Originally Posted by
Urban Pioneer
And just to recap a few points from today's meeting based on memory-
1. All seats were taken.
2. Roy Williams made it a point to state that he had been told that putting the CC on the Cox site was a no go as we would lose the business that had been established.
3. The substation site has not been considered a "fatal flawed" location and remains on the map until it is ranked out.
4. Mike Adams, (MAPS 3 Oversight Board) specifically asked that the northernmost MAPS 3 Park (the grand lawn area fronting the Boulevard) be formally added as one of the alternative sites to be considered.
5. Gary Gregory, (a real estate broker who had represented the COOP site in the past), made a semi-formal pitch for the Blumenthal family land that fronts Walker and the new Boulevard one block west of the park.
6. Kimberly Lowe, (MAPS 3 Oversight Board), sent a text read via Meg Salyer, stating that she believes that eliminating the Ford Dealership site means that other site should be factored without basement expo halls to reduce building costs and keep the overall program within budget.
7. OkieDave, (David Glover), made a big pitch to reuse the Cox site by redeveloping from the inside (arena space) outward.
8. Chris Flemming with the Howard Group was present. I found that telling.
9. Larry Nichols asked if the streetcar route could be modified to accommodate whichever site was chosen.
10. There was discussion about the declination of the new OKC Boulevard under the railroad underpass and how that might affect the site fronting the Boulevard in Core 2 Shore south.
11. Susan Hooper, (MAPS 3 Oversight Board), asked about implications to sites via the Santa Fe Station expansion plan and relationship to the streetcar. They kindly gave me the light pointer and we got to go over all of the various implications to transit regarding the various sites. I'm really glad I got to go to the meeting as there was quite a bit of ambiguity about these issues. Also, I got to press the fact that changes to our streetcar plans may affect our budget and that we may need additional money to cover any gap that might be created by changing these site locations.
12. Gary Marrs, (CC subcommittee), asked whether scoring of sites could also include a factor as to their affect on costs and coordination of the other city-involved projects at hand.
13. Meg Salyer emphasized that this might be an opportunity to re-score affects to and positive results from external economic development projects.
14. Jim Couch was asked if the Howard/Ford site could be reconsidered. He said yes.
15. Mike Carrier expressed his desire for adequate expansion room.
16. Populous stated that they were looking at parking opportunities that could also enable development outside of the CC project.
17. Cathy O'Connor stated that all of the CC hotel contenders were fine with the site reevaluation process and only want assurances that the hotel site will be directly next to the CC.
Probably a few more thoughts will come. I suspect it will either end up back at the original site or the sites east or west of the park in Core 2 Shore South.
Re: Convention Center
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks