Convention Center

[soonerguru]

I am not opposed to a new convention but I sure don't like be lied to by all these projects that will NEVER turn out to be true. I want a new convention center so the Cox site can be redeveloped.

Applying a reality screen here, I think no one on the Convention Center committee actually believes there will be underground building. This is just the fig leaf being applied to the citizens. Again, for emphasis, there will NOT be underground convention halls. That will be prohibitively expensive, and they are not going to be able to go back to the voters to ask for more dough, because the project itself is so unpopular with voters.

SO, here's what I believe they're doing:

1. They're saying they will build underground to pacify the people who want direct access between the Myriad Gardens and Central Park.
2. They're doing this to also pacify the mayor, who is a big proponent of the park.
3. They're waiting out Mick's term to level with the voters and "change" the plan to include a large convention center dividing the park spaces.
4. They will "announce" the new "recommendations from consultants" once Cornett is out of office, and, citing cost concerns, will suggest putting the convention center on the Fred Jones property and building everything over ground, creating a large barrier between the park spaces.
5. They will come up with a "compromise" by building some kind of flow through or walkway where Harvey is currently.
6. Harvey will be closed.

This is just the cynical side of me speaking, but it is probably what will happen. I know it will be unpopular here but it will be viewed as a "workable solution."

Tell me i'm wrong.

The alternative is worse: bleed funds from other MAPS III projects. But I don't believe they will go there because that would exact too large of a political price, costing council members seats and permanently damaging the MAPS brand.

ON EDIT: Perhaps Larry Nichols is planning to throw them another $240,000,000 and have them name it the Devon Center. Sound outlandish? $240 mil is a rounding error to Devon. They could probably just cut a check for that. The point is, this whole project seems like a fool's errand from the outside looking in, but it's quite possible they've already found alternative funding mechanisms to pay for this and we just don't know. I pose this possibility without condoning the closed-door behavior of the in-crowd. This city still could use a major dose of transparency.

[BoulderSooner]

harvey is going to be closed either way . ..

[wschnitt]

What about hudson if they choose to exercise the "expansion option" to the west of the current site? Will that be closed? that would be a HUGE mistake.

[Just the facts]

harvey is going to be closed either way . ..

Either way? You mean they will still close Harvey if the convention center is moved elseware?

[BoulderSooner]

Either way? You mean they will still close Harvey if the convention center is moved elseware?

no if the convention center is above ground or partially under ground ..

and if the CC is moved elsewhere .. it still might be closed .. but it would depend on what else would be built there

[Just the facts]

no if the convention center is above ground or partially under ground ..

and if the CC is moved elsewhere .. it still might be closed .. but it would depend on what else would be built there

check - I think they also plan (maybe even already approved) closing SW2nd as well.

[BoulderSooner]

check - I think they also plan (maybe even already approved) closing SW2nd as well.

it is not yet approved ... but i would bet sw 2nd closes in any case from robinson to hudson

[Larry OKC]

We desperately need improvements in downtown attractions to even attract more people to OKC for conventions: I'd like to say more retail, but I almost have to say some retail at all, finish the Native American Cultural Center, create an Adventure Line so people can easily get to the Adventure District .....something! There's no way I'd come here for a convention if I lived elsewhere when I can go to cities that have things for me and my family to do.

I am not saying you are wrong, but this seems to be contradicting the Chamber's and City's line about OKC being a place people want to come to as Convention inquiries are on the increase and bookings too. Also contradicts the Chamber's paid for Convention Center study that said our "challenges" had little to nothing to do with having the things to attract conventioneers. The report stated some of the challenges to becoming a Tier II city were

1) lack of direct flights
2) insufficient hotel stock
3) insufficient C.C. facility that involved structural limitations.

[betts]

I am not saying you are wrong, but this seems to be contradicting the Chamber's and City's line about OKC being a place people want to come to as Convention inquiries are on the increase and bookings too. Also contradicts the Chamber's paid for Convention Center study that said our "challenges" had little to nothing to do with having the things to attract conventioneers. The report stated some of the challenges to becoming a Tier II city were

1) lack of direct flights
2) insufficient hotel stock
3) insufficient C.C. facility that involved structural limitations.

Maybe we're getting inquiries from people in cities like Enid and Garden City Kansas....dunno. I don't think anyone outside of the Chamber has seen precisely who is inquiring about our facilities. But, I doubt we're getting inquiries from companies in cities of comparable size or even slightly smaller. Because those people want to go places where there are things to do. Again, perhaps once we have all the river activities planned, that will be a draw, but I go places where I can shop and do interesting things in my spare time. Anyone who believe that our challenges are only the three listed above is not being honest with themselves, in my opinion. I like Oklahoma City, I like living here, but I'd never spend money to a convention in a city like Oklahoma City.

[betts]

Again, I'd just like to see the numbers. I'd like to see a lot of numbers, specifically any analyses done by consultants regarding the convention center. It wouldn't shock me if we end up disappointed in the response to a new convention center.

[RodH]

People have different interest. I would never choose a convention city based on places to shop because that would not interest me. I do like historical things, geography, and museums. I like to go to places that I have never been to see how the people live. A city like OKC would have lots to interest me.

[BoulderSooner]

a ton of conventions that okc competes for are going to have great attendance no matter what city they choose to location in ..

[LakeEffect]

a ton of conventions that okc competes for are going to have great attendance no matter what city they choose to location in ..

The last two years I was on the education-speaker selection team for a national convention (American Public Works Association). We didn't have a huge number of attendees (1500 people or so?), but we required a big exhibit hall for all of the equipment showcasing. I wasn't part of venue selection (done many years in advance) but I at did get to hear from staff about attendance and cities. The bigger name the city, the better attendance we had... Columbus, Ohio had the worst attendance in 15 years, while I heard that this year's event in Anaheim had what appeared to be the highest in years. Denver was also well attended last year.

Conventions generally have a baseline attendance, but the city its in really does help add to the overall attendance number. Name recognition goes a long way - Columbus was our cheapest conference, and the convention center is in a great location with a ton to do, but people weren't sold on it as much as APWA tried.

[betts]

I do think Oklahoma City, with as much attention to attractions as "we've" paid to the Convention Center, coupled with a huge marketing push, could get better name recognition. We will have the river activities, we will (hopefully) ultimately have the Native American Cultural Center. Those are the kinds of things that look great on brochures and may pique people's interest. And we do have the Adventure District, which too has a lot of appeal. We've got other hidden gems that would be appealing to a visitor, such as the Paseo and the Stockyards District. What we don't have is easy access to them for someone without a car.

Very few people who travel to a convention want to rent a car. It's not fun driving in a city where you don't know your way, even with GPS. What we, as a city need to do, if we're going to try to appeal to a broader range of people, is come up with a comprehensive transit plan that can be used to link all these attractions. It would be amazing if we could have a streetcar line to each of those places, but that's not going to happen in the near future unless the city wins a big federal lottery. Without fixed transit, we have to look at buses and/or rail. Which comes back to the fact that very few people in a position of influence in this city have recognized the importance of mass transit. Were I in the Chamber, I'd be as interested in the streetcar, the Adventure line and improving our bus system as I would be in getting a few big rooms in a new building. Again, once you're in a convention center, the carpet choice is about the only noticeable difference between them. I think that to attract more people and more groups we have to promote our city as a fun, interesting destination that is easy to navigate.

[GaryOKC6]

a ton of conventions that okc competes for are going to have great attendance no matter what city they choose to location in ..

I totally agree. as for things to do, it depends on what people are looking for and everyone is going to want something different. Most people think that thier own city has "nothing t do" but poeple form other cities see the thingsds that we take for granted. For example, The National cowby and Western Heritage musium. Most people that I talk to will say, "I went there in grade school and have not been there in years" whild others come from all over just to go there. It is like that is every city I think.

[GaryOKC6]

I do think Oklahoma City, with as much attention to attractions as "we've" paid to the Convention Center, coupled with a huge marketing push, could get better name recognition. We will have the river activities, we will (hopefully) ultimately have the Native American Cultural Center. Those are the kinds of things that look great on brochures and may pique people's interest. And we do have the Adventure District, which too has a lot of appeal. We've got other hidden gems that would be appealing to a visitor, such as the Paseo and the Stockyards District. What we don't have is easy access to them for someone without a car.
Very few people who travel to a convention want to rent a car. It's not fun driving in a city where you don't know your way, even with GPS. What we, as a city need to do, if we're going to try to appeal to a broader range of people, is come up with a comprehensive transit plan that can be used to link all these attractions. It would be amazing if we could have a streetcar line to each of those places, but that's not going to happen in the near future unless the city wins a big federal lottery. Without fixed transit, we have to look at buses and/or rail. Which comes back to the fact that very few people in a position of influence in this city have recognized the importance of mass transit. Were I in the Chamber, I'd be as interested in the streetcar, the Adventure line and improving our bus system as I would be in getting a few big rooms in a new building. Again, once you're in a convention center, the carpet choice is about the only noticeable difference between them. I think that to attract more people and more groups we have to promote our city as a fun, interesting destination that is easy to navigate.

I agree. I used to do a lot of conventions ins Chicago. I would NEVER consider driving in that city. I always took a cab. The difference is that every 3rd car was a cab and that they were easy to get.

[betts]

I totally agree. as for things to do, it depends on what people are looking for and everyone is going to want something different. Most people think that thier own city has "nothing t do" but poeple form other cities see the thingsds that we take for granted. For example, The National cowby and Western Heritage musium. Most people that I talk to will say, "I went there in grade school and have not been there in years" whild others come from all over just to go there. It is like that is every city I think.

And how do you get there from downtown if you're a visitor? While it's nice to visit, is it really enough of a destination to make renting a car worthwhile? There is perhaps enough, although barely, to do here, but things to do are scattered all over the city. If I'm at a convention, I want it to be easy to visit....preferably within walking distance or easy to visit by mass transit that stops close to my door and the destination.

I think we need to look at our city without rose-colored glasses. We need to look hard at what keeps us from being a desirable destination. We don't have a lot of interesting old buildings, we don't have a beach or mountains or even a lake (that isn't mostly mud in the summer these days), we don't have shopping of note downtown and we're on the cusp of having enough interesting restaurants.

We do have the potential, especially as more things are completed, to provide a lot of amenities for our visitors, but many are difficult to reach and most of them don't really stand alone as a significant destination. I think we need to be honest about what the shortcomings of our city as a destination are, so that we can work to correct them.

[GaryOKC6]

And how do you get there from downtown if you're a visitor? While it's nice to visit, is it really enough of a destination to make renting a car worthwhile? There is perhaps enough, although barely, to do here, but things to do are scattered all over the city. If I'm at a convention, I want it to be easy to visit....preferably within walking distance or easy to visit by mass transit that stops close to my door and the destination.

I think we need to look at our city without rose-colored glasses. We need to look hard at what keeps us from being a desirable destination. We don't have a lot of interesting old buildings, we don't have a beach or mountains or even a lake (that isn't mostly mud in the summer these days), we don't have shopping of note downtown and we're on the cusp of having enough interesting restaurants.

We do have the potential, especially as more things are completed, to provide a lot of amenities for our visitors, but many are difficult to reach and most of them don't really stand alone as a significant destination. I think we need to be honest about what the shortcomings of our city as a destination are, so that we can work to correct them.

It depends on how long and why you are here. I talk to a lot of visitors that love the downtown area. The Art Museum, Botanical Gardens, Bombing Memorial and Bricktown are all within walking distance. If you are here for only a few days that is more than enough to do. Most people spend the bulk in the restaurants and bars in bricktown. There is also the Oklahoma River which is a great destination for rowing or juts walking. Because of the nature of my business Interact with hundreds of people that are visiting here every year. Their story is always very positive.

[Larry OKC]

Betts: please don't misunderstand my comment as anything but pointing out the Chamber's study (take that for what it is worth) and subsequent articles have indicated for the type of business we currently draw and the kind they want in becoming a Tier II city, we already have the things that most are looking for (esp when compared to our peer cities in the report). Is it for everyone? No. Is it for you? No. Is it for me? No (I would tend toward the Las Vegas/Orlando as a destination). And I absolutely agree that we can do things better, get more retail, have accessable mass trans to get folks to those things that aren't in the CBD etc etc. But all of those things take time and money. Right?

[HangryHippo]

Betts: please don't misunderstand my comment as anything but pointing out the Chamber's study (take that for what it is worth) and subsequent articles have indicated for the type of business we currently draw and the kind they want in becoming a Tier II city, we already have the things that most are looking for (esp when compared to our peer cities in the report). Is it for everyone? No. Is it for you? No. Is it for me? No (I would tend toward the Las Vegas/Orlando as a destination). And I absolutely agree that we can do things better, get more retail, have accessable mass trans to get folks to those things that aren't in the CBD etc etc. But all of those things take time and money. Right?

Nice post.

[betts]

Betts: please don't misunderstand my comment as anything but pointing out the Chamber's study (take that for what it is worth) and subsequent articles have indicated for the type of business we currently draw and the kind they want in becoming a Tier II city, we already have the things that most are looking for (esp when compared to our peer cities in the report). Is it for everyone? No. Is it for you? No. Is it for me? No (I would tend toward the Las Vegas/Orlando as a destination). And I absolutely agree that we can do things better, get more retail, have accessable mass trans to get folks to those things that aren't in the CBD etc etc. But all of those things take time and money. Right?

I'm not disagreeing either. And I wouldn't live in OKC if I didn't like it and what it has to offer. My point is that it could be a lot better, could offer more, could be more. The trap is when we think everything's fine. It's not. National perception of our city is improving but we're not at the point that many people would seek us out as a tourist destination. Our mass transit system is horrific, and that inhibits visitation. There is almost no public acknowledgement of that fact, much less attempt to improve upon it. Had it not been for MTP, I doubt we'd be planning a streetcar right now. It should have been the Chamber pushing as hard or harder for it than they pushed for the convention center. The city should be looking for ways to subsidize retail downtown, not sitting back hoping it will happen. We should be looking for ways to link the attractions we do have, complete the ones under construction and plan more. In city planning, if you're not moving forward you're being passed. In addition to celebrating all the new hotels being built we need to ask ourselves how the people filling those hotels will travel and where they will go.

Yes these things cost money, but no more than Project 180, the Convention Center and Convention Center Hotel. The city manages to find money for what it considers important.

[BDP]

Yes these things cost money, but no more than Project 180, the Convention Center and Convention Center Hotel. The city manages to find money for what it considers important.

Well I think the best point you're making, whether intentional or not, is that the city has a lot of great assets beyond the core and its immediate surroundings that could be leveraged a lot more with better access. Yes, transit costs a lot of money, but a properly planned transit system that gives visitors ready access to attractions like the Adventure District, the Paseo, Western Ave., historic districts, etc. is probably no more expensive or maybe even less expensive than spending 700 million dollars every ten years to develop new attractions catering to visitors to the core. You could bring them to the attractions instead of vice versa. It also has the reciprocal benefit of giving residents better access to and around the core as well.

I'm a huge proponent of downtown and may soon move my family there, but there are some very attractive and interesting districts that are uniquely Oklahoma City that remain largely hidden from the typical Oklahoma City tourist to which they simply need better access to discover.

An anecdotal example is when I visited the garden district when I was in New Orleans. No way I would have done that had it not been served by a street car. A ride through the historic districts to the Paseo would be very similar, imo. (although good luck on getting Heritage Hills residents on board with that : ) )

[Teo9969]

For some reason I couldn't "like" this post. But I do.

I don't think you can like posts in the wiki portion of OKCTalk (which is the "Urban Development & Buildings" portion of the site)

[Larry OKC]

...My point is that it could be a lot better, could offer more, could be more. The trap is when we think everything's fine. It's not. ...

That has been my position on many a topic. Glad we are in agreement.

National perception of our city is improving but we're not at the point that many people would seek us out as a tourist destination.

I am not saying you are wrong, but if the Mayor and Chamber are to be believed, folks ARE seeking us out as a tourist destination. IIRC it was something like $2 billion/yr of economic impact??? Not Vegas or Orlando type numbers but nothing to sneeze at either.

...The city manages to find money for what it considers important.

WOW. Again, that has been my position on many a topic we were formerly at odds on.

I will respectfully disagree that the City needs to subsidize DT retail. Not a government responsibility to subsidize private, for-profit businesses. How many millions did the ULI folks say it would require to get what they were wanting DT??? Even if they do, they have various economic development funds, the Alliance and other entities to do that sort of thing.

[Pete]

Interesting article and perspective on convention centers across the U.S.


Cities Clash in Battle to Land Conventions
Weak Economy Heightens Competition; Venues Splash Out Sweeteners, Freebies

Cities Vie for Conventions - WSJ.com

Mr. Sanders, the University of Texas professor, predicts the glut of convention space will only get worse, because a number of cities continue to push expansions. He blames cities' hired consultants, who he said predict "all these people are going to come and do wonderful things to your economy."

"But the problem is they aren't coming anymore, because there are lots of other convention centers ... that desperately want that business," he said. "So Atlanta steals from Boston, Orlando steals from Chicago and Las Vegas steals from everywhere."