Convention Center

[hoya]

I have never been excited about the convention center. However, I think the chances of me winning the lottery (and I don't buy tickets) are higher than the chances of the city deciding not to build it. We probably do need a new convention center, regardless of how convention business is going to grow or shrink, because of the age of the Myriad. Not being an expert on this subject myself, if someone tells me that we need to replace the Myriad with a better structure because XYZ, I'll believe them. Sounds good to me.

So the question becomes, what kind of convention center do we need and where should be put it?

If we build a really big nice one, I could see putting it south of the Myriad Gardens to show it off. A big gleaming glass and steel thing, like our version of the Sydney Opera House, where people drive by and go "oooooh cool", and yeah we'd want it front and center downtown so everybody could see how cool it was. The problem with that is we don't have enough money for that. $250 million will build us a nice medium sized building, perfectly servicable for a city our size, but it won't give us our own version of the Sydney Opera House. If we spend our money right, we'll get something like the Bricktown Ballpark or the Chesapeake Arena, a very nice venue where we got a lot of value for our money.

The problem with the current selected location is that it's the Big Money location. Nothing that gets built there is going to be cheap. If you build the convention center there you're not getting a Bricktown Ballpark or a Chesapeake Arena value, you're committing to spending Big Money. And I don't think we're committed to that. So that means we may need a different site selection.

I don't buy the idea at all that there are a huge number of developers licking their chops waiting to put giant mixed-use developments here. Sounds like crap to me. I think the best hope we have is that Continental Resources or whoever is not buying Stage Center decides to buy that property and build a tower there. I don't think the convention center is holding back a horde of private investors who are weeping over their inability to purchase that land.

What about all those old sheet metal buildings out in east Bricktown, north of Bass Pro? That seems like a fantastic spot to target. Redevelop a crap location in one fell swoop. I know there's some sort of plan for redevelopment there, but I think it would be a lot less expensive than what we're seeing in the C2S area.

[Spartan]

I made the assumption that Fred Hall and Bob Howard would be your answer Sparky when I asked the question. Truth is that one is an investor and the other is a car dealer. Could you explain how they became "legitimate" investors capable of developing the selected CC site? If it wouldn't tax your imagination to much, could you also explain why two parks should not be separated. Let me be clear here though, I ask these questions not caring if the CC goes there or not. In fact I now hope the city tells Hall and Oats, er, Howard to shove it because they became overly greedy in pricing the project. Let them develop it, but I am not going to get my hopes up that they will.

Ever been to NW10th?

[Popsy]

Ever been to NW10th?

Are you implying that Hall and Howard developed all of NW 10th? My answer is yes I have been to NW 10th and if you still persist that Hall and Howard are legitimate developers I would believe that you would probably call a pile of crap brunch. Perhaps you could provide a cross street. Please also provide a name for the "massive mixed use development" (your words) that gave them the experience to do the same for the chosen CC property.

[Spartan]

Are you implying that Hall and Howard developed all of NW 10th? My answer is yes I have been to NW 10th and if you still persist that Hall and Howard are legitimate developers I would believe that you would probably call a pile of crap brunch. Perhaps you could provide a cross street. Please also provide a name for the "massive mixed use development" (your words) that gave them the experience to do the same for the chosen CC property.

You're absolutely insane if you don't think Hall and Howard could pull it off. Howard may have already soared to the top of the list of downtown developers.

I mean "absolutely insane" in the nicest way...of course

[Popsy]

That's OK sparky. I am used to your childish name calling and wild exclaimations. You just don't like people that won't buy into your bull**** and usually call all of those people trolls. I actually feel sorry for those that do buy into it. By the way, I have questioned your sanity since 2005. Also, Hall and Howard might or might not be able to pull it off, but I really don't think they would want to try. Now is the time to post one of your fake rants that gets our posts deleted.

[catch22]

^^^ this will be good!

[Just the facts]

That's OK sparky. I am used to your childish name calling ....

Priceless.

[Lafferty Daniel]

That's OK sparky. I am used to your childish name calling and wild exclaimations. You just don't like people that won't buy into your bull**** and usually call all of those people trolls. I actually feel sorry for those that do buy into it. By the way, I have questioned your sanity since 2005. Also, Hall and Howard might or might not be able to pull it off, but I really don't think they would want to try. Now is the time to post one of your fake rants that gets our posts deleted.

[Steve]

Spartan, since I'm the reporter who wrote that story with Hall, the one that's been cited repeatedly in this long thread, it's time for me to put this all to rest (something I've been meaning to do for a while). Hall was NOT the majority owner of that land when he made those statements, and is still NOT the majority of that land. And had I known that early on, I wouldn't have even written the story because the truth is those affiliated with the majority owner, Bob Howard, told me the next day he wasn't so certain about the development dreamed up by Hall. And it's Howard, not Hall, who has the extensive experience doing urban development (Hall is not involved with the MidTown development). So it's time to scrap that story, quit using it as proof that the site was destined to be developed.
Could it be ripe for development in the future if it's not slated for a convention center? Absolutely. But the story I did when the dealership closed has taken on mythical status - and I really wish I had never written it. Because of what I know now, and what I didn't know then, it was certainly premature and possibly misleading.

[Steve]

And at this very moment, I've basically supported, to some extent, arguments made by Popsy, who has made it clear in the past he has no use for my reporting, and challenged Spartan, someone I consider a friend (and still do!)

[Popsy]

And at this very moment, I've basically supported, to some extent, arguments made by Popsy, who has made it clear in the past he has no use for my reporting, and challenged Spartan, someone I consider a friend (and still do!)

Hang in there Steve. If your bias on subjects didn't creep into your stories I would have no problem.

[hoya]

And at this very moment, I've basically supported, to some extent, arguments made by Popsy, who has made it clear in the past he has no use for my reporting, and challenged Spartan, someone I consider a friend (and still do!)

To tell the truth, all you internet people look alike to me.

[Spartan]

So, can we "still persist that Howard is a legitimate developer" ?

I can accept that Fred Hall was off his rocker, even though that should have been cleared up a LONG time ago. I had generally assumed they were kinda turned off on the idea of development by the city's "better idea" anyway - there are still a handful of significantly better uses for the site...like gee, a contiguous park. Or the City Arts Center being in the "Arts District."

The problem is that you not only forego those better uses but also MUST assume the negative consequences that always come with convention centers. They don't exactly fill surrounding environs with activity and street life. And this site will be particularly tricky because generally at least one side must be kind of ugly, reserved for loading docks and HVAC and the in-sexy features these facilities MUST have similar to the Robinson and EKG Cox frontage.

So where are the loading docks going to go? Along the boulevard? Fronting the park? Beside the Chesapeake Arena? In front of the Myriad Gardens? Which side gets stuck with this features?

[TAlan CB]

Accepting (though not wanting to) that the center will be built here, the west side would be the least intrusive. Not that this is good either, then the challenge is to create a design-creative loading dock. There is a practical side to this issue, how much money is justified in covering or hiding (underground) this functional aspect of this project? Though having the C.C. at this location is disruptive to the park line to the river, it could also place constant traffic flow from the "outside" (visiting) in the middle of large development. At some point one has to be pragmatic or the process never begins - no less ends. Problems are just opportunities for creative solutions.

[Spartan]

The west side is where they plan expansion, which we're also on the hook for.

it could also place constant traffic flow

The building will be vacant, aside from security personnel on the premises to keep people away from it, 99% of the time.

[Rover]

The west side is where they plan expansion, which we're also on the hook for.



The building will be vacant, aside from security personnel on the premises to keep people away from it, 99% of the time.

Are you saying that the actual usage rate for our current convention center is 1%? You expect it to be used 4 days a year? This sounds as exaggerated as the consultants' reports.

What is the tipping point you estimate for the number of users/yr which would make a CC sensible? Let's assume we opt not to do the expansion and we have a moderate contribution to a first class hotel downtown with convention services. You have given it thought, I'm sure. If a better location in your eyes was found, what size and type of cc would you support, if any? Do meeting halls, etc. have any place in the public realm, or do you advocate only having private facilities? What specifically would be your recommendation to the steering committee for Maps and the Council?

This is a sincere question. I hear a lot more about what the critics of the current plan are against than what they are for and would do other than scrap it, and if they can't scrap it, move it away. I respect your perspective and would like more of your viewpoint.

[Spartan]

Are you saying that the actual usage rate for our current convention center is 1%? You expect it to be used 4 days a year? This sounds as exaggerated as the consultants' reports.

No, I expect the convention center to be utilized for around 100 hours a year. I will absolutely agree that the CC will be a GOOD thing for traffic flow for an hour two days a week, but any other time, there's no way it won't be a BAD thing for traffic flow. That's what I'm looking at.

What is the tipping point you estimate for the number of users/yr which would make a CC sensible? Let's assume we opt not to do the expansion and we have a moderate contribution to a first class hotel downtown with convention services. You have given it thought, I'm sure. If a better location in your eyes was found, what size and type of cc would you support, if any? Do meeting halls, etc. have any place in the public realm, or do you advocate only having private facilities? What specifically would be your recommendation to the steering committee for Maps and the Council?

This is a sincere question. I hear a lot more about what the critics of the current plan are against than what they are for and would do other than scrap it, and if they can't scrap it, move it away. I respect your perspective and would like more of your viewpoint.

Rover, I appreciate your sincere question and the opportunity to talk more about what I'm FOR than what I'm AGAINST. The reality is that I'm not qualified to talk convention centers anymore than CSL is (which is not very). In high school and college while I was still at OU I did a lot of volunteering with the CVB to land conventions, and shadowed several people at the Chamber, and have had a great number of family friends and other good contacts who work for various economic development agencies.

It was one of the old CVB VPs (who's now in FW) who absolutely convinced me that we have to have a convention hotel. It needs 600-800 rooms, that I believe. I also think the public realm should very much provide a business facility, including meeting rooms, event/exhibition space, etc. However I do not think we should be doing a Y2K-style convention center. We should take the medical mart concept, with lots of high-tech exhibition space, IT infrastructure, meeting rooms, etc.-and make this concept our own as an "energy mart." That will be the only facility that 1, allows us to compete with Houston and Dallas; and 2, actually grows our share of business, rather than staying steady.

I think we absolutely SHOULD spend the full $250 million on it IF and ONLY IF we brand it as the "OKC Energy Mart and Convention Center." If we don't do that, then I think it's worth about $100 million max just to have a new facility that's not embarrassing, throw in another $20 million loan for a CC hotel. Regardless of whatever we do, it should be done in East Bricktown where there are currently 6, 7, 8 (I dunno, I'm loosing track) hotels existing or under development.

This is the problem though with having a city manager hired and still stuck in the 1990s, with very little experience in innovation (or bringing projects in on time, as promised, on budget, blah blah), but all the experience in the world looking at things from an engineer's perspective and caving to whatever the Chamber says. We're not exactly pursuing an open and public discourse about innovative ideas when we pull out the MAPS checkbook, save for the streetcar element.

edit: Just as a final point, realizing I didn't answer about a visitor count threshold - I'm not contesting that. I do believe that OKC has enough business visitors to absolutely justify being in the convention business. I'm really not as negative on this subject as people think, I just want to be emphatic about the impact on the rest of downtown, which must be addressed.

[BoulderSooner]

100 hours a year ... really ...... um no .. and bricktown makes no sense for a new CC

[Teo9969]

Okay, I'm going to play Sim City here for a second: What about displacing the CC 1 or 2 blocks West of the currently selected location? Like So:



This seems to me like it would spur on more diverse and useful development of the surrounding area. I imagine another Hotel on one of the 3 blocks not allocated to the Convention Center between Hudson and Robinson, and it could be a nice one considering it would be surrounded by 2 parks, the Peake, and the Convention center. It leaves room for potential residential development between the two parks (you could even call the development "Between the Parks"!). Restaurant and Retail would be attracted down here because it would be ensconced in destination areas, possibly with a residential component.

Furthermore, the expansion of the Convention center can go more than one direction: West, North, East depending on what is needed, what other development is taking places etc.

Is this feasible?

[Spartan]

100 hours a year ... really ...... um no .. and bricktown makes no sense for a new CC

How so? Even the consultants thought it was second-best, so it had to make some sense even to dead-panned consultants

Is there somewhere (not in the middle of a park) that makes sense to you?

[BoulderSooner]

How so? Even the consultants thought it was second-best, so it had to make some sense even to dead-panned consultants

Is there somewhere (not in the middle of a park) that makes sense to you?

the site south of the chesapeake arena makes the most sense to me with the hotel on the blvd on the north end and with the loading docks on the east side facing shields ..

[Spartan]

Fair enough. I think if you don't use the entire east park frontage, and preserve the historic building shells along the park edge and reuse as some innovative cafes, kiosks, gift shops, etc - then you don't have much of a problem with a superblock fronting the park.

Amazing how a worse alternative makes the old plan not seem so bad.

[Urbanized]

OK, the distortion of fact to suit a particular argument is a little out of control here. Spartan, I love you man, but 100 hours a year? I'm sure there are utilization numbers available somewhere, but I would guess the Cox Center's CURRENT usage is in the HUNDREDS of hours. PER MONTH. That is, if you count multiple simultaneous events as separate "event hours," much as the State Fairgrounds claims 1,000+s event days per year. There are CONSTANTLY events at Cox Center, spread throughout event rooms and exhibition halls.

While I think it's possible that the NEW economic impact of a new convention center might have been overstated (as happens to just about any public event/project), it doesn't mean that a new facility is not sorely needed. Very few people here or elsewhere seem to understand how many local/statewide/regional events are held there every week. There also are routinely events that are more national in scope related to the energy industry, government employees, sports governing bodies and the like. Those are frankly pretty immune to the ups and downs of the national convention industry, but ARE impacted by substandard facilities and oversold facilities.

Folks, we're not competing with Chicago, or D.C., or Boston, or Vegas, or San Antonio, and it's highly unlikely we ever will be. Therefore we shouldn't be comparing ourselves to them in any way. In fact, when the national destinations are suffering because of reduced budgets, airfare, etc., I think we should BENEFIT by providing a good regional location easily accessible by highway. We excel in this regard.

The problem is that our facilities are currently just slightly better than an embarrassment. Instead of competing on an even playing field with tier II or even peer tier III cities, right now we are competing WITHIN THE METRO AND STATE with superior conference facilities like Reed Center in Midwest City and the Embassy Suites in Norman. Do we REALLY want Oklahoma City to compete for conference and meeting business with Midwest City?

Last thought: much of the negativity regarding the "blank wall" being turned on the Myriad Gardens could be countered by fronting that sidewalk with small retail space that could house things like coffee shops, services, small restaurants, shops that cater to conference attendees AND downtowners, etc. These spaces would relate to Reno much the same way the retail spaces in Aloft face 2nd Street, and could also open to an interior hallway in the convention center during events. While I know many here are hoping against hope that the CC is relocated (or even killed, which would be incredibly irresponsible), I'd hope that those whose biggest problem with it is the "dead" park frontage would as a fallback start clamoring for the incorporation of good mixed use on the Reno frontage.

[BoulderSooner]

this

[Mr. Cotter]

Nicely said, Urbanized.

To the 100 hours a year: There is something happening at Cox almost every day, usually in the meeting rooms. The Bar Exam alone takes 40 hours a year of the full exhibit space.