That's going to be incredible and make a massive impact to OKC's skyline, not to mention the added vibrancy as Pete mentioned. I'm incredibly excited for this development and waiting another year for something bigger and better is totally fine. It's like the opposite of the Convergence development that got watered down to the point of not really being exciting anymore.

Is there any reason to think the TIF for a massive development like this wouldn't pass?

Also, can we get a better mass transit hub for Bricktown now that they'll have even more density? I know they've got the street car stop right across the street from this, but something wider reaching would be good to. Maybe this will help Amtrack as well.

Is there any reason to think the TIF for a massive development like this wouldn't pass?

Once a district or grant gets to the Planning Commission and then City Council, there has been a 100% pass rate.

Everyone voting gets briefed in private before something like this hits any public agenda. And they don't proceed until they have the needed support.

This would be a ton of residential units near Bricktown and that would help to bring more life and businesses to the canal, which is sorely needed.

I'd like to see the upper floors of some of those canal buildings converted to apartments.

I have no idea, but I suspect it's not much, so I'm wondering how many lofts there are in Bricktown? They're popular in other cities (or at least they used to be), and I know we have a few here (Garage Lofts is about the only one I know of, actually), but seems like a missed opportunity - is there no demand from people, no demand from developers, ....?

I have no idea, but I suspect it's not much, so I'm wondering how many lofts there are in Bricktown? They're popular in other cities (or at least they used to be), and I know we have a few here (Garage Lofts is about the only one I know of, actually), but seems like a missed opportunity - is there no demand from people, no demand from developers, ....?

Lofts as in for-purchase condos? There is only 30 in Bricktown proper, they are all the original ones along the canal in the Centennial building.

As for all residential in Bricktown proper, there is only 3 buildings that have residential. The Centennial, The Steelyard, and there is a handful of apartments @ 222 E Main St.

If they build the towers as planned, we are looking at 300-350ft height on all towers.

Four 24 and 26 story towers on this site would be a significant increase to the size of the downtown core.

I'm actually glad to see it apartment-heavy. Hotels are nice but permanent residents bring an entirely different need for goods and services. Now if we could just get more condos, townhomes, and other for-sale units to help drive prices down.

The developers in this city will never build fast enough for that to happen. It takes years for them to get projects launched and completed. OKC's population growth is easily snatching up available inventory when it comes online.

So with the request for TIF, don't they have to reveal the new plans? So we could possibly see them on Thursday?

Or is the meeting on Thursday just for the TIF district, and not awarding the actual TIF for the project?

Looking at 4 towers around the same height as Valliance Bank Tower. I like that. Fingers crossed this happens, I have been let down too many times.

Looking at 4 towers around the same height as Valliance Bank Tower. I like that. Fingers crossed this happens, I have been let down too many times.

At this point, even if they whittle down to 18-20 floors that still adds significantly to the skyline. It's the density of residential high-rise housing and hotel rooms that I'm excited about.

BTW, that article also quotes Randy Hogan as saying this project is a "moonshot" so take all this with a grain of salt.

I feel like this is being glossed over. This makes me feel like this absolutely isn't happening to the capacity that they are aiming for.

I feel like this is being glossed over. This makes me feel like this absolutely isn't happening to the capacity that they are aiming for.

I'll be surprised if anything close to this ends up getting built... but hopefully I'm wrong

^ I disagree, they announced this project almost 3 years ago and now has been modified since then, if they were going to drop it or water it down, I think they would of done it by now.

The TIF approval and how much is actually awarded will determine the outcome of the project.

BTW, that article also quotes Randy Hogan as saying this project is a "moonshot" so take all this with a grain of salt.

You say "moon shot" but to me, it doesn't mean what you think it does. I think baseball. Moon shot is a term for a massive, massive home run. Not a long shot, like you are thinking here.

I could be wrong. I think the TIF is the last piece of a project that is at the 3 yard line.

Not bashing, just saying my interpretation of his phrasing.

You say "moon shot" but to me, it doesn't mean what you think it does. I think baseball. Moon shot is a term for a massive, massive home run. Not a long shot, like you are thinking here.

I could be wrong. I think the TIF is the last piece of a project that is at the 3 yard line.

Not bashing, just saying my interpretation of his phrasing.

Ah, now see, that would make more sense. I definitely took it more like "there's no way this is happening".


But THIS version, I like your interpretation much much better.

Ah, now see, that would make more sense. I definitely took it more like "there's no way this is happening".


But THIS version, I like your interpretation much much better.

And like I said, I could be wrong. I wasn't meaning to bash anyone or seem too positive.

Really hope this comes off.

They said they hope to break ground early next year so we should know soon if this is moving forward.

In order to get started in that time frame they'll have to submit design and permit applications soon.

You say "moon shot" but to me, it doesn't mean what you think it does. I think baseball. Moon shot is a term for a massive, massive home run. Not a long shot, like you are thinking here.

I could be wrong. I think the TIF is the last piece of a project that is at the 3 yard line.

Not bashing, just saying my interpretation of his phrasing.

I like your thinking.

Lofts as in for-purchase condos? There is only 30 in Bricktown proper, they are all the original ones along the canal in the Centennial building.

As for all residential in Bricktown proper, there is only 3 buildings that have residential. The Centennial, The Steelyard, and there is a handful of apartments @ 222 E Main St.

Yeah, for-purchase or rent, condos or apts, basically any residential. Kind of surprised there's not that much residential in Bricktown. Because it costs too much to renovate, no demand, codes, ....?

I'll be surprised if anything close to this ends up getting built... but hopefully I'm wrong

Why? With a couple hundred million in TIF being made available, I would be surprised if nothing happened. That said, Im kind of tired of the constant come-with-your-hand-out game plan for most new projects. Its like the more unviable plan you have, the better chance at getting TIF money.

onthestrip, IMO that's the way TIF should be. If you're building a low-rise structure then you probably don't need/shouldn't get TIF since OKC has plenty of land and those type of developments shouldn't be allowed downtown. On the other hand, if you're building a structure higher than 5 floors I think TIF could be appropriate given the added density and "hopefully" improved amenities that it brings. Build a highrise and IMO TIF is necessary due to the rebuild/relocation of utilities/services (given the age of the core and that Urban Renewal tore out what existed previously) and to incentivize high-rise, dense, architectural significant development that OKC's core should have but compared to most peers still is rather lacking.

Again, TIF does not take away from the city, schools, or services; the base still goes out. Its the added value that for a period of time goes to the developer for taking on the risk hopefully benefitting the city overall. After the period, the ad-valorem is established and the schools/county/services see the huge boost (looks like a huge boost comes 2026). If not for TIF we wouldn't have the density, wouldn't have the skyline altering towers, and wouldn't have any ad-valorem to speak of. Now, do we need to alter TIF and revise who gets and what we espect from receiving TIF? YES. And I think it should be iterative as the city reaches milestones of growth, make TIF more difficult/demanding.

onthestrip, IMO that's the way TIF should be. If you're building a low-rise structure then you probably don't need/shouldn't get TIF since OKC has plenty of land and those type of developments shouldn't be allowed downtown. On the other hand, if you're building a structure higher than 5 floors I think TIF could be appropriate given the added density and "hopefully" improved amenities that it brings.

Except the majority of TIF money has been spent and is planned to be spent on buildings 5 levels or less.


There are zero guidelines. It's just basically what the head of Alliance agrees should be funded, then the process starts to help that happen.

There are no height minimums, no density parameters, no affordable housing requirements... It's simply down to what the Alliance chooses to back.

I can't wait to see the renderings!

Except the majority of TIF money has been spent and is planned to be spent on buildings 5 levels or less.


There are zero guidelines. It's just basically what the head of Alliance agrees should be funded, then the process starts to help that happen.

There are no height minimums, no density parameters, no affordable housing requirements... It's simply down to what the Alliance chooses to back.

Which is why I agree with what he said in the last bit that TIF 100% should be updated to match the change downtown/bricktown has made. We need to see higher density and should be willing to use TIF to match those needs. Increased density means increase amenities (Urban Target, Walgreens, CVS, etc.) Just guessing but lets say there would be 500 residential units with an average of 1.75 per unit would equate to 875 more people living full time. Add the hotel and that is another 300-700 rotating.

I'm not arguing for or against TIF but TIF does take away from the City, schools, and services. Projects receiving TIF status still receive all public services despite not paying for them. The cost then falls to all other taxpayers.

I'm not arguing for or against TIF but TIF does take away from the City, schools, and services. Projects receiving TIF status still receive all public services despite not paying for them. The cost then falls to all other taxpayers.

^this 1000%. That's my biggest beef with the system.

I'm not arguing for or against TIF but TIF does take away from the City, schools, and services. Projects receiving TIF status still receive all public services despite not paying for them. The cost then falls to all other taxpayers.

not totally true. Agencies still receive the base property tax but TIF takes the GAINS in the property that are assessed on the new building(s). So, there is a benchmark set before the development takes place, schools/city/county/library/services still get that amount no matter what. But obviously the assessment would increase with a new building, that difference goes to the development.

I'm generally for TIF but think it needs to be revised (as I've stated earlier) given downtown's gains or once we meet a certain target of critical mass. We may not be there yet but I think we're close. AND, as we learned from Convergence - there hsould be stipulations to claw back TIF if the project isn't delivered to the proposed design the TIF was awarded to. We jsut need to get control of the TIF process now that the city has truly become a major city and stop pretending downtown is still in 'developing nation' status. ..

Three 25 story apartment buildings and a hotel require far more public services than a parking lot does over the next 15 years

not totally true. Agencies still receive the base property tax but TIF takes the GAINS in the property that are assessed on the new building(s). So, there is a benchmark set before the development takes place, schools/city/county/library/services still get that amount no matter what. But obviously the assessment would increase with a new building, that difference goes to the development.

I'm generally for TIF but think it needs to be revised (as I've stated earlier) given downtown's gains or once we meet a certain target of critical mass. We may not be there yet but I think we're close. AND, as we learned from Convergence - there hsould be stipulations to claw back TIF if the project isn't delivered to the proposed design the TIF was awarded to. We jsut need to get control of the TIF process now that the city has truly become a major city and stop pretending downtown is still in 'developing nation' status. ..

Well, considering hardly anyone lives downtown, compared to many other cities our size, it is very much still a "developing nation". Think about how all those towers in Austin get built, incentives and subsidies.

Well, considering hardly anyone lives downtown, compared to many other cities our size, it is very much still a "developing nation". Think about how all those towers in Austin get built, incentives and subsidies.

this is correct .... OKC still has very very few downtown residents compared to peer cities

I agree, which is why Im in support of TIF. But again, we can redefine it beyond the funding mechanism it currently is to more of an incentive to encourage high density and urban development. Right now (as Pete alluded) TIF is given to almost anything requested within the downtown developing nation zone(s). Therefore, OKC gets very few development proposals above 5 floors which I thought was more or less prohibited in the CBD and shoulder area.

I understand we needed to get "something" first, but I think we may now be at the point of urban density in the CBD and shoulder zones to focus TIF on dense developments and less so to get a proposal completed.

Three 25 story apartment buildings and a hotel require far more public services than a parking lot does over the next 15 years

While I understand your point on TIFS, those 3 25 story apartment buildings will generate income for the city and state outside of what the TIFs offset. That's a fair number of residents living, shopping, and eating downtown. There are employees paying income taxes and spending that money. There are other businesses that will profit on the construction, maintenance, and support of these buildings that will be paying taxes. I would hope any good TIF process is taking the broader economic impacts into account.

I'm sure there are lots of improvements, claw backs, and such that could be done to make the TIF system work better, but it's not as binary as it just costing the funds they offset.

Three 25 story apartment buildings and a hotel require far more public services than a parking lot does over the next 15 years

All of the infrastructure already exists. The property is in the middle of downtown. I don't know where the extra cost on the taxpayer for additional public services would come from. Sewer is already in place, Electricity infrastructure already built, streetlights, sidewalks, Police patrols, fire station, and surrounding streets are all already there. That is one of the main benefits of urban infill and a good justification to subsidize it.

^

And, the city and state just spent a bunch of taxpayer money first putting in a new intersection on the east side of Uhaul, then tearing it up and moving it to Compress specifically to serve the Lower Bricktown area and this project in particular.

Billions in public funds have been poured into the area immediately surrounding this site. Plus, the developer was given a sweetheart deal on the land in the first place.

The TIF resolution passed the planning commission, now on to City Council.

rubber stamp to come on Tuesday. eh?

Hopefully, this will expedite renders, plans, approvals, and construction!

As I've stated before, TIF districts and grants have a 100% approval rate by the Planning Commission and City Council.

This has long been decided.

I understand how some feel that OKC shouldn't need to subsidize these type of projects. In my mind, these are exactly the type of projects that should be subsidized as long as we get what is expected. 3 25 story residential buildings will bring a ton more people downtown and build on a site that is absolutely in need of development to remove one more MASSIVE surface lot! I would approve 3 more projects just like this in the lot east of Ballpark, just north of mcdonalds and the lots to the north of this development. All total adding a few thousand people living downtown and filling in surface lots with significant infill.

Are they still using Cube 3 as the architect? I wonder because they just did conceptual drawings 3 years ago, and we haven't seen any updated renderings.

The development has drastically changed so maybe they contracted a new architecture firm.

Are they still using Cube 3 as the architect? I wonder because they just did conceptual drawings 3 years ago, and we haven't seen any updated renderings.

The development has drastically changed so maybe they contracted a new architecture firm.

With this particular development, I wouldn't mind seeing some significant changes to the layout of the existing conceptual drawings. id like to see these buildings really make an effort to address the surrounding streets and lessen the focus these buildings have on the interior lagoon. I wouldn't mind seeing the lagoon scrapped from this project all together.

status, did it pass?

surprised no mention in the Daily.

I don't think the resolution was heard at this meeting, probably the next one.

The only thing the PC and council are voting on is removing sections of TIF #2.

The new TIF's (such as the one for this project) will have to be presented later and approved by council.

Any updates?

TIF was presented Tuesday to the City Council. Seems like Tsoodle is really pushing for this development, so that is a good sign. City Council to vote on TIF on March 28th, after that shouldn't be much longer until we see new renderings:

https://journalrecord.com/2023/03/15/proposed-tif-changes-would-support-downtown-okc-housing/

TIF was presented Tuesday to the City Council. Seems like Tsoodle is really pushing for this development, so that is a good sign. City Council to vote on TIF on March 28th, after that shouldn't be much longer until we see new renderings:

https://journalrecord.com/2023/03/15/proposed-tif-changes-would-support-downtown-okc-housing/

They also approved changing some TIF things up to provide Tannenbaum TIF money for the two office buildings-to-apartment conversions. Amazing how quickly this TIF money is being offered up not just a couple months after he closed on the properties.

I watched the replay of the meeting on YouTube. Councilmember Nikki Nice asked Tsoodle if the developers asked for the TIF, and he said yes. So there's that. After this project gets off the ground. I wouldn't be surprised if Randy Hogan secures the Bricktown Event Center parking lot and develops it as well.

I just wish they incorporated a canal expansion into this. They may be able to have a lagoon, whatever...just loop the canal back to the corner of the old sushi place and Harkins. It would liven up both the new development and the canal.

I don't know what the long term plan is. Do people really think a dead end canal is going to be good for Bricktown?

I just wish they incorporated a canal expansion into this. They may be able to have a lagoon, whatever...just loop the canal back to the corner of the old sushi place and Harkins. It would liven up both the new development and the canal.

I don't know what the long term plan is. Do people really think a dead end canal is going to be good for Bricktown?

It's been fine for Bricktown for like 25+ years?

Extending the canal would have been a massive disruption to the layout of this part of Bricktown and would require painful changes to Reno and the streetcar line, and for no good reason other than speculation about it being a nice idea. The cost of the above would have been nuts compared to what the developers are intending for this site.

As I've stated before, TIF districts and grants have a 100% approval rate by the Planning Commission and City Council.

This has long been decided.

Yep, most of the hard work is accomplished at the staff level. If you are one of those staff members and you are reading this... Thank you for you hard work.

It's been fine for Bricktown for like 25+ years?

Extending the canal would have been a massive disruption to the layout of this part of Bricktown and would require painful changes to Reno and the streetcar line, and for no good reason other than speculation about it being a nice idea. The cost of the above would have been nuts compared to what the developers are intending for this site.

yep canal extension into a development on the coop site makes possible sense but not onto this property

Looks like trouble for the Dream Hotel in Vegas

http://https://www.reviewjournal.com/business/casinos-gaming/las-vegas-strip-hotel-casino-construction-fully-stopped-as-funding-plans-stall-2747588/

https://www.reviewjournal.com/business/casinos-gaming/las-vegas-strip-hotel-casino-construction-fully-stopped-as-funding-plans-stall-2747588/ Same company or different?

https://www.reviewjournal.com/business/casinos-gaming/las-vegas-strip-hotel-casino-construction-fully-stopped-as-funding-plans-stall-2747588/ Same company or different?

To answer your question, it is the same Dream hotel group.

But why does the DEVEOPER running out of money matter with regards to a hotel brand? I don't think this means anything for the OKC project, if that is your concern.

To answer your question, it is the same Dream hotel group.

But why does the DEVEOPER running out of money matter with regards to a hotel brand? I don't think this means anything for the OKC project, if that is your concern.
I read the story and it looks like it’s a short term cash flow issue…sorta. They started paying with cash and previous financing terms fell through, so they were far along on plan B when cash ran out. Looks like it is 4 to 5 stories high already. Developer assurances are more emphatic than I usually read in these situations.

It's been fine for Bricktown for like 25+ years?

Extending the canal would have been a massive disruption to the layout of this part of Bricktown and would require painful changes to Reno and the streetcar line, and for no good reason other than speculation about it being a nice idea. The cost of the above would have been nuts compared to what the developers are intending for this site.


yep canal extension into a development on the coop site makes possible sense but not onto this property
Disagree. When the canal was built there was a right-of-way preserved between Harkins and what is now the Centennial. To make it to the proposed lagoon would need a few hundred feet of canal plus a bridge at Oklahoma Avenue. The end.

I've discussed this with the P.E. working on this and he was personally enthusiastic about the idea for a number of reasons, but that doesn't mean it will be a part of any plan.

Disagree. When the canal was built there was a right-of-way preserved between Harkins and what is now the Centennial. To make it to the proposed lagoon would need a few hundred feet of canal plus a bridge at Oklahoma Avenue. The end.

I've discussed this with the P.E. working on this and he was personally enthusiastic about the idea for a number of reasons, but that doesn't mean it will be a part of any plan.

And what would you know about the canal.... oh wait.... :)

And what would you know about the canal.... oh wait.... :)

lol

Disagree. When the canal was built there was a right-of-way preserved between Harkins and what is now the Centennial. To make it to the proposed lagoon would need a few hundred feet of canal plus a bridge at Oklahoma Avenue. The end.

I've discussed this with the P.E. working on this and he was personally enthusiastic about the idea for a number of reasons, but that doesn't mean it will be a part of any plan.

Sure, but the poster I was responding to was suggesting a loop that turns the canal into something other than a dead end. I was assuming that meant using both the right of way you are talking about as well as extending the current NW end of the canal south under Reno.

This project would be several orders of magnitude larger than anything in Bricktown; probably bigger than everything else combined.

It would only make sense to incorporate the canal because as a city we have made such a huge public investment there.

And as we all know, that canal needs some life -- it would benefit the entire community and lead to a lot more private investment.


Seems like too big an opportunity to let pass by.