Urban Land Institute Sends Advisors / MAPS Oversight Board Moves Forward

[Urban Pioneer]

Lots of things happening this week with a panel (I believe 9 people) who will advise on a redevelopment plan for downtown/Core to Shore.

They are conducting interviews throughout the week with almost 100 people and will unveil their findings/concepts Friday morning in council chambers.

Also, it is my understanding that the City Council may be voting on the "proceedural structure" at today's council meeting.

Lots of stuff happening. This week may very well orient plans and affect major decisions such as placement of key MAPS components.

[mugofbeer]

I recall when they were here after the MAPS 1 vote. It's a great thing and they can give a lot of good ideas and support to the projects.

[Urban Pioneer]

Just a reminder. ULI will give their design team report to the public in City Council Chambers tomorrow at 9:30 AM. I am not sure if it will be televised live or not. I would encourage anyone speculating on these various developmental matters to attend.

It should be interesting. It will be even more interesting as to whether it will "direct" many of the developmental plans to be decided by the council/MAPS oversight board to be made in the near future.

[betts]

Hopefully someone will attend and give a report to those of us who have to work and cannot get away to attend. I would really love to go to that.

[Urban Pioneer]

Just attended the meeting. See Steve Lackmeyers blog OKC Central - Information about Oklahoma City, Bricktown and beyond for synopsis.

[betts]

Wow! Narrow the boulevard, move the convention center to another location and build it first. I think they're spot on on every one of these recommendations.

[Larry OKC]

Wow! Narrow the boulevard, move the convention center to another location and build it first. I think they're spot on on every one of these recommendations.

If this is a duplicate post, my apologies...

I agree and think the consensus in these threads and the Oklahoman is that these folks are correct.

I will point out that they seemed to think the overall C2S plan was a good one, that it just needed to be tweaked some.

One thing I found interesting was about the Streetcars. I was in agreement with those on these threads that one of the advantages of a fixed rail system (as opposed to buses) was that developers would know where the routes/stations are going to be and development will naturally follow.

But Russ Tillman, offered a cautionary note. Said that since they are expensive and permanent, that routes need to be chosen very carefully. He stated:

There is a vast industry that will tell you build a streetcar and the buildings will follow it. It's more complicated...it's less clear if streetcars really spur development. It is one of many factors that can spur development.

(emphasis supplied in presentation slide)

So now I don't know....

[Kerry]

One thing I found interesting was about the Streetcars. I was in agreement with those on these threads that one of the advantages of a fixed rail system (as opposed to buses) was that developers would know where the routes/stations are going to be and development will naturally follow.

But Russ Tillman, offered a cautionary note. Said that since they are expensive and permanent, that routes need to be chosen very carefully. He stated...

This isn't aimed at you Larry, but who would have thought the street car lines WOULDN"T need to be well planned? This is the very reason the orginal rail plan in MAPS I would have been a disaster. It was not well thought out and would have doomed any future rail expansion because the anti-rail crowd would of had actual evidence of rail failure in OKC. We dodged a bullet back then.

[lasomeday]

Big D Mosey

The Uhaul Building is actually a beautiful building underneath the aluminum siding. It can be redone.

If you went to a convention, would you rather be able to walk to lunch in Bricktown or be forced to have lunch at two shady options in the convention center.

Look at it this way if we have a grand boulevard with a lumber yard and cottin gin next to it, how would that welcome people into the city. I would rather have a convention center there. The lumber yard is big enough for the size of convention center we voted on, parking can be beneath it. NO big deal!

The park will be enough to spur development. If you look at other cities, many offices and residential tend to want to build next to parks. There are buildings adjoining the park that could be refurbished and become awesome lofts or office buildings or mixed use.

[OKC@heart]

Big D Mosey

The Uhaul Building is actually a beautiful building underneath the aluminum siding. It can be redone.

If you went to a convention, would you rather be able to walk to lunch in Bricktown or be forced to have lunch at two shady options in the convention center.

Look at it this way if we have a grand boulevard with a lumber yard and cottin gin next to it, how would that welcome people into the city. I would rather have a convention center there. The lumber yard is big enough for the size of convention center we voted on, parking can be beneath it. NO big deal!

The park will be enough to spur development. If you look at other cities, many offices and residential tend to want to build next to parks. There are buildings adjoining the park that could be refurbished and become awesome lofts or office buildings or mixed use.

Would love to see the skin of the original U-haul building! Am encouraged by the recommendations ULI made regarding the Convention center moving more to the east to anchor Lower Bricktown. More about securing and and ensuring continued success of Bricktown. You know that development that we poured a ton of both public and private money into just a while back. It is important to realize that it is by no means mature and fully stable. It is doing great as an entertainment venue, but is lacking in residents, and retail. We need to do more to bolster its sucess, and adding the new convention center is a great way to show that its progress continues, while preserving the land around the park for the best uses, such as allowing for the redevelopment of the existing usable structures which would likely be the first type of development we would see, followed by infil projects.

I also love the fact that they supported the idea of the new 700 room Hotel remaining where it is located. That would be a great building to anchor the corner adjacent to the park, so long as it is a vertical expression and not a horizontal one that denotes a more suburban attempt at filling the land available. That would be a huge mistake. What I would ultimately love to see, is the 700 room hotel vertically oriented, with a partnership with a residential developer who has successfully done highrise condos in other markets, add an appropriate amount of for sale residential condos to the top giving great views of the downtown skyline while becoming a contributor to the skyline itself.

It is this type of partnered mixed use building that are having any sucess in other markets these days.

[BigD Misey]

Big D Mosey

The Uhaul Building is actually a beautiful building underneath the aluminum siding. It can be redone.

If you went to a convention, would you rather be able to walk to lunch in Bricktown or be forced to have lunch at two shady options in the convention center.

Look at it this way if we have a grand boulevard with a lumber yard and cottin gin next to it, how would that welcome people into the city. I would rather have a convention center there. The lumber yard is big enough for the size of convention center we voted on, parking can be beneath it. NO big deal!

The park will be enough to spur development. If you look at other cities, many offices and residential tend to want to build next to parks. There are buildings adjoining the park that could be refurbished and become awesome lofts or office buildings or mixed use.

I believe i could walk ONE BLOCK further, yes i do.
As far as looking at other cities...I live in dallas. They have been considering the Trinity Park idea for years down here. It almost happened when jerry decided to build a stadium. But, with Jerryworld moving out to Arlington, that idea is now squashed. Why? Because the surrounding area is a 'blighted' area...unsightly, undeveloped and NOTHING AROUND.
Conversely, a park was proposed a couple of years ago that would be built over the Woodall Rogers Expwy. It is already being built. Guess why? Attractions around the park. Sculpture center, MCkinney Ave., Arts Museum, mixed use retail/residential (which by the way was just built and finished about 5 years ago) up off Hall & James.
It seems when ANY other major city builds a park downtown, it is not bordered on 3 sides by blighted areas. Either they are at points where you traverse or are bordered on 2 or more sides with points of interest. Just building a park will not spur growth and is a huge reason trinity park will not be built here in dallas for a long time.
Just sayin'

[betts]

I went and looked at the lumbar yard site yesterday, because I didn't really ever distinguish it in my mind from the Cotton gin, and honestly thought it was all part and parcel of the same thing. I did have a couple of thoughts when I looked at it.

It does seem rather small in size. Perhaps that's perspective, and if the area were leveled it would be easier to see that it's adequate in size. Does it indeed have enough room to expand were we to want to expand?

When I looked at it, I thought a convention hotel would either have to be built on the site of the cotton gin or the U-Haul building. The Cotton Gin owners, if anything, would probably increase or certainly wouldn't lower the cost of their property if they knew a convention center was going to be built there. I know Doug has posted pictures of the U-Haul building in it's earlier incarnation, and I didn't know if people would be amenable to it being demolished. It would be a pretty cool-looking building if its current facade were removed, but certainly would probably not be amenable to renovation into a convention center hotel.

Since I live near the tracks, I know that there are a lot of trains that go through. The lumbar yard is immediately adjacent to the tracks, and train noise would be very loud. If you live near it, you get used to it and literally stop hearing the trains, but if you're a visitor, you wouldn't have time to get used to it. Would the train noise disrupt presentations? Would people staying in the convention center hotel be unhappy about the train noise, especially the whistles? You could significantly improve the noise if you had a Quiet Zone, however.

[shane453]

If you live near it, you get used to it and literally stop hearing the trains, but if you're a visitor, you wouldn't have time to get used to it. Would the train noise disrupt presentations? Would people staying in the convention center hotel be unhappy about the train noise, especially the whistles?

The Cox Center is also adjacent (across the street) from the train tracks, and the Renaissance and Courtyard hotels, so it wouldn't be a problem that would remove the sites from consideration. Aren't all three potential convention center sites adjacent to the Santa Fe tracks?

The ULI presentation was kind of disconcerting and hopefully leads to thoughtful but quick discussion and decision among city leaders about the issues that were covered.

[Doug Loudenback]

Shane, I've not seen the presentation or discussion, just what Steve has written in his blog and the newspaper. What was disconcerting?

[ssandedoc]

I was in Bricktown yesterday and parked at the Lumbar yard. It would make sense to put the new convention center here. Its within a short walking distance of hotels, restaurants, and the Cox & Ford centers. If there was a shuttle or a rail line, it would really connect the whole area well.

I agree with the ULI that putting the convention center several blocks south is not good for the city.

Also, has anyone noticed the amount of graffiti and gang activity in the proposed core to shore area? Definitely, don't want to get our stuff messed up by gangs. Need more patrol and security.

[shane453]

Shane, I've not seen the presentation or discussion, just what Steve has written in his blog and the newspaper. What was disconcerting?

I also have only seen the media accounts, not the full presentation, but what concerned me was that there were so many discrepancies with the ideas that the city and planners have developed over the last few years compared to the opinions of the ULI panel. And I want to believe that each bit of advice will be weighed fairly and given due consideration, but don't know if that will be the case.

[Larry OKC]

I also have only seen the media accounts, not the full presentation, but what concerned me was that there were so many discrepancies with the ideas that the city and planners have developed over the last few years compared to the opinions of the ULI panel. And I want to believe that each bit of advice will be weighed fairly and given due consideration, but don't know if that will be the case.

Definitely take the time to catch the repeat showing or view online @ okc.gov. One thing they stressed was that overall the C2S plan was a good one, it just needed some tweaking is all. It was not a complete abandonment. Certain elements weren't going to happen at all (like getting a major dept store, i.e. Nemin-Marcus etc).

[USG '60]

What lumberyard is being referred to in this thread? Where is it?

[onthestrip]

At the presentation it appeared that the city was considering putting the convention center at the SE corner of Robinson and the new boulevard, with the park just to the west, and the ULI just suggested moving it a block to the East (lumber site) and putting the convention hotel at that spot instead. They also stated that the convention hotel should be at least 700 rooms.

One other thing they said is to not expect any new or speculative office construction and high rise housing

[OKC@heart]

At the presentation it appeared that the city was considering putting the convention center at the SE corner of Robinson and the new boulevard, with the park just to the west, and the ULI just suggested moving it a block to the East (lumber site) and putting the convention hotel at that spot instead. They also stated that the convention hotel should be at least 700 rooms.

One other thing they said is to not expect any new or speculative office construction and high rise housing

That comment about speculative office and high rise housing does not surprise me at all, and is more a comment about what is happening (or not happening) in any of the US major markets right now. Lending for spec offices and high rise residential is almost non-existent.

That certainly doesn't mean forever and that it is doomed, rather based on the realities of the current market climate, few are willing to take the risk on something like that. They would be right in that regard. However, if the right corporate relocation were to take place then we certainly could have another high rise built capitalizing on the momentum of what is taking place in OKC. Lenders would not have a problem with lending based on an existing fortune 500 type company relocating to OKC and building new digs. It would be a much safer bet and would get funded.

Residential high rise could come back more quickly in OKC simply from the respect that we have none. So whom ever did the first would capture the market share of those who truly want to live in a high rise. (I know that we have some to speak of) but nothing new and really tall that would give people the views of the city and the world class amenities found in other cities on site. I just hope that whomever gets there first does it right, and does not skimp simply to be first. We need it to endure and be successful to lay the groundwork and precedence for future projects.

[betts]

You're right about the Cox Center being close to the train noise. I guess it wouldn't be that much of a problem, then. I've always thought a close to Bricktown location would be better, for obvious reasons. Do we know that the lumbar yard is purchaseable, and what kind of price they might expect? And again, is there space there for a convention center hotel?

I'm not too worried about graffiti in Core to Shore. As the area improves, the graffiti will decrease.

[Mikemarsh51]

I am wondering how this is working out? the convention center was shown to have the least support, was supposed to be built last and now we have professionals telling us it should be first. I will say it loudly, "Man did we have a job done on all of us"!!!

[onthestrip]

I am wondering how this is working out? the convention center was shown to have the least support, was supposed to be built last and now we have professionals telling us it should be first. I will say it loudly, "Man did we have a job done on all of us"!!!

Whats the big problem? Things should be done in whatever order makes the most sense.

Having said that, at the meeting the park still was assumed to be built first or in conjunction with the convention center.

[Mikemarsh51]

Onthestrip, it matters because of the way it was presented to the voters. Had I not opposed it for political reasons, I would have supported it for all of the obvious reasons. I still would not be happy because now it is not the plan that was sold to us. I also think it is disgusting the way they are now planning to take land from rightful land owners!!!

[onthestrip]

Onthestrip, it matters because of the way it was presented to the voters. Had I not opposed it for political reasons, I would have supported it for all of the obvious reasons. I still would not be happy because now it is not the plan that was sold to us. I also think it is disgusting the way they are now planning to take land from rightful land owners!!!

We were sold on certain projects, not on a certain schedule. Nothing is being taken, everyone will be compensated.