University Town Center

[jedicurt]

My stance on $200 million is if that can be done via TIF, a TIF or similar structure could be figured out for a better location. You really think UTC is a better location than on or near campus?.

okay. well a different development group has already purchased a majority of Campus Corner, so that's out as an option. and they can't use the TIF to build it on campus.... so where else would you put it? the reason that UTC is being looked at is because that is where the private part of this want to build it... that is where they think they can get the most investment to cover their part of it. again, we go back to the only two options... take the one on the table, because there have been years for an option to come forward and this is the only one that keeps coming up, or we wait another 2 decades to just put it back next to the current LNC. Those are the only options on the table. there is no Magical third option that is going to happen.

[UrbanistPoke]

It's just the difference between a donation and an investment. Don't confuse or equate the private investment into the development with booster money. It functions completely differently.

Most likely, this is just a commercial development group that believes they can include an entertainment venue and receive public assistance for that. OU basketball (and other indoor sports, I assume) are simply the anchor tenant. As for whether that is a good call for the University to participate, well, that would very much hinge on the terms of the lease, imo. The university does have some leverage in that because they own the land. So, it could be simply, "okay, you can develop the land, but we want an arena to be in the mix, we'll lease it for our teams and we can get public assistance to cover it." So, the University gets their land developed, the developers get some value add through public assistance, the athletic department gets a new facility, and the investors are hoping to get a return through revenue generated from the entire development mix.

So, there is no donor / booster opportunity cost going on here and this is the group that has emerged and is interested in developing this property in this way. So, "why aren't they doing this... why aren't they doing it over there... why not on campus... etc." is irrelevant as far as anyone knows, because this is the only group that is doing this. I'm sure if the campus corner developers were interested in building an arena for OU to use, the university would answer the phone. But this is where the school has some leverage and where there's investors willing to participate.

Simply put $800 million in investment in this development does not equate to reallocation of $800 million in potential facility donation money. It's not automatically the same money and it functions completely differently.

You can say it's a bad investment, but saying that money can just be flipped to another location or turned into a straight out donation doesn't really make sense.

Maybe some of my posts confused people because I was responding to various scenarios people threw out there.

OU does own the land around the current arena and they could conceptually build a new one on the parking lots and redevelop that entire area into a mixed-use development - that site isn't smaller than the UTC site and plenty of vacant land on the south side of campus that could become a massive mixed-use and walkable urban center all the way down to the National Weather Center (and a much better location for a weather museum too than UTC). I think that would be a far better spot and could utilize the same TIF/tax dollar recapturing that would pay for the arena on the UTC site. That is why I have a hard time believing the ONLY option is UTC. Campus Corner area and downtown Norman have plenty of spots an arena and mixed-use development could fit on.

It does seems that if OU wants to shift the risk off to Norman and taxpayers the UTC is the easiest option for them if they have support from city/county. If they did a TIF or some sort of tax $ recapture on the current arena's parking lots/site they would have to do the bonds themselves to do the construction and well that's where their credit ratings, debt, etc. become an issue. To do it on campus they'd be nearly doubling their current debt with little/no donor support for an arena (which just blows my mind how OU donors care that little about basketball and other sports that would use the venue). OU's past bad investments have tied their hands a bit in what they can/can not do in getting a new arena built, especially on campus and because of that it's a combination of various forces that have pushed this proposal which is a bad location away from campus, too small of size, etc. etc.

[jedicurt]

Maybe some of my posts confused people because I was responding to various scenarios people threw out there.

OU does own the land around the current arena and they could conceptually build a new one on the parking lots and redevelop that entire area into a mixed-use development - that site isn't smaller than the UTC site and plenty of vacant land on the south side of campus. I think that would be a far better spot and could utilize the same TIF/tax dollar recapturing that would pay for the arena on the UTC site. That is why I have a hard time believing the ONLY option is UTC. Campus Corner area and downtown Norman have plenty of spots an arena and mixed-use development could fit on.

It does seems that if OU wants to shift the risk off to Norman and taxpayers the UTC is the easiest option for them if they have support from city/county. If they did a TIF or some sort of tax $ recapture on the current arena's parking lots/site they would have to do the bonds themselves to do the construction and well that's where their credit ratings, debt, etc. become an issue. To do it on campus they'd be nearly doubling their current debt with little/no donor support for an arena (which just blows my mind how OU donors care that little about basketball and other sports that would use the venue). OU's past bad investments have tied their hands a bit in what they can/can not do in getting a new arena built, especially on campus and because of that it's a combination of various forces that have pushed this proposal which is a bad location away from campus, too small of size, etc. etc.

because the LNC is basically off campus by all real measure. students can't really just walk there, they all drive or take the bus. the reason UTC is a better option than near the current LNC is because people actually already go to UTC, why build mix use in the LNC parking lot? who would want to live there, people already say that because HW9 traffic is so bad, that is why they don't go to LNC, so people aren't going to go there to shop. you don't gain anything by building it there. UTC would cut a good 20 minutes off the drive to go to a basketball game for people living in OKC. that might actually entice them to come to a game. people already live and go to UTC to shop, so adding more shopping and mixed use development makes sense there.

yes, in a perfect world we could build it somewhere on campus, that was actually on campus, but that just doesn't appear to be a viable option at all. If we want a good development that might actually spur growth, and population traffic to an area, UTC destroys the parking lot of LNC in every category. If the purpose of putting an arena on campus is to get kids to walk to games, then LNC isn't the answer, because it's apparently already too far for the kids to feel the need to walk there. and that seems to be the only real argument i hear for why it needs to be on campus.

[UrbanistPoke]

okay. well a different development group has already purchased a majority of Campus Corner, so that's out as an option. and they can't use the TIF to build it on campus.... so where else would you put it? the reason that UTC is being looked at is because that is where the private part of this want to build it... that is where they think they can get the most investment to cover their part of it. again, we go back to the only two options... take the one on the table, because there have been years for an option to come forward and this is the only one that keeps coming up, or we wait another 2 decades to just put it back next to the current LNC. Those are the only options on the table. there is no Magical third option that is going to happen.

I'll try to clear this up one last time via Campus Corner. I know and taking what I was saying out of context. BTW there's several people on the campus corner thread talking about how OU can use eminent domain etc etc to help with Campus Corner redevelopment and other various things. I didn't make that up.

What I am saying is there are parking lots in that area an arena could fit on, which is true. Getting a hold of that site is another issue, yes - not denying that. OU could approach the developers buying up campus corner and other owners and work out a deal those just like UTC. OU owns the land yes, but they still have to have a private partner to do the mixed-use development around the arena or there is no TIF $$ to build the arena. It's not the same structure of private-public partnership but if they can work something out for UTC I have a hard time thinking they could with Campus Corner possibly.

I still think the parking lots and surrounding vacant land around LNC is a better site and OU owns that land already. Walking distance to campus, better suited for student housing expansion, campus related office research buildings, etc. etc.

[UrbanistPoke]

because the LNC is basically off campus by all real measure. students can't really just walk there, they all drive or take the bus. the reason UTC is a better option than near the current LNC is because people actually already go to UTC, why build mix use in the LNC parking lot? who would want to live there, people already say that because HW9 traffic is so bad, that is why they don't go to LNC, so people aren't going to go there to shop. you don't gain anything by building it there. UTC would cut a good 20 minutes off the drive to go to a basketball game for people living in OKC. that might actually entice them to come to a game. people already live and go to UTC to shop, so adding more shopping and mixed use development makes sense there.

yes, in a perfect world we could build it somewhere on campus, that was actually on campus, but that just doesn't appear to be a viable option at all. If we want a good development that might actually spur growth, and population traffic to an area, UTC destroys the parking lot of LNC in every category. If the purpose of putting an arena on campus is to get kids to walk to games, then LNC isn't the answer, because it's apparently already too far for the kids to feel the need to walk there. and that seems to be the only real argument i hear for why it needs to be on campus.

I do understand your point and why LNC feels like that and it's because of the built environment surrounding LNC. It is essentially built like it's an off campus commuter site. If the way to pay for a new arena though is via property taxes/sales taxes of surrounding development the LNC site is far better (demo LNC and build a new arena, not saying keep LNC - tear it down after the new facility is done and then could redevelop the rest of the site and surrounding areas). If it was turned into a mixed-use urban center and areas around it, the walk from campus would feel like no big deal walking past retail, housing, etc... unlike it does now because you're walking across mostly barren land and massive parking lots. The failures of LNC are being repeated with the UTC site except that they plan to place a few strip centers in front of the arena walking from the massive surface parking lots so you're last 100 feet into the arena won't feel as awful. Now you'll have to convince a disinterested fan base of students to go even further via car or bus to get to it and you couldn't even get them to LNC.

Edit: While the location would be slightly closer in to OKC - this site will only have 1 ingress/egress point via 24th if you're using I-35 from north or south to access Norman. Just think about that... if you think traffic is an issue on Highway 9. The ingress/egress of the south campus area is a lot better than funneling 5,000 plus cars if the arena is sold out to the Tecumseh and Robinson on/off ramps and then forcing everyone to turn left from Robinson to 24th or go into 24th off an inadequate interchange off Tecumseh. That's why suburban strip centers are a bad idea for stuff like this. If you think it's hard to get into LNC just wait. That's even more public dollars that will have to go into building out additional infrastructure to ease traffic in and out. That will be a net negative to retailers on event days/nights for an area that already has healthy enough traffic for suburban retailers. You're mixing incompatible types of development/users. Even for local traffic, Rock Creek is your only other east/west option to get to another north/south road and only can take you west to an inadequate 36th for a large event traffic event like this. The airport isn't going anywhere anytime soon so no way to add east/west road connections either. Adding an on/off ramp at Rock Creek would have $25+ million easily too to add another ingress/egress point from I-35.

It's a difference of opinion if you like UTC better than a south campus site like the LNC parking lots, etc. I still think it's a massive mistake and only sucks development away from campus that could have been done to make the university more desirable for students with more retail, housing, etc. within walking distance and not via car miles away. OU has the benefit of being in a major metro and in the largest suburb of the metro and just wastes the opportunity of its location that baffles me so much. It has a lot of things OSU could never replicate in a market size perspective of being able to do really great campus developments/mixed-use stuff and have a tenant list that would locate there given the metro size. There isn't a reason why retailers like Trader Joes, etc. wouldn't be interested in a well done mixed-use neighborhood that went from Highway 9 north toward the main part of campus that couldn't be replicated at UTC.

[BimmerSooner]

Just move on dude. Let it go. Life’s short.

I don’t know what your day job is, but you’ve spent quite a bit of time, effort and characters on this thread.

Surely there’s more out there for you.

[UrbanistPoke]

Just move on dude. Let it go. Life’s short.

I don’t know what your day job is, but you’ve spent quite a bit of time, effort and characters on this thread.

Surely there’s more out there for you.

Another triggered Sooner I see. You do understand what the internet is and a forum right? The very one you're posting to now... you can move on too and not post or not read my comments, yet you took the time out of your day because you wanted to. What's your day job? I don't post that often but this was entertaining given the hysteria from OU fans that came my way for no reason when I've said very little negative things about any of this. It's comical. Sooner fans are so sensitive on here, hate to see what happens to people in the real world.

[unfundedrick]

I don't think I've ever seen any poster here before who completely understands everything about everyone else and is so adept at rationalizing his own posts, even when shown to not be accurate. He is certainly entitled to his opinion but 90 percent of what he says is just opinion and worth nothing more than that. So I'm sure I will be lambasted next as an OU apologist. LOL

[Watermelonsugar]

My thoughts exactly, looks like a giant parking lot from above. I am never too excited about these unwalkable car centric developments.

[Jeremy Martin]

I know it's too late for this now but I think the duck pond would make a great spot for a new arena. Just sayin.

[rcjunkie]

Good location but not enough space

[bombermwc]

So question like some of the others are leading to here. Since OU is not contributing to the venue (understandably) I wonder if Harroz's goal is to use this as a buffer. Play here for a bit and see how it goes and then start a fundraising campaign for a LNC replacement.

LNC is too valuable as a space for parking for football and regular commuter parking, so you won't see the actual lot itself going anywhere. But if LNC is dozed (or dug up, whatever you want to call it) while they play at University Town Center , then there's freedom to start over and not have to worry about location.

My concern then becomes, what is Norman going to do to keep that size of an arena busy if/when OU moves out. That's a pretty good sized venue at 11k. It could host a ton of graduations (if the price is right). There are hotels nearby for some 2nd tier conventions...but they aren't walking distance close, which is a downside. So does it become an Olympic type venue then, where it just sits and collects dust for 30 years as it stagnates? That's all assuming OU doesn't stay there. If it does stay, well there's nothing to worry about. It's going to be plenty busy.

If OU does stay, i'm also wondering if OU rebuilds the practice facilities (which i hear always leak in the rain for some reason...or at least used to).

[jdross1982]

So question like some of the others are leading to here. Since OU is not contributing to the venue (understandably) I wonder if Harroz's goal is to use this as a buffer. Play here for a bit and see how it goes and then start a fundraising campaign for a LNC replacement.

LNC is too valuable as a space for parking for football and regular commuter parking, so you won't see the actual lot itself going anywhere. But if LNC is dozed (or dug up, whatever you want to call it) while they play at University Town Center , then there's freedom to start over and not have to worry about location.

My concern then becomes, what is Norman going to do to keep that size of an arena busy if/when OU moves out. That's a pretty good sized venue at 11k. It could host a ton of graduations (if the price is right). There are hotels nearby for some 2nd tier conventions...but they aren't walking distance close, which is a downside. So does it become an Olympic type venue then, where it just sits and collects dust for 30 years as it stagnates? That's all assuming OU doesn't stay there. If it does stay, well there's nothing to worry about. It's going to be plenty busy.

If OU does stay, i'm also wondering if OU rebuilds the practice facilities (which i hear always leak in the rain for some reason...or at least used to).

I believe OU would have to commit to a long term lease in the range of 20-25 years. The size of the arena I have heard is between 8-10 k which makes a lot of sense as you build bigger (increased cost) you are just trying to compete with Paycom and the new Thunder arena which doesn't make much sense. This size allows OU to use it 40-50 (maybe 60) nights a year between Men's and Women's basketball and Gymnastics. I see it hosting another few tournaments for HS (volleyball, basketball, gymnastics etc) which could take up to another 20-30 nights of action. The rest would be up to the developer to fill the space.

[jdross1982]

Just a comparison of size between UNP, Campus Corner and LNC.

Campus Corner area is roughly 52 acres.
LNC area is roughly 59 acres.
UNP (the area dedicated to this development only) 208 acres. Neither CC nor LNC compares in size and quite frankly doesn't compare with infrastructure either.

[BoulderSooner]

A full on clown show. When did this become public money paying for the arena? Everyone else is saying the max public investment is like $20-30 million via TIF and it's being paid for via private $$$.

If it's public money paying $200 million for an arena for OU to use at UTC, good luck ever getting that built. You really expect the 100,000+ non OU students that are residents of Norman to pick up the tab for OU when they couldn't get an on campus arena funded. Brilliant idea there. Just like it being paid for via 'private' investment too.

you are the clown who clearly doesn't understand this project ..

[BoulderSooner]

because the LNC is basically off campus by all real measure. students can't really just walk there, they all drive or take the bus. the reason UTC is a better option than near the current LNC is because people actually already go to UTC, why build mix use in the LNC parking lot? who would want to live there, people already say that because HW9 traffic is so bad, that is why they don't go to LNC, so people aren't going to go there to shop. you don't gain anything by building it there. UTC would cut a good 20 minutes off the drive to go to a basketball game for people living in OKC. that might actually entice them to come to a game. people already live and go to UTC to shop, so adding more shopping and mixed use development makes sense there.

yes, in a perfect world we could build it somewhere on campus, that was actually on campus, but that just doesn't appear to be a viable option at all. If we want a good development that might actually spur growth, and population traffic to an area, UTC destroys the parking lot of LNC in every category. If the purpose of putting an arena on campus is to get kids to walk to games, then LNC isn't the answer, because it's apparently already too far for the kids to feel the need to walk there. and that seems to be the only real argument i hear for why it needs to be on campus.

also the majority of season ticket holders live north of norman in the OKC metro and this reduces the travel time by almost 30 min ..

it also gives before and after the game beverage options ..

there have been several season ticket holder surveys about this possibility going back years and years ... (and then of course the public survey from this year )

there was a LNC reno plan from over a decade ago and it was 175 mil ... there is simply not funding for that ...


the options are this plan or no arena for another 20 years ..


this is very much UNP ... but they are clearly rebranding it to get away from the UNP stigma ...

where do people think the 200 mil of public money is going to go ... (this area is already primed for development and the major roads are already built)

[BoulderSooner]

So question like some of the others are leading to here. Since OU is not contributing to the venue (understandably) I wonder if Harroz's goal is to use this as a buffer. Play here for a bit and see how it goes and then start a fundraising campaign for a LNC replacement.

LNC is too valuable as a space for parking for football and regular commuter parking, so you won't see the actual lot itself going anywhere. But if LNC is dozed (or dug up, whatever you want to call it) while they play at University Town Center , then there's freedom to start over and not have to worry about location.

My concern then becomes, what is Norman going to do to keep that size of an arena busy if/when OU moves out. That's a pretty good sized venue at 11k. It could host a ton of graduations (if the price is right). There are hotels nearby for some 2nd tier conventions...but they aren't walking distance close, which is a downside. So does it become an Olympic type venue then, where it just sits and collects dust for 30 years as it stagnates? That's all assuming OU doesn't stay there. If it does stay, well there's nothing to worry about. It's going to be plenty busy.

If OU does stay, i'm also wondering if OU rebuilds the practice facilities (which i hear always leak in the rain for some reason...or at least used to).

they are building a new hotel ..

OU is currently upgrading the practice facilities they will stay where they are for a long period of time (the BG performance center is also there and is first class)

[BoulderSooner]

I still think the parking lots and surrounding vacant land around LNC is a better site and OU owns that land already. Walking distance to campus, better suited for student housing expansion, campus related office research buildings, etc. etc.

you can think this it is just not correct in any way


if money was not a concern .. the location for the new arena would be on the north east corner of Jenkins and brooks .. that is the one spot with enough room to actually build a new arena ..

but that still doesn't solve the 30 min time savings that this location does ..

[BG918]

you can think this it is just not correct in any way


if money was not a concern .. the location for the new arena would be on the north east corner of Jenkins and brooks .. that is the one spot with enough room to actually build a new arena ..

but that still doesn't solve the 30 min time savings that this location does ..

But makes it harder for students to go to games. Sorry this is a stupid decision that OU will regret IF it moves forward. I have my doubts.

[chssooner]

But makes it harder for students to go to games. Sorry this is a stupid decision that OU will regret IF it moves forward. I have my doubts.

Students don't go to football games, let alone basketball games. Quit making this about students. If students cared, they'd go to LNC. It's a 10 minute drive. There are no on-campus locations for an arena of this size. You can't just imagine and child-like grandeur 70+ acres from thin air.

OU won't regret it. LNC is a dump, and can be torn down and made into a mixed-use area benefitting the students and citizens of Norman. But it isn't big enough for an arena to be constructed while still housing LNC. What? Is OU supposed to try to schedule around the Thunder in OKC for 2 years AND pay rent to OKC? Good luck with that.

So many fiscal advantages to this plan. And it generates additional revenue from the areas surrounding said new arena.

I get some want to be skeptics for the sake of being skeptical. But your reasoning is flawed. Students are a money loser at arenas and stadiums. And OU could build an arena on top of dorms, and students STILL wouldn't go. If they don't go and show out for football games, they never will for basketball.

[SEMIweather]

But makes it harder for students to go to games. Sorry this is a stupid decision that OU will regret IF it moves forward. I have my doubts.

Agree. It's not going to rescue the basketball program, instead it's just going to incentivize OU's donor base to remain lazy and football focused. I have been closely following OU basketball for over a decade...the apathy by people who actually have the power to change things is absolutely suffocating the program and this won't fix it, it's just kicking the can down the road for another 20-30 years.

[BoulderSooner]

But makes it harder for students to go to games. Sorry this is a stupid decision that OU will regret IF it moves forward. I have my doubts.

pretty much all students currently drive to games .. all the students also drive to the target in the UNP development ..

if they want to go they will go ..

[BoulderSooner]

Agree. It's not going to rescue the basketball program, instead it's just going to incentivize OU's donor base to remain lazy and football focused. I have been closely following OU basketball for over a decade...the apathy by people who actually have the power to change things is absolutely suffocating the program and this won't fix it, it's just kicking the can down the road for another 20-30 years.

i have been following the OU basketball program closely for 40 years ... if this project doesn't happen it is a non renovated LNC for another 15 years Minimum (more like 20-25)

[SEMIweather]

i have been following the OU basketball program closely for 40 years ... if this project doesn't happen it is a non renovated LNC for another 15 years Minimum (more like 20-25)

Yes...because of donor apathy. I'm in agreement with you on the potential outcomes here...all I'm saying is that playing in a new arena at the UTC as opposed to continuing to play at the LNC for the next 15-25 years is not going to be a panacea for the issues that have caused the basketball program to backslide since the end of the Sampson era.

[FighttheGoodFight]

Students 100% still had to drive to games at LNC. They also give away free tickets with football and no one goes. Students like football (for a quarter or two) and everything else is secondary.

I am sure they will have ample shuttles running from campus to the new arena.