Convention Center

[CaptDave]

Makes me think a $150 million CC south of the Chesapeake arena to give our present convention business a nicer facility AND a $100 million office tower (OR refurb of FNC) would be a better use of our $250 million MAPS fund..... I sincerely hope we are not throwing away $250 million to a dying business that won't have much impact on OKC. Only time will tell though.

[Spartan]

Makes me think a $150 million CC south of the Chesapeake arena to give our present convention business a nicer facility AND a $100 million office tower (OR refurb of FNC) would be a better use of our $250 million MAPS fund..... I sincerely hope we are not throwing away $250 million to a dying business that won't have much impact on OKC. Only time will tell though.

We have no choice though. The Chamber junta wanted this and would not have allowed us to have streetcar and a park if we didn't also pay for a new convention palace. They are dead set on this being our highest priority and they are not willing to consider anything more current on the subject as relevant. It's almost hard to think this decision is being handed down from businessmen who are usually trend savvy, because the last few years have proven the convention trap to be a huge folly.

I just don't understand it. CCs were successful for a short period but their stock has fallen so dramatically, meanwhile streetcars have been a wild success, even long term, wherever they are built. Convention business is very finite and cannot be produced by a local economy in the same way that a local economy is built to respond to streetcar-related economic development. What happens for transit in Portland or Phoenix or KC won't compete with and reduce our economic development impact the way that new CCs in Nashville, FW, Omaha, Albuquerque, and so many other mid-sized cities will obliterate what we would otherwise hope to get out of $250 million. I am racking my brains over this..

It's an arms race, and we're about as well positioned as Iran to win this thing. It would be so much smarter to take a bow like South Africa or Japan before we do harm to ourselves competing for elusive convention market share. Not every city needs to be a big convention player..I'd say to let those cities hinder their own competitiveness by chasing this folly and instead keep maximizing our own potential by making smarter investments with such a huge chunk as $250M. Nashville and FW won't be as competitive and desirable places to live because they spent their resources on a CC and not smart QoL improvements...ESP once those QoL improvements become mandatory for growth.

[Just the facts]

I want a new convention center so the current site can be redeveloped. The new site should go where it does the least harm (East Bricktown).

[CaptDave]

I understand the consternation Spartan. I am trying to figure out WHY the supporters of the CC are so sure of its necessity. Can we expect some sort of huge domestic independent energy producers convention to held in it annually? What would something like that look like and is it something that would become a "signature" event in OKC? Often a city builds or expands a CC to keep one or two particular conventions (Mary Kay in Dallas is one I think) but we don't have anything close to that to justify the "need". There are some very smart people in the group that is pushing for it so there must be a compelling reason to spend a quarter billion dollars on it...... right?

[Dubya61]

I understand the consternation Spartan. I am trying to figure out WHY the supporters of the CC are so sure of its necessity. Can we expect some sort of huge domestic independent energy producers convention to held in it annually? What would something like that look like and is it something that would become a "signature" event in OKC? Often a city builds or expands a CC to keep one or two particular conventions (Mary Kay in Dallas is one I think) but we don't have anything close to that to justify the "need". There are some very smart people in the group that is pushing for it so there must be a compelling reason to spend a quarter billion dollars on it...... right?

Suddenly, I was thinking about starting a band right here in River City! Trombones! to squelch out the Trouble!

[BoulderSooner]

I understand the consternation Spartan. I am trying to figure out WHY the supporters of the CC are so sure of its necessity. Can we expect some sort of huge domestic independent energy producers convention to held in it annually? What would something like that look like and is it something that would become a "signature" event in OKC? Often a city builds or expands a CC to keep one or two particular conventions (Mary Kay in Dallas is one I think) but we don't have anything close to that to justify the "need". There are some very smart people in the group that is pushing for it so there must be a compelling reason to spend a quarter billion dollars on it...... right?

Our CC is a joke for a city our size and for us to be presented the way we want to visitors ..

[CaptDave]

Our CC is a joke for a city our size and for us to be presented the way we want to visitors ..

I agree the Cox CC is nothing to brag about; adequate may be a high compliment. I am fairly sure I am missing something in this topic - but the data does show that conventions are becoming less numerous and several cities are miles ahead of us in that business. I do not see how the new CC will draw anything from those cities, so what would justify an expansion of the space we currently have? I think it is a good idea to relocate our CC so that location can be redeveloped, and make our CC a nicer place for the regional events currenty held at Cox CC. As I was thinking about it, I thought maybe with the colocation of four large independent domestic producers there may be a critical mass for some sort of domestic energy convention that could be rather large in scale.

[Just the facts]

Civic buildings, be they City Hall, the convention center, or the airport should reflect the collective pride of the people they represent and inspire the citizens to think big, and dream bigger. They shouldn't be monuments to be marveled at by people from Grand Rapids, they should be marveled at by people who call OKC home. They should be a source of pride and inspiration and a crowning achievement of the City on display in the public realm.

OKC public buildings have almost none of that.

[Spartan]

I disagree Kerry, where are you coming from with this charge? We have fine public facilities. We have a top-notch AA baseball stadium and NBA arena, the Civic Center Music Hall is among the nicest venues in the nation, and our downtown public parks (Myriad, MAPS3, river) will soon be a huge point of pride. The downtown library and arts museum (soon to be plural) aren't too shabby either. I think we could do better with polishing City Hall and perhaps a grand new City building should the 420 Bldg be renovated by private developers, but that's just as far as city offices go. At least we don't have a fugly City Hall like Dallas or FW.

Our CC is a joke for a city our size and for us to be presented the way we want to visitors ..

With what visitors? How is this tied to a tourism or visitor study that shows how/why people do or could come to OKC? We're probably going to get more out of the fairgrounds improvements, much cheaper, than the CC project in all honesty. The fairgrounds is a legitimate success that is existing we can reasonably assume is stable enough to build on and make even more competitive.

The business community downtown is booming. But is a convention center the only way in which we can facilitate business visitors??? What else, outside the box, could we do for business visitors with $250 MILLION??? What about a medical mart, or an energy mart, modeled after several of the new medical marts...or a huge, massive tech/research incubator, or something like that. I think there is a lot we could do with $250 million that would realistically improve our business climate, if that $250 million must be tied to something for business visitors.

[CaptDave]

True, but I would differ that OKC is completely bereft of good civic buildings. The Civic Center/City Hall area fits that description - they look like significant, important structures. WRWA is a pretty nice small - medium size airport now and certainly not a source of embarassment as it was ten years ago.

The Cox CC? Not so much and that is why I think a new CC is justifiable. I am not so certain about the location selected and the size/projected cost. But a new CC is going to be built and if history is any indication, it will be just fine in the end.

[Spartan]

True, but I would differ that OKC is completely bereft of good civic buildings. The Civic Center/City Hall area fits that description - they look like significant, important structures. WRWA is a pretty nice small - medium size airport now and certainly not a source of embarassment as it was ten years ago.

The Cox CC? Not so much and that is why I think a new CC is justifiable. I am not so certain about the location selected and the size/projected cost. But a new CC is going to be built and if history is any indication, it will be just fine in the end.

What history?? The recent history of new convention centers in the U.S. is actually quite depressing.

[catch22]

I can speak for a lot of people, that our airport is very poorly designed (but aesthetically pleasing for the most part). Many people from out of town can not figure out how to use our airport. Even a lot of people from the area, can not figure out how to get around in the airport. Not to change the subject, but our airport is very poorly designed. It looks good but is very inefficient in many aspects, both from the passenger point of view, and logistical "behind the scenes" point of view.

[HangryHippo]

I can speak for a lot of people, that our airport is very poorly designed (but aesthetically pleasing for the most part). Many people from out of town can not figure out how to use our airport. Even a lot of people from the area, can not figure out how to get around in the airport. Not to change the subject, but our airport is very poorly designed. It looks good but is very inefficient in many aspects, both from the passenger point of view, and logistical "behind the scenes" point of view.

THIS!! And Cafebouef, if you're reading this, my response to your airport question is forthcoming.

[Spartan]

It's a weird layout, but it's such a layout that I have always kind of blindly stumbled along in the right direction and surprisingly turned up at a recognizable area and suddenly knew exactly how to navigate. I feel like that's how most people's WRWA experience goes. I feel as though the layout and design is intended to make you feel like there are a lot less people there than really are, which isn't many to begin with..lol

[CaptDave]

I can speak for a lot of people, that our airport is very poorly designed (but aesthetically pleasing for the most part). Many people from out of town can not figure out how to use our airport. Even a lot of people from the area, can not figure out how to get around in the airport. Not to change the subject, but our airport is very poorly designed. It looks good but is very inefficient in many aspects, both from the passenger point of view, and logistical "behind the scenes" point of view.

I suppose I don't think it is too bad because I remember the old WRWA and the construction years. To me it is comparable to Louisville and similarly sized airports - not perfect, but not too bad either. I kind of like the mix of trim materials - stone, stainless steel, and glass is sleek and rustic at the same time; kind of like OKC. I have no idea about the behind the scenes operations but I think they kept the old baggage handling areas and other support areas beneath the main terminal, correct?

[CaptDave]

What history?? The recent history of new convention centers in the U.S. is actually quite depressing.

The MAPS projects in general. Certainly not perfect and a few missteps, but overall very positive for the city.

CC's are strange spaces simply because they are nothing more than huge open spaces with a roof and HVAC. The CC building itself is not valuable, only what it can be configured to do and contain has value - and that is very debatable at this time. Even if I have concerns about the details, I still give the people in charge of these programs benefit of the doubt based on a pretty good track record to date.

[catch22]

I suppose I don't think it is too bad because I remember the old WRWA and the construction years. To me it is comparable to Louisville and similarly sized airports - not perfect, but not too bad either. I kind of like the mix of trim materials - stone, stainless steel, and glass is sleek and rustic at the same time; kind of like OKC. I have no idea about the behind the scenes operations but I think they kept the old baggage handling areas and other support areas beneath the main terminal, correct?

The baggage handling systems I believe were rebuilt, but they were so poorly designed that they are about to be rebuilt anyway at a very high cost. The upper level was also poorly designed, they are about to redesign and consolidate the two checkpoints into one. Between the United and Southwest counters. At a very high cost. The vertical transportation element is also poorly designed. You have escalators that dump people either right in the middle of either checkpoint and mixing them with people trying to exit the secure area. The other option for going up on escalators is the ones just at the end of the tunnel. If you are departing you must go to the right and it dumps you in a highly congested area by the American counter and a new stand. If you are going down you have to go all the way to the east checkpoint to use that down escalator. Or you can use the elevator plopped in the middle of the check-in area. Which, in itself, squeezes people together by the United counter (which is usually overflowing into the main lobby).

On the behind the scenes level, there is no way to go from the ramp level to the terminal level without going outside of the building itself. There is also no way to walk, for example, under the airport on the ramp side under the West Concourse. If you are working a flight for example, at Gate 5, if you need to go to Gate 8, you literally have to walk all the way around the West Concourse. Or go to one of the outside staircases, and enter the concourse, then exit the concourse, (which consumes more time than walking around the building itself). Other airports I have worked at have many tunnels and walkways connecting many common points. This airport has no convenient way to flow as an employee.

I digress....

[CaptDave]

Gotcha - makes sense. Fix all that but keep the same look and mix of materials......that way people coming to our new CC and CC hotel will have an easier time. There, still on topic!

[Larry OKC]

The info Pete posted isn't really "new", there were reports cited during the MAPS campaign. This just supports those earlier reports.

Fact is to get the 3-fold (300%) increase in business/revenue the Chamber promised is going to require a 9-fold (900%) increase in out-of-area business since they admitted that most of the convention business is for local events. This admission by the Chamber came conveniently after MAPS 3 barely passed and they were pushing to get the C.C. moved up in the project time line. Even going as far as to claim that by moving it up sooner, that increased business would help fund MAPS 3 tax collections so it would help the projects getting pushed back. Problem is, if it stays on schedule and opens when it is supposed to ("late 2018"), the MAPS 3 tax collection period will have ended several months earlier ("ending at 12:00 a.m. on January 1, 2018). Then there is the small matter of City projects routinely going well beyond the established time lines. The new C.C. won't generate a single extra dime for those MAPS 3 projects that are now at the end of the time line.

[Just the facts]

Spot on Larry. Building a new convention center because it will increase attendance by a significant amount is the biggest lie being told today. I always love the "we can get conventions that are going to Austin" line. Really, go look at the Austin convention calendar and tell me which convention they have that OKC could host. The Texas Teachers Convention? Nope. Austin City Government Workshop? Nope. Society of South Texas Petroleum Engineers Regional Conference? Nope. It goes on and on. Go pick your favorite city and try it for yourself.

The fact is, the vast majority of all conventions/meetings are local, state, or regional. Very few are national, and that number is dropping everyday. Dallas, Denver, and KC are not our competitors for 99% of the conventions – Tulsa and other OKC meeting space is.

[Spartan]

I'll just add to what Larry and Kerry have said, in that I really believe that the convention center project is going to be the one that ruins the MAPS legacy. We're in for a huge clusterf...

[BDP]

I'll just add to what Larry and Kerry have said, in that I really believe that the convention center project is going to be the one that ruins the MAPS legacy. We're in for a huge clusterf...

Maybe that's why they want to do it first. We'll moan about the wasted resources for a couple of years. Meanwhile, all the stuff that we actually get to use, the stuff that will actually make being here more enjoyable, will get built and we'll all forgive and forget the massive half used facility that's dividing our downtown core from all the fun stuff.

[soonerguru]

Maybe that's why they want to do it first. We'll moan about the wasted resources for a couple of years. Meanwhile, all the stuff that we actually get to use, the stuff that will actually make being here more enjoyable, will get built and we'll all forgive and forget the massive half used facility that's dividing our downtown core from all the fun stuff.

No, I think these otherwise sound business people actually believe a convention center will be a huge economic development catalyst. It's a joke. Forest, trees, etc.

[Just the facts]

Maybe that's why they want to do it first. We'll moan about the wasted resources for a couple of years. Meanwhile, all the stuff that we actually get to use, the stuff that will actually make being here more enjoyable, will get built and we'll all forgive and forget the massive half used facility that's dividing our downtown core from all the fun stuff.

They wanted to be moved up because they didn't want to risk having the convention center be the only project on the "Let's Finish MAPS III Right" campaign. Let's not forget, this is just phase 1. The CC committee already said that 2 phases will be necessary to meet their growth projections. No funding has been identified for phase 2 but without it they said phase 1 would be a failure. That kind of puts someone on the hook to pay for it because not doing it is not an option.

http://www.myspace.com/video/vid/100711285

[BoulderSooner]

They wanted to be moved up because they didn't want to risk having the convention center be the only project on the "Let's Finish MAPS III Right" campaign. Let's not forget, this is just phase 1. The CC committee already said that 2 phases will be necessary to meet their growth projections. No funding has been identified for phase 2.

maps 4