I'm curious how this is going to effect the Coca Cola Events Center (or Chevy or whaever it calls itself these days). We were just seeing a push to renovate that place, and then with this coming in, it would spank the old place.

BDP, I think you are still giving it too much credit. From what I understood, it's more like a big empty FLAT room...forget chairs and stuff. But that does give it the ability to host large reception type events. Anyone know if there's a kitchen involved? Could be a good place for a large company banquet....

My understanding is the Chevy will be more like the Cain's with a balcony and the Criterion will be like the Brady. The Cain's and the Brady are down the street from each other and still pull in a lot of big name acts. I think it all depends on the promotion and who is managing these places.

I'm curious how this is going to effect the Coca Cola Events Center (or Chevy or whaever it calls itself these days). We were just seeing a push to renovate that place, and then with this coming in, it would spank the old place.


chevy center's capacity is around 1500, criterion is 4200, so they'd be pulling in different levels of acts. there should be no competition - that's enough of a capacity jump to where the venues won't be competing for the same bands.

I'm curious how this is going to effect the Coca Cola Events Center (or Chevy or whaever it calls itself these days). We were just seeing a push to renovate that place, and then with this coming in, it would spank the old place.


BDP, I think you are still giving it too much credit. From what I understood, it's more like a big empty FLAT room...forget chairs and stuff. But that does give it the ability to host large reception type events. Anyone know if there's a kitchen involved? Could be a good place for a large company banquet....

I don't know what the seating / standing configuration will be. Just that it will have a mezzanine. I usually like tiered standing lower level and seated mezzanine / balcony. But I think either way would work.

I don't think the places will compete for acts. They may compete if they happen to book similar acts on the same night, but I don't see that happening.

This project goes to the Bricktown Design Review Committee on 11/12 and after working with the Planning Department, the developers have added windows and made some other changes to the design.

The City staff are recommending approval only if the window sizes are increased to better fit with the district.

The signage shown in previous renderings (see article at top of page) has been deleted here because it must receive separate approval.



http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/criterion110514a.jpg

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/criterion110514c.jpg

Interesting that the major complaint here was lack of windows and a lot of people said it didn't need them.

I would have rathered them add a mural than windows, but these windows make it look better than it would with a blank wall. What is wrong with the size of the windows in the drawing above? What are the chances this won't be approved because of them?

From the staff report:


The windows proposed on the north elevation appear to be smaller in size and scale as compared to windows used on the older buildings. This has the effect of creating a greater proportion of brick to glazing resulting in a substantially greater area of solid brick wall. This effect could also be caused by the fact that there are not as many windows and therefore they are less tightly spaced. To address this, staff would suggest that the windows be enlarged.

Steve has an update.

Steve has an update.

Basically the same information.

Design Review at Work: More Revisions to the Criterion Music Hall in Bricktown | News OK (http://newsok.com/design-review-at-work-more-revisions-to-the-criterion-music-hall-in-bricktown/article/5363813)

Interesting that the major complaint here was lack of windows and a lot of people said it didn't need them.

For its function, it doesn't need them. It's nice that they added them though.

IMO, this is going to be more about what's on the inside that counts and we still don't know much about that except a general floor plan.

I'm most interested in knowing whether the balcony / mezzanine will be theater style seating or standing. It looks like it might be standing which I think is a mistake unless it's more shallow than what it looks like. Mainly seating the 2nd level would grade it so sight lines in the back are preserved. That's kind of why I like the HOB in Dallas or Vegas a little better than the HOB in Chicago. I think standing on the main floor is good, but I think upper levels work best when they're shallow or graded.

I'm most interested in knowing whether the balcony / mezzanine will be theater style seating or standing. It looks like it might be standing which I think is a mistake unless it's more shallow than what it looks like. Mainly seating the 2nd level would grade it so sight lines in the back are preserved. That's kind of why I like the HOB in Dallas or Vegas a little better than the HOB in Chicago. I think standing on the main floor is good, but I think upper levels work best when they're shallow or graded.

Plans show the 2nd level to be all standing.

And while it it somewhat deep, at the back are three bars and restrooms.

Here is the second floor plan; the labels are small but hopefully still readable:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/criterion110614.jpg

Plans show the 2nd level to be all standing.

And while it it somewhat deep, at the back are three bars and restrooms.

I wonder what the capacity break down is between the main floor and the mezzanine. Having a level floor on the 2nd level does present the option of tabled VIP seating against the railing for some shows, but when they're going for a capacity crowd, being more than 3 people deep up there will be frustrating.

Here is the ground floor:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/criterion110614b.jpg

I wonder what the capacity break down is between the main floor and the mezzanine. Having a level floor on the 2nd level does present the option of tabled VIP seating against the railing for some shows, but when they're going for a capacity crowd, being more than 3 people deep up there will be frustrating.

The plans seem to indicate more of a club than concert venue.

I did some quick math and determined that the advertised 4,200 capacity is only possible if the entire 1st & 2nd floor are standing space only. Seating would probably reduce the capacity to less than half of that by the time you include aisles, etc.

The only thing this building has in common with the Brady is 2 levels and a stage.

The doors and windows are a must for this project. The brick monolith was far too heavy visually. Also, windows are no hindrance to creating murals:

https://www.google.com/search?q=apartment+building+mural&newwindow=1&safe=off&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=643&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=RTFcVIn6N8qiyAT4xYHgBQ&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ

Whether any artwork goes on any building is much less important to me than that building's relation to the public realm, though.

The plans seem to indicate more of a club than concert venue.
It reminds me of The Austin Music Hall with both the main floor and balcony flat.

The doors and windows are a must for this project. The brick monolith was far too heavy visually. Also, windows are no hindrance to creating murals:

https://www.google.com/search?q=apartment+building+mural&newwindow=1&safe=off&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=643&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=RTFcVIn6N8qiyAT4xYHgBQ&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ

Whether any artwork goes on any building is much less important to me than that building's relation to the public realm, though.

+1

It reminds me of The Austin Music Hall with both the main floor and balcony flat.

yes that is exactly what I thought.. and for Austin Venues I prefer the moody theater to Austin Music Hall but have seen great shows in both.

The plans seem to indicate more of a club than concert venue.

A lot of venues have this configuration.

The only thing this building has in common with the Brady is 2 levels and a stage.

Which is probably a good thing. It certainly is a different space and should be a lot nicer.

yes that is exactly what I thought.. and for Austin Venues I prefer the moody theater to Austin Music Hall but have seen great shows in both.
The Moody opened up not long before I moved to Denver, never did go to a show there. A former co-worker did the AMH interiors.

Steve's update.

Proposed Bricktown concert hall design undergoes overhaul | NewsOK.com (http://m.newsok.com/proposed-bricktown-concert-hall-design-undergoes-overhaul/article/5371307)


Challenges by the Bricktown Design Review Committee — and the presence of a supportive banker — are being credited for an extensive redesign of a proposed Criterion concert hall that includes window openings, awnings, brick detailing and a grander marquee and entrance.

The new designs by Bucher Design Studio in Palmer Lake, Colo., add windows to both floors of the two-story building, with canopies over the first floor windows. Brick detailing and a roof cornice hearkens back to the district’s old warehouses.
The proposed entryway for the concert hall includes a glass curtain wall — a key feature on the original Criterion — and a marquee shaped after the original theater sign.

It's amazing how the design review process works. We should go with it more often.

It's amazing how the design review process works. We should go with it more often.

You think? LOL

Just look at the design difference.

If you just make a few recommendations before rubber stamping the application....it makes all the difference

Just look at the design difference.

If you just make a few recommendations before rubber stamping the application....it makes all the difference

Both look unimaginative IMHO.

I really like the proposed changes. It's not quite as good as rebuilding the original Criterion but it still looks awesome. Glad to see the design review process worked in this case.

I really like the corner entrance.

Nice job by the developer and the design committee.

Maybe there will still be a place on one of the sides for a mural. I think there really should be one on this venue.

Steve's update.

Proposed Bricktown concert hall design undergoes overhaul | NewsOK.com (http://m.newsok.com/proposed-bricktown-concert-hall-design-undergoes-overhaul/article/5371307)

Glad to see them recognize Reeve Tarron with Legacy Bank. He was the banker on my office and was very helpful in getting the financing for the extra details. Young guy and definitely going to be one of the movers and shakers of his generation.

i think the revised rendering is fantastic. I really can't wait for this to be built, I'll have to fly down from Seattle to attend the first concert. :)

I'm thinking it's time for some new depictions at the top of this thread.

This is the design firm they are working with. Unfortunately, there is nothing depicted here that makes you say "WOW". It's all very mundane.

http://bucherdesign.com/

I really like the corner entrance.

Nice job by the developer and the design committee.

Agreed, the new entrance design is great.

I'm thinking it's time for some new depictions at the top of this thread.

I don't have the new renderings yet and Steve screams bloody murder if we post them from the Oklahoman.

The full set will be included in the next Bricktown Design agenda.

I'm thinking it's time for some new depictions at the top of this thread.

This is the design firm they are working with. Unfortunately, there is nothing depicted here that makes you say "WOW". It's all very mundane.

Bucher Design Studio, Inc. (http://bucherdesign.com/)
Palmer Lake is a small town off I-25 between Denver and Colorado Springs, near where we have looked at some land. Seems a bit odd they would be used for a project like this. I guess they have some connection to the investor.

Some thoughts by Steve on TIF and how it relates to this project and possibly others in the future.

Changing designs for proposed Criterion concert venue could mark new direction for tax increment financing | NewsOK.com (http://m.newsok.com/changing-designs-for-proposed-criterion-concert-venue-could-mark-new-direction-for-tax-increment-financing/article/5371940)

I kinda like the thought of using a TIF as a so called carrot for developers to upgrade design.

I think it's a simple situation where design review says they would like to see changes and the developer says that will blow their budget, so the committee suggests applying for TIF funds.

In the end, it still amounts to gap funding which is the same premise everyone uses when applying for these funds.

I kinda like the thought of using a TIF as a so called carrot for developers to upgrade design.

+1. I think there's a lot of potential with that approach.

I think it's a simple situation where design review says they would like to see changes and the developer says that will blow their budget, so the committee suggests applying for TIF funds.

In the end, it still amounts to gap funding which is the same premise everyone uses when applying for these funds.

I think it also brings us developments that actually could use the public subsidy. This is a good trend.

The article at the top of the page has been updated with the most recent submission to the Bricktown Design Review Committee.

Although they plan to make a presentation at the December 10th meeting, they are not yet seeking formal approval of these plans.

I suspect they are looking for more feedback before taking that next step.

FWIW, All the windows that were added have spandrel glass in them. Meaning they are completely opaque.

From the Journal Record:

Criterion owners move forward, but seek city assistance

By: Molly M. Fleming The Journal Record December 23, 2014

OKLAHOMA CITY – Progress on The Criterion music venue’s future site will soon be evident as the remaining Stewart Metal Fabricators buildings at 420 and 500 E. Sheridan Ave. are scheduled for demolition.

Developer Matt Maley with Colorado-based Alliance Investments LLC said the buildings’ taps will be cut this week and demolition will begin Monday. In total, three buildings will be razed.

In their place, Maley and Wormy Dog Saloon owners Ronnye Farmer and Philip Randolph plan to build a 39,000-square-foot, two-story concert venue at the corner of E. Sheridan and Charlie Christian avenues. It will be across the street from The Steelyard mixed-use facility. The project’s plans were first submitted to the Bricktown Urban Design Committee in November. The BUDC gave the group extensive notes on changes it would like to see to the building. The group went back to the BUDC in December, and will return in January with hopes of gaining approval.

Since its first design, the project’s budget has gone up by $1 million to $6 million. Maley said the developers are seeking funds from the city, in addition to a loan amount originally approved from Legacy Bank.

“In order to bridge the gap between the original approved value and the new project costs, the property owners and developers are seeking TIF (tax increment financing) assistance,” he said, though he did not have an exact total that will be sought.

If TIF funds are not received, Maley said that he, Phillip, and Randolph will have to reassess the project’s viability.

The E. Sheridan area in Bricktown was historically home to several oil wells and is a brownfield site. Steelyard developers Andy Burnett and Gary Brooks have dealt with related environmental issues on their site. Because of his group’s environmental studies, Maley said, the same problems are not expected.

“We’re aware of what we have underneath us,” he said. “We don’t foresee any issues moving forward with that. We have typical Bricktown urban infill things, but there are no signs of any issues in the ground.”

The Criterion will sit at 500 E. Sheridan Ave. The 420 E. Sheridan property was purchased Monday by Joey Chiaf, the managing partner of CRJO LLC. Chiaf previously owned Bricktown’s IHOP building with partners in Bricktown Marketplace LLC. Maley said it was a news article about the IHOP building sale that led him to call Price Edwards & Co. broker David Dirkschneider to see if Chiaf would want to purchase the property.

Chiaf and his group purchased the 40,000-square-foot lot for $2.4 million. They already owned the parcel at Joe Carter and E. Sheridan avenues; therefore, the 420 E. Sheridan Ave. purchase increased their land size to about 1.5 acres.

“Right now, they’re going to bulldoze the building and just add it to the current parking and make it all automated,” Dirkschneider said. “Their goal would be to develop it, but they’re just not sure what yet. They want to wait until The Steelyard and The Criterion are complete. They are not in any rush.”

Very interesting.

So, the developers are asking for TIF money to cover the $1 million in improvements asked by the design committee.

Enter the new tactic for future developers who want to get public assistance: Submit a bare-bones design then claim any suggested changes should be paid for with tax money, otherwise it's not economically feasible.

Very interesting.

So, the developers are asking for TIF money to cover the $1 million in improvements asked by the design committee.

Enter the new tactic for future developers who want to get public assistance: Submit a bare-bones design then claim any suggested changes should be paid for with tax money, otherwise it's not economically feasible.

Yeah, this just reeks. If you don't have contingency funds available for design changes, then you shouldn't be building.

Considering the remodel of the Cheverolet events center and the planned music venue over by 21c I don't think we need the criterion theater enough to bring TIF funds into the deal. Sure it would be a great development but I smell a rat.

I'm not criticizing the developers of this project, just saying that it opens up another can of worms and sets a precedent.

It also puts the City in a very funny position: By asking for design changes you are basically sending the bill to the taxpayers.

This may not be very popular on here, but if none of these venues(concert hall, ClayCo Towers, etc...) will come down or compromise, I'd just tell them to walk. A big league city also includes turning things down that don't meet your standards or make sense.

Love this development, but I can't imagine why taxpayers should foot the bill for anything. The original proposal was about as bland and bare bones as it gets. The changes were reasonable and will likely just make this a more attractive and profitable venue long term. If it's not viable after the changes then let them walk.

I think it would be worth looking at how a similar situation would be handled in another city and comparing. Is TIF subsidies unique to here or do other cities give them? If they do happen in other cities, how liberal are they with TIF subsidies compared to OKC? TIF has become a dirty word on OKCTalk and I am afraid that it has become so without real perspective on what it is or how they are used elsewhere.

I agree with PluPan that big league cities should turn down developments that aren't up to standard rather than rubber stamping everything. Unfortunately I don't think OKC is at that point yet. Despite all the development over the past 20 years, it's still a fact of life that downtown OKC has some ground to cover compared to peer cities and some of that catching up will require a subsidy to make happen.

I want OKC to be a city that pulls its weight and has the entire package. A part of that package is not having to drive to smaller regional cities to see live music. Part of that is a Bricktown with a wide variety of entertainment choices and not just dinner, a movie, or a nightclub. I was okay with the original bare bones version of this proposal but the revision is a home run and I think it should be approved.

I don't think TIF has become a dirty word... People are just starting to ask good questions about how these districts are set up and funds used. It's up to public officials to justify the allocation of tax dollars, not for citizens to justify asking questions about that process.

And I disagree with the statement that that OKC has ground to cover in terms of peer city downtowns. Which peer cities have recently built more or have more currently in progress? I'll stack OKC's office, apartment and hotel vacancy against anyone. So, at what point do you stop subsidizing private developers just because they ask?


My concern is that TIF funds are considered (and treated like) free money, and that is certainly not the case.

What's more, how these districts are set and how the money is spent is decided by a very small group as opposed to MAPS funds which go through a huge political process and public vote. THEN there are citizen committees set up to guide and manage the entire process.

And the small group putting forth the ideas and making the decisions are clearly in love with the TIF funding mechanism. At least two more TIF districts will soon be pitched.

TIF dollars do get approved by city council but IMO they are not given good enough information to make informed choices. The council doesn't get presented with anything more than you see posted here, and it's pretty clear we don't have good answers for a lot of questions that have been raised.

And beyond that, there is very much a political culture of approving all this stuff lest you be labeled an obstructionist and hater. Same with demolitions.


It's healthy for the public to challenge political decisions, especially when you are talking about hundreds of millions of tax dollars and plenty more of these districts on the way.

And I disagree with the statement that that OKC has ground to cover in terms of peer city downtowns. Which peer cities have recently built more or have more currently in progress? I'll stack OKC's office, apartment and hotel vacancy against anyone. So, at what point do you stop subsidizing private developers just because they ask?


By this, I mean the downtown ecosystem in its entirety, not the rate of developments proposed and built. A lot of the "catching up" OKC has ahead of it is actually regaining things that were lost in urban renewal, things that peer cities still have. OKC would not need to subsidize the construction of a music venue if it had a historic theater to revitalize into one like other cities have done.

I agree though it's good to have more knowledge of how these things work. I just don't want to see a trend of opposition to every development that asks for a TIF subsidy. Some developments are worth it in my opinion and this is one of them.

By this, I mean the downtown ecosystem in its entirety, not the rate of developments proposed and built. A lot of the "catching up" OKC has ahead of it is actually regaining things that were lost in urban renewal. OKC would not need to subsidize the construction of a music venue if it had a historic theater to revitalize into one like most of OKC's peer cities have done.

Again, you offer no comparison to peer cities. Every single American city experienced massive clearing during the urban renewal periods of the 60's and 70's. I'm still not convinced that OKC was in any way exceptional and have thrown down the challenge for others who make that claim to justify it in some way, and no one has ever done it, nor can I find any evidence to support this claim. Go to the urban density thread and follow the links that show the impact of urban renewal on scores of American cities.

And, you are taking a huge leap by saying we "need" to subsidize the concert hall. It was proposed without any ask for public assistance and the City has created a situation where tons of projects get TIF money without any real clear guidelines for accepting and declining such requests. We are basically told, "We can't do this project without it, so gimme or else". We have yet to call a single bluff on this as far as I know.

Also, there a bunch of big projects that have been done downtown or are currently underway without any TIF money. Including the proposed 499 Sheridan and the Metropolitan, the largest downtown housing complex to date.


In this particular case (the Criterion), there is a nearly identical project directly next door that was bought, converted to a concert venue, then recently upgraded at great cost without a dime of public assistance.

I think TIF is a valuable tool in the right project but I just don't think every development should be using TIF as their negotiation. Of course the closed mouth doesn't get fed and it never hurts to ask I suppose but we need to be saying now when its appropriate.

BTW, there was a time where almost every new downtown project represented unchartered waters.

The first apartment complexes, the first condo projects, the first few hotels, etc. And then you had the first big apartment complex in Deep Deuce, then in Midtown, etc., etc.

Or, you had a very ambitious restoration project like the Ambassador Hotel or the Marion.


With very few exceptions, all the trails have not only been blazed, they have been well-traveled. Lots and lots of all these projects are open, full, and in most cases generating more income than ever budgeted; and it's happened in almost every district. And lots of companies have moved downtown or have greatly increased their work forces.


So at what point do you finally say, "Look. The City has already invested more than a billion in public funds in downtown. There are several examples of how to make a project work and you can take their numbers to any lending institution. So, time to take the training wheels off, otherwise we will be doing this forever."


It seems we have already crossed this threshold. And instead of giving more and more money out because these districts are taking in way more money than budgeted, why not give a good chunk of it back to the schools and the other coffers where this money would have gone otherwise?

TIF #2 (the one that comprises most of downtown) is now budgeted to receive $126 million vs. the $50 million anticipated. And of course, we just spend that money through the TIF because most consider it to be just "found" dollars.

ALSO...

Only downtown projects have been getting TIF funds; meaning Midtown, Deep Deuce, Bricktown, the CBD, Film Row, etc.

Yet, great renaissances have occurred in the Plaza District, Uptown, the Paseo, Western Avenue and elsewhere. And TIF was not involved in any way.

So, how do you reconcile that -- plus the long list of downtown developments that never asked for TIF dollars -- with the "need" for TIF funds to move urban projects forward?


Forget other cities, we have hundreds of data points right in OKC just since TIF 2 was established.

ALSO Part II...

We are giving this money out because we can. Our cup runneth over, so everybody who asks gets some. Let the good times roll!

However, there is always, always an opportunity cost.

We still have First National Center looming, for example. That is going to be $100 million to renovate, at least. And you could argue that project is so important that they deserve every bit of TIF dollars available.

Also, few realize the American Indian Museum & Cultural Center is within the TIF 2 boundaries. TIF could have been used to keep that project moving forward and they still may need the money yet.

Yet, even though we only anticipated getting $47.5 million, we have already committed $90 million (of the now anticipated $126 million) and we are just over halfway in the 25 year TIF.


How about holding TIF money for exceptional projects (like 21c or FNC) rather than paying it out a few million at a time to dozens of developers, where it only represents an average of 4% of their costs? Does anyone really believe 4% is the difference between building a project and taking a complete pass?

Then, when something great comes along, we are ready. And if that never happens, you return the money to the schools and the general coffers.