Convention Center

[Plutonic Panda]

Reading the comments on that article makes me realize how disconnected a lot of people are.

The comments about the design gave me a chuckle.

I noticed that too. When they did an article on the street car people where saying things like "so I'm gonna have to pay for something that I live 10 miles from and will never use" "it's a called a car, go buy one" "this is just another failure of OKC" and they were getting positive marks on their comments too!!!??????

[Spartan]

The comments about the design gave me a chuckle.

Who registers to post on a site as Dr Mengele?!?

[Pete]

Funding, costs for Oklahoma City convention center hotel, parking still unknown

The Oklahoma City Council was advised Tuesday a new garage and a publicly subsidized conference hotel are unknown costs the city faces beyond the $250 million set to be spent on a new convention center.

[Pete]

This was just posted by Ed Shadid on Facebook:

To achieve the economic impact touted during the MAPS3 campaign by a new convention center there will have to be substantial additional investment of taxpayer dollars. This was outlined clearly in a study by Convention Sports and Leisure in 2009 prior to the MAPS3 campaign which indicated that a 600 room hotel would be required and that no city in recent memory had been able to accomplish such a task without massive public subsidies. Despite my repeated requests, this study has yet to be released to the public. This study advocates for $250 million to be spent in phase one (discussed in MAPS3) along with the taxpayers largely or completely the funding a hotel and then investing an additional $150 million for a convention center expansion. In addition, the current $250 million budget does not include taxpayer money for parking which could run in the $50 million range. The taxpayers in Nashville just invested $128 million plus a 62.5% property tax decrease for 20 years to make their convention center hotel deal with Omni work. Ask yourself this question: if you buy a car for $25,000 and are told that it is going to do certain things and then afterwards learn that you have to buy special tires for $10,000 and two engine components for another $15,000 and $5,000 in order to realize those promises, would you feel misled? If the salesman said "we didn't talk about it or that you would have to buy it but we showed you a picture that had the tires in it" would that be acceptable to you? Would you feel you had a valid contract with the salesman?

[Just the facts]

I think it is very clear that the average person didn't know the $250 million MAPS III funding was only seed money.

[HangryHippo]

My god, this situation becomes worse by the day it seems. What in the hell is going on with all these costs/studies/hidden info/etc.? It's becoming unreal at this point.

[OKCTalker]

So is the cost without a hotel now $450 million ($250 million phase I + $150 million expansion + $50 million garage)?

And I think Shadid meant to say "...62.5% property tax INCREASE for 20 years..."

[Pete]

So is the cost without a hotel now $450 million ($250 million phase I + $150 million expansion + $50 million garage)?

Yes, and that's assuming that $250 million is realistic for Phase I, which is highly suspect in itself.

[Lafferty Daniel]

I would vote for the next MAPS if it included funding for the expansion as long as they choose a different site for the CC. I like the site south of CHK Arena. As long as they plan to keep it on the old Ford site, they won't get my vote for more money.

[Just the facts]

So is the cost without a hotel now $450 million ($250 million phase I + $150 million expansion + $50 million garage)?

And I think Shadid meant to say "...62.5% property tax INCREASE for 20 years..."

No I think it is property tax cut for the land the convention hotel is on. That means the City will collect very little property tax on the hotel development for 20 years.

[dankrutka]

I'm just afraid this project is going to kill the MAPs goodwill between the city and the voters. MAPs has been a tremendous success, but this could end it. The council and mayor have been very irresponsible on what is the least popular MAPs 3 project.

End it now and give the money to streetcar.

[Pete]

I'm just afraid this project is going to kill the MAPs goodwill between the city and the voters. MAPs has been a tremendous success, but this could end it. The council and mayor have been very irresponsible on what is the least popular MAPs 3 project. .

Yes, and then they conspired to move it way up on the timeline.


One thing has also changed in a big way since the original MAPS: The free-flow of information and discussion. People are watching much more closely now and can get their own data, rather than rely on the continual cry of "All is well. Nothing to see here."

We are really experiencing the effects of this on the Boulevard; scrutiny and citizen involvement is rapidly escalating across the board.

[Anonymous.]

Is there any public access to the "Convention Center Site Location Study"?

I feel like the opportunity costs of this chosen location were extremely underestimated. This land is the real deal, why is the city so bent on putting their foot in it????!!! So frustrating...

[Bellaboo]

This thread just depressess my azz.

[Pete]

Is there any public access to the "Convention Center Site Location Study"?

Yes, I just added the link to the article at the top of the page.

[HangryHippo]

This thread just depressess my azz.

Mine too.

[GaryOKC6]

Ok I know I am in the minority here and certainly no disrespect to any of my friends on this site. But, I actually like the location and the idea of the park on both sides. It fells like a great setting to me. The proximity to bricktown is fine. It is actually better than other convention facilities in the cities that I have works conventions in. The thread makes this seem like it is so aweful and I just don't see it. Again, I respect everyone's opinion and this is simply my take.

[BoulderSooner]

Ok I know I am in the minority here and certainly no disrespect to any of my friends on this site. But, I actually like the location and the idea of the park on both sides. It fells like a great setting to me. The proximity to bricktown is fine. It is actually better than other convention facilities in the cities that I have works conventions in. The thread makes this seem like it is so aweful and I just don't see it. Again, I respect everyone's opinion and this is simply my take.

so you enjoy walking by the east and west side of the cox??

[GaryOKC6]

so you enjoy walking by the east and west side of the cox??

I do it every day.

[Anonymous.]

Yes, I just added the link to the article at the top of the page.

Thanks I was looking everywhere. Looks like little to zero consideration for potential opportunity for the land was really taken in this study. I will be very dissapointed if the CC ends up on this "core to shore north" location.

I actually like the idea of using the lumberyard SE of the 'Peake and placing the hotel in the now U-Haul space. But hey, they want to 'stay away from the railroad'. Not to mention they are probably really wanting it not to be stuck next to that awful cotton-seed mill for who knows how long.

[GaryOKC6]

I do it every day.

Just out of curiousity, what does walking on the east and west side of the cox have to do with the rendering above?

[Anonymous.]

Ok I know I am in the minority here and certainly no disrespect to any of my friends on this site. But, I actually like the location and the idea of the park on both sides. It fells like a great setting to me. The proximity to bricktown is fine. It is actually better than other convention facilities in the cities that I have works conventions in. The thread makes this seem like it is so aweful and I just don't see it. Again, I respect everyone's opinion and this is simply my take.

It is a great location, but it isn't the best use of the land. This is an area that has the potential to be something really nice and the proposals want to slap a big shell box with a hotel on it. This isn't about it being a good or best spot for the CC, it is about this being a good and possibly the best spot for anything (private development) at the moment.

I think we can all agree years down the road we will be saying the lots south of the 'Boulevard' will be the next best spots once development moves south to fill the I-40 void, but until then we need to use the now 'best spots' for the 'best use'.

Just out of curiousity, what does walking on the east and west side of the cox have to do with the rendering above?

Because the sides of the Cox center are disgusting, and one of them faces the nicest park in OKC. You really want two ugly walls facing this same park? Not to mention it would then put a large boring wall facing the new 'Boulevard' as well.

[Just the facts]

I actually like the idea of using the lumberyard SE of the 'Peake and placing the hotel in the now U-Haul space. But hey, they want to 'stay away from the railroad'. Not to mention they are probably really wanting it not to be stuck next to that awful cotton-seed mill for who knows how long.

Not that it matters but 5 rails of mainline railroad run right through the center of the Georgia World Congress Center, and when I say through, I mean right down the middle.

[GaryOKC6]

It is a great location, but it isn't the best use of the land. This is an area that has the potential to be something really nice and the proposals want to slap a big shell box with a hotel on it. This isn't about it being a good or best spot for the CC, it is about this being a good and possibly the best spot for anything (private development) at the moment.

I think we can all agree years down the road we will be saying the lots south of the 'Boulevard' will be the next best spots once development moves south to fill the I-40 void, but until then we need to use the now 'best spots' for the 'best use'.




Because the sides of the Cox center are disgusting, and one of them faces the nicest park in OKC. You really want two ugly walls facing this same park? Not to mention it would then put a large boring wall facing the new 'Boulevard' as well.

Wasn't there always suposed to be a pak there if no the convention center? I personally like the surroundings of a parkaround the convention center. I think they should build the CC there and then tear down the Cox center and use that for private development. I can not tell from the rendering above that it is going to just be a big box. there are lots of details missing.

[Just the facts]

I can not tell from the rendering above that it is going to just be a big box. there are lots of details missing.

That is one of the big concerns, with a limited budget, expensive land, and an even more expensive construction technique there isn't going to be a lot of money available for detail. However, that is only a small part of the problem. The other part is that convention centers create voids in the urban fabric and that is where the long-term danger lays.