Core to Shore

[rcjunkie]

How long have you?

I haven't, but I don't pretend to be an expert and know what and won't work.

[Just the facts]

I haven't, but I don't pretend to be an expert and know what and won't work.

Well then if you don't know what you are talking about maybe you should sit down and be quite, and let the adults discuss the issues.

My guess is you didn't like me questioning your right to discuss the issues of the day. BTW - I have seen your posts on the politics page. How long have you been in Congress?

[rcjunkie]

Well then if you don't know what you are talking about maybe you should sit down and be quite, and let the adults discuss the issues.

My guess is you didn't like me questioning your right to discuss the issues of the day. BTW - I have seen your posts on the politics page. How long have you been in Congress?

The difference being that I state what I believe without claiming to know everything. Nice try though.

[Fantastic]

Great, here we go... Seems like the New Convention Center thread all over again...

Look, guys, we are all here to discuss our opinions, even argue back and forth about them, but when two parties refuse to yield it always ends up the same: Party A, "Since when have you been an expert in ______?" Party B: "Acctually, since _____, and because of that I know what I'm talking about, and you don't." Cue the personal attacks... page after page after page, and at some point it stops being relevent.

Just chill out, guys.

[Just the facts]

You're right Fantastic but there seems to be a reoccurring theme on OKCTalk. There are essentially two kinds of people on OKCTalk. The first group looks at the news and events of the day and comments on them – good or bad. The second group comments on the people in group one. It usually consist of "you don't live in OKC" or "you're not an expert". It gets old.

In the spirit of burying the hatchet - I have decided not join group 2 and take back my comment. So where were we?

[Urban Pioneer]

I have heard two comments from other committee members as we were not informed of this study.

1. Who requested the study and why?

2. Who were the "stakeholders and interested parties" that were interviewed?

I also think the questions regarding the streetcar- "What is the rider profile? and Who is this transit serving?" sound like they were tacked onto the list of questions about The Edge development. lol

I'm going to re-ask these questions again.

[jungmuny]

In the past it has appeared that Cornett and the Council have had this MO with MAPS: After the referendum has passed, acted like some new information has been discovered by a consulting firm, information that goes against voter mandate. This then allows them to reappropriate the revenue by blaming it on consultants (think P180 projections being off by 100%), thereby insulating themselves from public backlash and keeping the tax revenue spigot at full blast.

[krisb]

A "center for conventions" that connects with pedestrians on the street level. This gives me hope.

[RodH]

I am curious how it could be done better. Genuinely curious. These costs must be incredibly difficult to estimate without engineering having been done first. And engineering costs are going to come out of the funding of the project. So how can OKC get better numbers without accurate engineering done first?

This.

[Just the facts]

I have heard two comments from other committee members as we were not informed of this study.

1. Who requested the study and why?

2. Who were the "stakeholders and interested parties" that were interviewed?

I also think the questions regarding the streetcar- "What is the rider profile? and Who is this transit serving?" sound like they were tacked onto the list of questions about The Edge development. lol

Your guess is as good as anyone’s. I can tell you the Convention Center Committee and Devon Energy were well represented. At least they stopped with the ‘vibrations’ concern.

[jungmuny]

The engineering is important but it should be funded separately from the major funding referendums. I remember being about 10 years old and thinking, they think they can build a lengthy canal for $8 million? It came in at $20 m.
But the streetcar issue isn't about engineering. They are asking who is going to use it and "What is is the rider profile?". This has a criminal connotation. The voters who passed the proposal, that's who! I am just saying they are laying the groudwork to reneg on the streetcar.

edit: Btw I'm not morally opposed to this type of political maneuvering, just passionate about the streetcar.

[Just the facts]

... I am just saying they are laying the groudwork to reneg on the streetcar.

This has been my fear from day one and have been warning against it every chance I get.

[Urban Pioneer]

It looks like it was done by ADG (I know you know that) and I wonder if it was simply something they put together voluntarily. Not sure how much difference there is from this "study" and collecting existing notes and slides into this document. Just a thought.

Your being too kind. This is a position statement from a select group of individuals. And I don't mean our good mayor and city council. To call it a "study" is a genuine stretch.

It is a survey at best of undefined individuals with no solicited broad public input.

[BigD Misey]

sit down and be quite

I haven’t been in the construction and development game for about 6 years now so ill be quite quiet after these Messages:

If OKC is serious about being a player for corporations and conventions and continuing the dream of being an 'elite' city (and I believe everyone on this board is), OKC NEEDS convention facilities and not just a mediocre one. Granted the population and corporate presence and tourism of cities like Houston, Chicago, Vegas, Orlando and LA warrant 2 or 3 Tier 1&2 CC’s, but it goes to show: You need a Jewel that catches people’s eye.

May as well get used to OKC progressing without your consent JTF.
Surely you aren’t suggesting OKC (metro population 1.25M) lag FURTHER behind cities like Omaha (population 1.2 mill in metro area/ final cost 291M), Savannah (200k population: final cost 197M) -or- Nashville (population 1.5M - proposed REBUILD of CC cost 595M), all of whom already have a running start on OKC.

I think the city has done great in the last 10-15 years even with perceived imperfections in the original plan, and considering the overruns in the past. Hopefully It won’t slow down soon.

With Boeing, the Energy hubs, the Thunder and the River events becoming a real player in the downtown area, OKC will be getting allot of attention quickly and when they see the Cox (arena) convention center, nobody will be thinking "THATS a beautiful place, we want to go out of our way to go there for our convention!" Just keepin it real...OKC needs a really nice CC, other cities have already started to remedy their viability.

[Spartan]

An arms race indeed.

[Just the facts]

If OKC is serious about being a player for corporations and conventions and continuing the dream of being an 'elite' city (and I believe everyone on this board is), OKC NEEDS convention facilities and not just a mediocre one.

Here we are in the catch 22 position again. The chamber says 2/3 of convention center visitors are local. If the goal is to expand the other 1/3 then we aren't going to do it with the convention center proposed. We need to spend way more than $250 million. Of course, the Chamber already knows this and called the MAPS III CC a phase 1, with a phase 2 to come later? Where do they plan on building this phase 2 by selecting a land-locked location for phase 1?

I am all for the convention center (I can't seem to repeat this enough), I just wish they would move it from the current location to a place that would allow for contiguous expansion while reserving prime space for private development. MBG is supposed to be a driver of private development but how can that be accomplished if the City keeps building publicly funded projects around it? I don't know why that doesn't make sense.

[kevinpate]

Call me cynical if you must, but yeah .... if you are rabid about , or even mildly interested in, the streetcar coming to life, it would be good to be even more vigilant than ever before. That mess contains questions that were pretty much already answered (my opinion) but as the answers are not appreciated, it seems the tactic is to just ask all over again. But, who will be getting asked if that happens?

[ABryant]

That PDF was like watching a high school student project created the night before it was due. The language was atrocious. There was very little information given that could not be assumed from the body of information known to the general public. Even worse, this half baked "study" claimed that the street car route needed an additional "study". Do they expect to be paid by the city to author the needed streetcar study?

[Just the facts]

That PDF was like watching a high school student project created the night before it was due. The language was atrocious. There was very little information given that could not be assumed from the body of information known to the general public. Even worse, this half baked "study" claimed that the street car route needed an additional "study". Do they expect to be paid by the city to author the needed streetcar study?

That particular question is a tough one for me as I personally don't like the route selected nor the use of couplets, but I resigned myself to the fact that the decision had already been made so I stopped bring it up. A question about the route doesn't concern me near as much as questions about whether we should have a system at all.

[Jchaser405]

Here we are in the catch 22 position again. The chamber says 2/3 of convention center visitors are local. If the goal is to expand the other 1/3 then we aren't going to do it with the convention center proposed. We need to spend way more than $250 million. Of course, the Chamber already knows this and called the MAPS III CC a phase 1, with a phase 2 to come later? Where do they plan on building this phase 2 by selecting a land-locked location for phase 1?

I am all for the convention center (I can't seem to repeat this enough), I just wish they would move it from the current location to a place that would allow for contiguous expansion while reserving prime space for private development. MBG is supposed to be a driver of private development but how can that be accomplished if the City keeps building publicly funded projects around it? I don't know why that doesn't make sense.

Exactly!

[king183]

My biggest concern is what I perceive to be laying the groundwork for doing away with the streetcar, or at least delaying it or scaling it back. Look at these questions from the report. These are all questions I've seen repeatedly addressed by Urban Pioneer and others. So why are they making a re-appearance as if these issues are just now coming up?

Modern Streetcar

Findings:
• There was general concern among stakeholders interviewed that the
transit component of the MAPS 3 program needs additional study and
planning. Questions that were raised include:
- What is the market for transit?
- What is the demand?
- How will it connect employment centers and housing?
- What is the rider profile? Who is this transit serving?
- How can transit in Oklahoma City be leveraged to spur high
quality development?
• There was concern among interviewed stakeholders about possible
streetscape clutter created by an overhead wire system.

[betts]

There are very simple and obvious answers to the majority of those questions....which leads me to question the breadth of knowledge and sophistication of the questioners.

[Rover]

Here we are in the catch 22 position again. The chamber says 2/3 of convention center visitors are local. If the goal is to expand the other 1/3 then we aren't going to do it with the convention center proposed. We need to spend way more than $250 million. Of course, the Chamber already knows this and called the MAPS III CC a phase 1, with a phase 2 to come later? Where do they plan on building this phase 2 by selecting a land-locked location for phase 1?

I am all for the convention center (I can't seem to repeat this enough), I just wish they would move it from the current location to a place that would allow for contiguous expansion while reserving prime space for private development. MBG is supposed to be a driver of private development but how can that be accomplished if the City keeps building publicly funded projects around it? I don't know why that doesn't make sense.

The biggest critics of the cc on this board think there will be no need for expansion as they believe it is a dying business. If they are right, then all the hand wringing about expansion is baseless. If indeed they are wrong, the current Cox site is the most logical or the south of the Chesapeake arena. And, before everyone gets uptight about it being across the blvd, go see Orlando. It has multiple halls separated by a huge blvd. Doesn't seem to hurt their business. Chances are the expanded space will be for multiple events with conflicting dates, not so much for one huge event (we aren't likely to get those anyway).

Secondly, while the MBG is supposed to drive private development, that doesn't have to mean that it is driving only development for a person or two who already happens to own property adjacent. If you are looking at it in a micro sense, I guess the objection stands, but if you are looking at it as improving the whole of the downtown core and thereby attracting private development to the core, then it is a weaker objection. I do not believe the huge investment in the garden was just to make ONE parcel more valuable. The validity of the logic just depends on how you want to frame the argument. Each has its point.

[Skyline]

Has there ever been a top priority Maps project that did not get built?

I know we are waiting on a downtown school, but that is moving along and will be built.

[Just the facts]

The biggest critics of the cc on this board think there will be no need for expansion as they believe it is a dying business.

I think you mean critic - singular.

Have you ever walked around the outside of Orange County Convention Center? It is deadsville. International Drive is one of the busiest streets in Orlando with more shopping (albeit tacky shopping) than you can shake a stick at - until you get the convention center area, then all sidewalk life ceases to exist. Even the convention centers inside Disney World are put at the backs of the hotels out of site because no one wants to walk next to 900 linear feet of walls (or in the case of the Orange Count CC - a half mile of blank walls).

No one wants to turn Oklahoma Blvd into this section of International Drive. The only pedestrians are the taxi drivers.



Downtown Orlando (sans convention center) however, is booming.