REHCO / Former Downtown Ford site

[Plutonic Panda]

And again, the national office market is chaotic right now and probably headed for a sea change before things are sorted out. If office was going to be a part of any planned development it would DEFINITELY warrant a wait-and-see approach.

Look, if they would just consider a strip mall that had amenities we don’t have downtown like a city target, 7 eleven, CVS, we could redevelop it in 5-10 ye…

/s

In all seriousness with this property I completely agree with a wait and see approach rather than my ideology for getting development for the COOP site.

[Rover]

There are many on these boards who apparently think development is like playing Sim City. Development has never been easy, but as Urbanized points out, is as difficult now as it’s ever been. Most have no clue of the financial commitments and risk involved. Anyone can conceptualize great looking buildings fitting rigid urbanism dogma. Getting those to work financially is way more difficult than most even imagine.

This develop on demand attitude is unrealistic. OKC doesn’t demand development at any cost. We love it, but serious money people tread carefully when investing here.

[Just the facts]

Tax parking at a much higher rate and see who cries the loudest. Then you will know what business they are in.

[Laramie]

Tax parking at a much higher rate and see who cries the loudest. Then you will know what business they are in.

Afraid that the only problem with raising the rate of taxes on parking, the council affects all paved surface parking lots. Owners will past that tax on to the customers.

[Teo9969]

In a lot of ways, this site is make or break for Downtown. Perhaps not make or break in terms of downtown being a great deatination in the center for the residents of OKC to come together as a community.

I do think it's a make or break site in terms of whether or not we are going to ever be a serious contender for a Tier II city. Ultimately, some element of this site needs to contain something that is unique in the city/state and also something that stands out in the region. In a lot of ways, the site needs to be able to gather thousands of people into one place and serve the surrounding area.

This site very likely has a huge footprint of building(s) that are 15-45 stories which means it's going to take north of $1B to develop in 2025+ dollars. You can't rush the confluence of things that need to come together to ensure the right thing is built here and the point about the future of the Thunder absolutely matters.

Something we should consider: the performance of the Convention Center will greatly impact the floor count of a very probable hotel on the site, so a few years is most welcome.


I will say that I agree some things should be done to beautify this area. A food truck park is likely viable for at least 5 years and would have so much success with the parks and different events that congregate in that area.

[Just the facts]

This site very likely has a huge footprint of building(s) that are 15-45 stories which means it's going to take north of $1B to develop in 2025+ dollars.

They don't have to develop the whole site at once. My guess is they want to sell it to the city for a new arena, then used the windfall profits to fund development on their property in midtown. In the meantime nothing gets developed for the next 10 years.

[catch22]

Everything is a conspiracy to have surface parking.

Urbanized is as close to the heartbeat on these things as anyone can get without being directly involved and displays wisdom beyond his years in interpreting that pulse. I would bet his opinion is as close to reality on this matter as is possible.

[Just the facts]

What exactly is Urbanized's opinion with regard to this site? It will get developed when it gets developed and not a second sooner? That is a pretty bold stance to take.

[Canoe]

They don't have to develop the whole site at once. My guess is they want to sell it to the city for a new arena, then used the windfall profits to fund development on their property in midtown. In the meantime nothing gets developed for the next 10 years.

They wouldnt sell it to the city at a fair price for core to shore. The city will not overpay to place a stadium there in the future.

[Plutonic Panda]

What exactly is Urbanized's opinion with regard to this site? It will get developed when it gets developed and not a second sooner? That is a pretty bold stance to take.

On one thread you’re arguing with me and agreeing with Urbanized about my stance on the COOP site but here you’re taking a complete opposite stance. What’s the deal?

[Oski]

There are many on these boards who apparently think development is like playing Sim City. Development has never been easy, but as Urbanized points out, is as difficult now as it’s ever been. Most have no clue of the financial commitments and risk involved. Anyone can conceptualize great looking buildings fitting rigid urbanism dogma. Getting those to work financially is way more difficult than most even imagine.

This develop on demand attitude is unrealistic. OKC doesn’t demand development at any cost. We love it, but serious money people tread carefully when investing here.

Yes, I always think if you desperately wish to see something developed, you should become a developer.

[G.Walker]

They don't have to develop the whole site at once. My guess is they want to sell it to the city for a new arena, then used the windfall profits to fund development on their property in midtown. In the meantime nothing gets developed for the next 10 years.

I agree, in 10 years, they will be saying the same thing: "It will get developed when the market allows it", lol.

[Just the facts]

Ah yes the old, why don't you do it argument. I'm not a developer so it isn't my job to do it.

It really comes down to this. The taxpayers have spent a lot of money in this area; MBG, Scissortail, Convention Center, Streetcar, OMNI, and OKC Blvd. The expectation that taxpayers had was that this spending would spur adjacent economic development. However, the three largest landowners in the area aren't doing their part. Instead of building off the tax dollars spent they either do nothing or sell parking, all the while repeaing the benefit of increased property values.

The carrot has not worked and it is getting close to time that we need to use the switch. OKC is on the verge of squandering billions in public dollars. Why do I say this? Look where the most organic growth has been occuring: midtown, OAK, Deep Duce, and the far flung edges of the city. The places that have NOT received billions in taxpayer dollars. In many cases the exact sames landowners are the ones developing these other areas.

What we are seeing play out on this message board is the difference between spectators and activists. The spectators comes here to learn what is going on, add some commentary, and then accept whatever happens. The activists come here to change the course of events, be it new urbanism principles, land value taxation, TIF, etc...

I have come to think that OKC has approached downtown revitalization all wrong. In fact most cities are getting it wrong. We stimulated growth through government spending. Direct spending through MAPS, indirect spending through TIFs, grants, forgivable loans, property tax abatement, etc... But the benefits of those only last as long as the handouts keep coming, and when we get to properties like the Ford site, Lumberyard, Strawberry Fields, and Coop the City has no mechanism to force movement.

If you play poker then you know that anties, big and small blinds are there to force action on the table. Without them a person could just fold every hand. That is fine for the person folding but not great for the other players, or the person waiting on the outside that can't get a seat at the table.

We need big and small blinds for developers. Bet or pay the penalty for sitting at the table and doing nothing. If they can't or don't want to then let someone else play. You can't tell me that there isn't a project right now that wouldn't be profitable on the Ford site. There are probably hundreds of developers that could turn that vacant lot into a profitable project - if they owned the land.

We need to get that land into the hands of one of those other people, so what is the best ways to do it? More government spending in the area with TIFs and MAPS? That hasn't worked so far. It is time to play hardball and make parking lots and vacant lots unprofitable. If anyone has a suggestion on how to do that speak up.

Finally, let's stop pretending that the developer profession is some field that only the smartest and greatest can aspire to. Trump was a developer, made billions, and most of you think he is the dumbest guy on the planet and the most evil since Hitler. Being a developer is not difficult. Any of us could go do it right now, but it does come with risk so most of us don't do it and we choose to earn our income in other pursuits.

[Oski]

Finally, let's stop pretending that the developer profession is some field that only the smartest and greatest can aspire to. Trump was a developer, made billions, and most of you think he is the dumbest guy on the planet and the most evil since Hitler. Being a developer is not difficult. Any of us could go do it right now, but it does come with risk so most of us don't do it and we choose to earn our income in other pursuits.

I'm a developer, and I disagree. It's very difficult! It's very difficult to convince people to give you the money to build anything, because people are smart with their money, and it's too expensive to do it yourself. It's very difficult to build something that works as well (ask Devon and BOK), what's the point of building a castle and leaving it sit vacant for a hundred years because nobody needs it, how the investors will get their money back, what if it's a bad project to start with, knock it down and building something else later? I'm sure that if you can find the developers who have the brains and pockets to make this site work, the owner will be happy to hand off their land. Figuring out ways to navigate risks isn't easy, that's why most people don't do it. What you're saying is like: all of us can cross the Sahara, the risks are we may get lost and run out of water, that's why most of us don't do it. Yes, that's simple.

Btw, I believe many smart people don't think Trump is dumb either, and not sure if Hitler was dumb either, but I'm sure he was an evil.

[G.Walker]

If Randy Hogan can pull off building four 24-26 story high rises between a railroad track and a Uhaul storage, you can't tell me nothing can't work right now for this Ford site.

[Just the facts]

If Randy Hogan can pull off building four 24-26 story high rises between a railroad track and a Uhaul storage, you can't tell me nothing can't work right now for this Ford site.

I think this is an exact illustration of the problem OKC is facing right now. It took four 24 story buildings and 26 years to nudge out parking.

[Oski]

If Randy Hogan can pull off building four 24-26 story high rises between a railroad track and a Uhaul storage, you can't tell me nothing can't work right now for this Ford site.

I'm sure lots of things can work in that piece of land, but if they aren't what the owners want to see there, they won't happen. If the owners want to build the tallest building in OKC, designed by Renzo Piano or Norman Foster there we have to wait then because it's their land, their dream, their pride, and their plan. If I have a piece of land, I know if I build a self-storage facility, I'll can sell it and make a quick profit, but I don't want that, I think it's better for the neighborhood, and the city if I build a mixed-use there, and if it isn't the right time, I'll sit on that land and wait (to do the right thing).

[Just the facts]

I'm sure lots of things can work in that piece of land, but if they aren't what the owners want to see there, they won't happen. If the owners want to build the tallest building in OKC, designed by Renzo Piano or Norman Foster there we have to wait then because it's their land, their dream, their pride, and their plan. If I have a piece of land, I know if I build a self-storage facility, I'll can sell it and make a quick profit, but I don't want that, I think it's better for the neighborhood, and the city if I build a mixed-use there, and if it isn't the right time, I'll sit on that land and wait (to do the right thing).

See, that is where the difference in philosophy comes in. The taxpayers have a bigger vested interest in the property than the owner does.

If downtown vacant property owners came out against all the tax dollars spent then they could say yes, the property value went up, but it was against their will. But they didn't.

Taxpayers invested a lot of money to improve the likelyhood that these properties would get developed, add to the tax base, provide housing, provide urban amenities, and otherwise increase the quality of life. Taxpayers didn't do it for this land to sit unused.

MAPS was a great catalyst to get the ball rolling but every developer that bought into it has already acted in good faith. It is now the holdouts that need to be proded.

I seriously doubt Hall Capitol is sitting on some shovel ready grand plan that they are just waiting for the economics to be right and then spring it into action. We are leaving years of low interest rates, easy money, and high demand for downtown housing. It isn't going to get any better than it has been. The ship sailed and they didn't get on.

[Oski]

See, that is where the difference in philosophy comes in. The taxpayers have a bigger vested interest in the property than the owner does.

If downtown vacant property owners came out against all the tax dollars spent then they could say yes, the property value went up, but it was against their will. But they didn't.

So, if your HOA wants to raise the fee to build a playground, swimming pool, new walls, and have better landscaping, you agree the extra fee, because that will add value to your property, say an empty lot, it's your responsibility to build something, even a 1 B/1B there, so it's no long an vacant lot to please your neighbors or the mailman? What if you don't want a 1B/1B, but you can't afford anything more than that right now?

The owners are lucky, they bought the right piece of land, that's it. You can make this city better by filling up all the smaller holes in Plaza, Uptown, Midtown, Paseo, etc. which are much less risky, and you know you can do it easily.

[Rover]

See, that is where the difference in philosophy comes in. The taxpayers have a bigger vested interest in the property than the owner does.

If downtown vacant property owners came out against all the tax dollars spent then they could say yes, the property value went up, but it was against their will. But they didn't.

Taxpayers invested a lot of money to improve the likelyhood that these properties would get developed, add to the tax base, provide housing, provide urban amenities, and otherwise increase the quality of life. Taxpayers didn't do it for this land to sit unused.

MAPS was a great catalyst to get the ball rolling but every developer that bought into it has already acted in good faith. It is now the holdouts that need to be proded.

I seriously doubt Hall Capitol is sitting on some shovel ready grand plan that they are just waiting for the economics to be right and then spring it into action. We are leaving years of low interest rates, easy money, and high demand for downtown housing. It isn't going to get any better than it has been. The ship sailed and they didn't get on.

So, you are saying the taxpayers should control the property and make the decisions about use, scale, level of investment etc. The owners then should be the financiers and the property managers? Good luck with that concept. Who has the say for the taxpayers? You? The city? Your “party”? The competitors? The readers of this board?

So, for your solution the “state” should own and control the properties on behalf of the people. Sounds a whole lot like central planning. I’ve seen first hand with how that works around the world. Careful that you get what you are fantasizing about.

[Just the facts]

Oski - HOA's do exactly as you just mentioned. It is literally their prinary responsibility. They increase property values for everyone by punishing those at the bottom and maintaing amenities for the common good. Here in Florida you pay the new fee or incur the penalty, which can now be the HOA taking your house from you instead of just a fine.

Rover, the City Council is the entity responsible for being good stewards of the funds entrusted to them. It is ultimately up to them to decide.

[Oski]

Oski - HOA's do exactly as you just mentioned. It is literally their prinary responsibility. They increase property values for everyone by punishing those at the bottom and maintaing amenities for the common good.

Rover, the City Council is the entity responsible for being good stewards of the funds entrusted to them.

I'd suggest that you should try to build something small, a house, or a gas station, to learn all the ins and outs of RE development and realize that it's a crime to be careless, thoughtless with other people's money. SimCity is the only place you can build and knock down something fast and free.

[Just the facts]

Well, I've said my peace for now so I'll give someone else the last word.

[HOT ROD]

Guys, many cities have prime lots that sit vacant for years/decades. Here in Seattle, there is a square block that I believe used to house the original Seattle CIty Hall - that has been vacant for at least a decade or two. the site is right across the street from Seattle's tallest building and all around it are fully developed. there have been plans to build but nothing has panned out, despite construction in the northern part of downtown and south lake union courtesy of Amazon.

What I'm saying is, sometimes these prime sites sit for a while so the right development can be worked out. OKC has a couple of notable sites but that's a good thing to have. My only issue is as many have said, can they at least clean up and/or restrict the site? The city could get behind this and require them to clean it up; at least like Stage Center (oh grief) has been "integrated" into the city until it can be developed.

[Bits_Of_Real_Panther]

Sometimes that east west road splitting the blighted lots will have overlooked available street parking. For people who don't want to pay to park at street meters or pay lots.

How long is this structure supposed to be in use?