601 W. Main

[Pete]

Why don't they take half of the lot south of them? There is so much parking right by the Civic Center even for a sold out event, an office building with a nice restaurant on the bottom would be such a better use.

Because it's the same issue with the City not wanting a parking garage on Main Street either.

If you read my story you'll see that the association first started with the idea of putting it on one of their lots on the south side of Main and were basically told by city planners that was a no-go in informal meetings.

And they've already paid for all the architectural and engineering on this site.

Remember, this project will have commercial space on the ground floor facing both the park and Main.

[sooner88]

Because it's the same issue with the City not wanting a parking garage on Main Street either.

If you read my story you'll see that the association first started with the idea of putting it on one of their lots on the south side of Main and were basically told by city planners that was a no-go in informal meetings.

And they've already paid for all the architectural and engineering on this site.

Remember, this project will have commercial space on the ground floor facing both the park and Main.

I read your story, but I guess I focused on the Box lot. This is a park facing lot but nothing like mbg or the new park. not a terrible option. Commercial space will be good and the renderings will be different than actual but larger windows with more emphasis on 1st floor space would be my only change

[Ross MacLochness]

Disappointing to say the least. I wish they could build it on the site of the soon to be demolished courts building.

[Pete]

Has anyone actually stood in that park and looked in all directions?

To the north and south you have nothing but surface lots (including one owned by Box) and some small, generally ugly, lifeless 1- and 2-story buildings... And it's not like any of that is going away any time soon. Zero commercial space or really anything that interacts with the park. Also, there is parking on both sides of Colcord and Couch with a road running down the middle. All these properties are fairly removed from the park anyway.

Ask yourself why we have people lining up against this project while there was barely a peep when Devon sought approval for two ridiculously huge and monolithic garages that each border large existing city parking structures.

[riflesforwatie]

Has anyone actually stood in that park and looked in all directions?

To the north and south you have nothing but surface lots (including one owned by Box) and some small, generally ugly, lifeless 1- and 2-story buildings... And it's not like any of that is going away any time soon. Zero commercial space or really anything that interacts with the park. Also, there is parking on both sides of Colcord and Couch with a road running down the middle. All these properties are fairly removed from the park anyway.

Ask yourself why we have people lining up against this project while there was barely a peep when Devon sought approval for two ridiculously huge and monolithic garages that each border large existing city parking structures.

Agree completely. And I don't understand why the coverage in other local media has been so obviously biased against this project. I mean, in general I dislike parking garages but this is a lot less objectionable than a bunch of others that have been approved recently.

On the other hand, telling the association not to build across the street from the new police HQ doesn't make much sense, either. If the garage is partly/mostly for Police Dept. employees, that would be a more convenient location. I don't understand why 601 W. Main is "better" for the Main Street Corridor than across the street from police HQ.

As for the argument, reported elsewhere, that this is a money grab for Civic Center traffic, well...maybe it's true, maybe not. But what I do know is that a new garage at 601 W. Main is going to make Civic Center parking at 618 W. Main (across the street) a lot less valuable.

[AP]

After re-reading this entire thread, it is clear that the best option is for the Association to build on this lot and free up their other lots for development.

[Pete]

Agree completely. And I don't understand why the coverage in other local media has been so obviously biased against this project.

Because you have very skilled real estate attorneys orchestrating all this. The Boxes own the property directly east and Dennis lives in a condo on this block as well.

The whole land swap thing was nothing but a publicity stunt and the Oklahoman has complained about the police association and their attorneys not responding. That's because they feel they have not been treated fairly in this matter.

Box sent a letter to the association's attorney and almost instantly the association started receiving calls from the Oklahoman. How did this happen when the letter/offer was not a public document? The only logical conclusion is that Box fed this to the Oklahoman who went on to write a story in which Box accused the association of a "cash grab".

Keep in mind the two parties had already discussed this swap in the past and it had been rejected. So why the formal letter and Oklahoman interview with inflammatory language? Is that any way to find compromise or strike a real esate deal? Of course not and that was never the intention.

And since when is collecting parking revenues some sort of evil "money grab" scheme?? Box owns two lots immediately adjacent and charges for parking... Just a bunch of rhetoric especially when the money being grabbed by the association goes into a nonprofit that funds all types of community service endeavors, like providing the color guard at Thunder games, etc.

The irony is that as the Boxes were screaming bloody murder about preserving the park they were representing Braum's in their bid to demolish the Classen Circle buildings.

AND the city itself just built a 9-story parking structure directly south of the park in front of City Hall. This property doesn't even front the park -- it sits further back and faces the drive in front of the Civic Center.


I am no advocate for parking garages but the way this has been portrayed is absurd and completely unfair. And I don't see anything within the guidelines that prohibit a small garage with commercial space being built across the street from a park. In fact, this would be nicest private development in that area and would directly serve the much larger public good of ultimately freeing up those Main Street surface lots for the desired mixed-use projects.

[Ross MacLochness]

Has anyone actually stood in that park and looked in all directions?

To the north and south you have nothing but surface lots (including one owned by Box) and some small, generally ugly, lifeless 1- and 2-story buildings... And it's not like any of that is going away any time soon. Zero commercial space or really anything that interacts with the park. Also, there is parking on both sides of Colcord and Couch with a road running down the middle. All these properties are fairly removed from the park anyway.

Yes, I'm in the park every day.. Just because there isn't a whole lot of building interaction at the moment means we need another building that discourages activity? People do use this park on a day to day basis, especially people who live nearby in Avana arts and Park Harvey. More people would use it if more people were nearby.

Ask yourself why we have people lining up against this project while there was barely a peep when Devon sought approval for two ridiculously huge and monolithic garages that each border large existing city parking structures.

I would have had I been around.. Those things are massive and unfortunate as well esp. because they cut off Main St. I agree that the folks who have spoken up against this garage likely have ulterior motives. That doesn't validate that this garage should be built. Part of the reason this project is so unfortunate is because of it's proximity to the parking garage district.

Granted, this garage will actually have ground floor retail, looks ok, and might encourage other development so it's certainly better than a surface lot. I just think it's sad that another monolith is goin in this area when there is so much space already dedicated to parking in the area already. What's even the point of ground floor retail if the only other use of the area is for parking? It's a wasted opportunity to create more people oriented stuff in our civic center. Hopefully if this gets built it really will unlock development potential for the other lots.

Edit: I agree with you Pete that the portrayal of this project in the Oklahoman article was biased and unfair. I still don't like this being built here.

[king183]

Has anyone actually stood in that park and looked in all directions?

To the north and south you have nothing but surface lots (including one owned by Box) and some small, generally ugly, lifeless 1- and 2-story buildings... And it's not like any of that is going away any time soon. Zero commercial space or really anything that interacts with the park. Also, there is parking on both sides of Colcord and Couch with a road running down the middle. All these properties are fairly removed from the park anyway.

Ask yourself why we have people lining up against this project while there was barely a peep when Devon sought approval for two ridiculously huge and monolithic garages that each border large existing city parking structures.

What do you think the answer is? Are they worried a large portion of their revenue will be lost for events, compounded by the fact that occupancy is already low?

We have way too many garages in downtown. Building more, in my opinion, is short-sighted, and on only extends the shortcomings we have when it comes to walkability. Nevertheless, if the city is going to let others build disgusting--in size and design-- garages, this one should be allowed to move forward as well.

[Pete]

What do you think the answer is? Are they worried a large portion of their revenue will be lost for events, compounded by the fact that occupancy is already low?

See my post above yours.

Also, because no one dares speak against big business in this state. And in addition, Larry Nichols is the chair of both OCURA and The Alliance; the Chamber was also openly solicited support for that BOK project at the mayor's breakfast no less.


The simple truth is that developing those Main Street surface lots is a high priority in order to bridge the CBD with the huge investment being made in west downtown.

One little parking garage set way back from a little-used park seems like a very small price to pay in order to expedite the bigger picture... But somehow this has been portrayed as the worst thing that could ever happen downtown. Where was all this passion and conviction when 3 huge parking garages were recently approved and built a block away?

[Pete]

Edit: I agree with you Pete that the portrayal of this project in the Oklahoman article was biased and unfair. I still don't like this being built here.

I understand that and why others share this view.

At issue, though, is whether this falls within existing planning and design guidelines and it's hard to see how it doesn't.

In fact, it puts pressure back on the police association to facilitate the development of those Main Street lots, which would be a huge, huge deal. Imagine those lots with projects similar to West Village with this tiny little building across the street. Just not a big deal at all, even if it takes a while to get those lots under construction.

.

[riflesforwatie]

In fact, it puts pressure back on the police association to facilitate the development of those Main Street lots, which would be a huge, huge deal. Imagine those lots with projects similar to West Village with this tiny little building across the street. Just not a big deal at all, even if it takes a while to get those lots under construction.

I'm guessing the answer is 'no', but I have to ask: Is there an "if-then" mechanism in the DDRC process to force the Association to open their other West Main lots for development? (They were quoted in the Oklahoman as saying they didn't want to be landlords, so I'm assuming if this garage is built and solves their parking needs they'll be open to selling/leasing/developing their other property.)

[Pete]

There is no way to tie this approval to the future development of those lots, but they have stated that is their intention and why wouldn't they do it?

They would no longer need the surface parking and can make much more money by doing a ground lease (they don't want to sell) to a developer.

I know for a fact there are active deals being discussed.

[Pete]

Interesting to note that Hall Capital did not sell their property to 21c or the developers of West Village.

[Pete]

DDRC votes 3-1 to deny revised application.

The police association is almost certain to pursue their appeal.

[king183]

DDRC votes 3-1 to deny revised application.

The police association is almost certain to pursue their appeal.

Wow. On what basis? Did they give an explanation? This seems bordering on corruption.

[Pete]

Wow. On what basis? Did they give an explanation? This seems bordering on corruption.

Definitely not corruption, just a line of people swearing this is an incompatible use for this site and the committee agree.

The use is permitted, but there is also language in the guidelines that talk about compatible use and that's where this got hung up.

[Pete]

The end result of all the people that lined up and fought this like it was the Nazis trying to take Stalingrad is that they pretty much guaranteed the lots along Main Street will stay surface parking for a long, long time.

[Ross MacLochness]

The end result of all the people that lined up and fought this like it was the Nazis trying to take Stalingrad is that they pretty much guaranteed the lots along Main Street will stay surface parking for a long, long time.

Not as long of a time as the parking garage staying next to Bicentennial Park..

[Plutonic Panda]

^^+1 and it’s sad that a component of any development in DTOKC has to have parking. If the police association could find a way to add 1-2 levels of subterranean parking with one or two levels above ground with ground level retail and 2-3 stories of housing on top, that’d be a good plan. I’d only hope that there were housing units fronting the park instead of parking so the parking would be in the back half in the above ground floors.

[warreng88]

Police parking garage stalls again

By: Molly M. Fleming The Journal Record November 16, 2017

OKLAHOMA CITY – For the second time, a proposed parking garage at 601 W. Main St. was rejected by the Downtown Design Review Committee.

The first design was turned down in September by the same committee.

The parking lot is owned by the Oklahoma City Police Association. Hall Estill attorney Kent Gilliland, who represents the association, said the group will protest the decision to the Oklahoma City Board of Adjustment. Gilliland said the association needs the parking spaces. He said the group didn’t want to build a multifamily property on the site.

“We’re not commercial developers,” he said. “We need it for our employees.”

The DDRC’s decision rested on the proposed use for the land. The committee said little about the garage’s design, which was done by ADG Inc. architect Scott Dedmon.

The garage presented at Thursday’s meeting was five stories, with 13,000 square feet of ground-floor commercial retail space. It would have 207 parking spaces, including some available for monthly use by non-association members. The structure presented earlier this year was one story taller.

The garage’s north and south sides would face different areas, and Dedmon had accounted for that in his design. The side that faced Bicentennial Park and the other city operations’ buildings would be blonde brick, matching the surrounding area. The south exterior would have red brick since it faced Main Street. Dedmon’s design pulled from the other city and county buildings, using a decorative aluminum design on both sides above the retail space.
Gilliland said the parking garage fits within the allowed land use in the downtown design regulations.

Attorneys for nearby business operators said the use shouldn’t be allowed because a park is nearby and the site should be residential. Developer Richard McKown spoke against the proposed garage.

“I don’t want another fabulous residential project that I have to compete with, but it’s the right thing to do for downtown,” he said.

He said the city spent $5 million on renovating Bicentennial Park, and that the update should spur residential living. He said a garage is a self-storage unit for cars.

Attorney John Michael Williams, who has a law office next to the site, said he had a letter from developer Gary Brooks, who also was against the parking garage because the site should be for residential development. Williams said in the letter from Brooks that Brooks called the spot the best place for residential development in downtown because of the park frontage.

Besides a parking garage, other uses for the site allowed by downtown design regulations include a convenience store and a bingo hall.

“A bingo parlor would be far better than this parking garage,” McKown said, adding that at least it would bring people to the area for activities.

When the committee considered the decision, committee member Nathaniel Harding said he was voting against it because of use, not design. Architect Tony Blatt said he had nothing against the design, but it wasn’t compatible with the park. Julie Kriegel said she agreed with Blatt, that the garage wasn’t compatible.

Chairman Cory Baitz was the only vote in favor of the garage, arguing that is was compatible. He said it’s a mixed-use project since it has ground-floor retail space.

“If done well, a convenience store would be a good use being next to the park,” he said.

During the vote, the meeting became heated. While the committee voted, Dedmon approached the lectern, saying he had a question. Attorney Eric Groves quickly stood up and approached the microphone as well. He represented Williams.

Dedmon started speaking over the committee while the members were voting.

When Dedmon reached the lectern, Groves pulled the microphone away from him, tearing off the foam covering.

Groves said if Dedmon was able to make a final comment, then his client should get to give one as well.

The committee continued voting and turned down the project.

[king183]

Definitely not corruption, just a line of people swearing this is an incompatible use for this site and the committee agree.

The use is permitted, but there is also language in the guidelines that talk about compatible use and that's where this got hung up.

The incompatibility could be a good, valid argument. Not sure I see it given the other buildings that are in that area. On my previous reply I did something I can't stand when other people do: I immediately jumped to the worst possible conclusion of corruption. I think my head was back in the Rand Elliot debate on the Broadway building. I'll be sure to avoid that in the future.

[shawnw]

Imagine a bingo hall going in out of spite...

[HangryHippo]

Imagine a bingo hall going in out of spite...

LOL. I had this exact thought as well. That would be something.

[Pete]

This project goes before the Board of Adjustment on Thursday for appeal.