in their building but they gave none of them a reason to go outside and enjoy or take advantage of all the benefits of P180 or MBG. They built a self-contained work place where we were trying to build an open and permeable pedestrian environment. Yes, there are reasons to go to Devon for lunch, but there is no reason for a Devon employee to leave; on-site parking, on-site gym, on-site food - all of which close when Devon employees aren't using it. If Devon had just stuck to the oil and gas business and left fulfilling the needs of daily life to other merchants imagine how many more people would be on the sidewalks, walking by the dress shop or the sidewalk café, or any other downtown retailer. That is what I meant when I said Devon shielded their employees from interacting with the downtown environment.

Now this isn't to say that Devon employees never go out of the building during the day but I'll bet 90% never do. It would be interesting to get an employee count at each exit/entrance and see the percentage that use the parking garage door vs. all the other doors combined.

So in closing, I hope this new development encourages the employees to get out and participate in the City, not just look at it through glass. Downtown OKC is not a herpetarium exhibit at the zoo. It is a petting zoo and the animals want interaction.

I think the Devon Tower is a world class development and OKC is extremely fortunate to have it. Most cities the size of OKC don't have a skyscraper of the prestige and quality of Devon Tower. Kudos to them for building it.

Sorry for turning this into a Devon discussion but I think it is important to discuss what went well and what didn't go well with Devon as we prepare for another large development in the same area.

Honestly, I don't think the powers that be at Devon knew what they wanted from the neighborhood, or if they did know, they didn't fully understand how to make it happen. P180 is a great project. All the ingredient are there for an interactive and vibrant street - bike lanes (except for in front of Devon mind you), on-street parking (except for in front of Devon mind you), wide sidewalks, street furniture, well defined crosswalks, etc... but what is missing is the actual people themselves.

Devon has 2,000 employees in their building but they gave none of them a reason to go outside and enjoy or take advantage of all the benefits of P180 or MBG. They built a self-contained work place where we were trying to build an open and permeable pedestrian environment. Yes, there are reasons to go to Devon for lunch, but there is no reason for a Devon employee to leave; on-site parking, on-site gym, on-site food - all of which close when Devon employees aren't using it. If Devon had just stuck to the oil and gas business and left fulfilling the needs of daily life to other merchants imagine how many more people would be on the sidewalks, walking by the dress shop or the sidewalk café, or any other downtown retailer. That is what I meant when I said Devon shielded their employees from interacting with the downtown environment.

Now this isn't to say that Devon employees never go out of the building during the day but I'll bet 90% never do. It would be interesting to get an employee count at each exit/entrance and see the percentage that use the parking garage door vs. all the other doors combined.

So in closing, I hope this new development encourages the employees to get out and participate in the City, not just look at it through glass. Downtown OKC is not a herpetarium exhibit at the zoo. It is a petting zoo and the animals want interaction.

For a design that you say didn't encourage interaction with mbg or the rest of downtown, it's surprising that I see a ton of Devon employees enjoying the park everyday and walking to restaurants outside of their building (As well as driving to Bricktown and midtown).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No doubt Devon is a world-class building, but the immediate area around it is NOT world-class. That is because a world-class building does not make a world-class neighborhood. I am interested in building world-class neighborhoods. Wheeler Park, at a tiny fraction of the price of Devon Tower, has the makings of a world-class neighborhood and if built anything close to what has been presented so far will appear in more magazines, books, and videos than Devon Tower and Stage Center combined.

Back to the Stage Center site...

OKC has a historic opportunity to avert a super block on this site, and I believe it's important to the long term environs of the Myriad Garden to prevent new ones and possibly break up old ones.

Instead we are moving toward the opposite, and that is sad.

it would be nice if the kids from the school could take a mid-block crosswalk at california straight to the park instead of having to walk up to sheridan or down to reno...

it would be nice if the kids from the school could take a mid-block crosswalk at california straight to the park instead of having to walk up to sheridan or down to reno...

Or they will walk out of the main school entrance (on Sheridan). And walk directly to the park

Or they will walk out of the main school entrance (on Sheridan). And walk directly to the park

of course. I was thinking if they were in the courtyard, they wouldn't then have to go all the way through the school.