Convention Center

[hfry]

^^ agreed! Pete do you have any idea if that extra 30 million that allotted to the CC will be put back into limbo or will it stay for a expansion for whatever site they choose? If they choose the east C2S site will they need to find another 30 million for the substation relocation?

[Pete]

^^ agreed! Pete do you have any idea if that extra 30 million that allotted to the CC will be put back into limbo or will it stay for a expansion for whatever site they choose? If they choose the east C2S site will they need to find another 30 million for the substation relocation?

That $30 million was previously set aside to relocate the substation when it looked like the cc was going to the east of Central Park.

So, that's probably what it will actually be used for now.

[josh]

Welcome to the world of costly real estate. In the end, I hope the city does not compromise the success of the convention center by choosing a sub-par site just to save money. I cannot believe OKC's land value is greater than in all the other U.S. cities that have convention centers. If it costs more than the original estimate, they need to refresh the numbers and be realistic. There is no reason OKC cannot have a cc when every other city can make it happen.

As to a waste of money. That is the way these things go. I know San Diego has spend $$$$ of dollars in the last decade on the stadium site, and we just learned this week that if the downtown site is chosen, it could take 7 years for them to get the rights to the property and clear it for construction. After millions of dollars in studies and proposals, that site is not even feasible in the timeline dictated by the Chargers.

Land value is definently not more expensive in OKC than all cities with convention centers. Not even close.

[BoulderSooner]

That $30 million was previously set aside to relocate the substation when it looked like the cc was going to the east of Central Park.

So, that's probably what it will actually be used for now.

And before all of that it was part of the cc budget

[Plutonic Panda]

Land valua in most cities on the plains are relatively cheap with a few exceptions.

[Stickman]

Land value is definently not more expensive in OKC than all cities with convention centers. Not even close.

AGREE! Waaaaaay overpriced.

[Pete]

I doubt many cities have built convention centers on land for which they paid $100 million.

[Spartan]

They should have studied the Bass Pro site. After all, we love to tear things down, so why don't we have a demo that unites everyone? Plus, pretty sure we already own that land...

[bchris02]

They should have studied the Bass Pro site. After all, we love to tear things down, so why don't we have a demo that unites everyone? Plus, pretty sure we already own that land...

I would totally support this.

[betts]

No need to go underground anywhere else either. That's one good thing that could come of this.

[Pete]

One other thing has changed that favors the South Core to Shore site (the name given for east of Central Park)...

In the image I posted, they had left out the OG&E offices as part of the proposed site. But now, OG&E has said it would give that property to the City if they moved to the Clayco site.

It seems like it almost has to go there or the Cox Center site and of the two, I'd rather they save the Cox site for a higher and better use.

On the other hand, Cox may be the only way this project is ever done on the scale on which they have been discussing (expanded meeting space, large hotel, etc.) But in that case, we still have the super block issue that would lead us back to underground solutions.

[hoya]

So what about taking the south half of the ClayCo property, and the space immediately to the south? It's the part I've marked here in blue.



If you're worried about eminent domain proceedings and using for a convention hotel, that's easy. Just put the hotel portion on the south part of the ClayCo site. We haven't sold that land to ClayCo yet.

If you're going to make some of it underground, it can run underneath Reno. ClayCo can either move all 4 of their buildings to the Stage Center site (which would make JTF happy), or they can change the site plan for the south portion so that you can fit in a convention hotel and some portion of the convention center.

[Pete]

Just so you know, the south part of that site you highlighted is owned by REHCO, the group the City was just doing battle with.

[hoya]

Well, poop. Perhaps they'll accept less money for that portion.

[s00nr1]

I just can't get over the timing and the length of time it took to make the decision to abandon the plan. Certainly the most controversial MAPS project to date and one that could cause voters to lose faith.

[Pete]

But it's a very good idea and thought.

I wonder if they'll even consider sites previously not identified in their study.

We would have to pay Populous all over again in that case, I'm sure. But, almost four years have passed since they did they final work.

[OKCnBA]

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I have to believe there is more to this decision than we know. Is it a hardball tactic to get this property at a lower price? Is some better property becoming available at a much lower price? Did some other buyer/use for the REHCO property strike a deal that cannot yet be announced? Or maybe there is nothing more to the situation. Regardless, this will be fun to watch.

[Pete]

The situation between REHCO and the City turned very sour and I believe it was not just due to the wide difference in price, but because the City denied REHCO the ability to incorporate the streets and alleys into their property and thus, did not want to pay them for that additional acreage.

In the end, REHCO had subpoena'd Cathy O'Connor and members of the Chamber for depositions and for whatever reason, the City did not want that to happen.

I don't think it's a coincidence the judge ruled Cathy had to testify on Friday and the date to do so was this coming Thursday. Today, Tuesday, the City pulls out completely after a 9-month process.

I'm trying to figure out what had the City so worried. I think I have a general idea but don't want to engage in too much conjecture until I do more research.

[Motley]

Wouldn't a good use of the lumberyard site (due to its proximity to the Coop) be the convention center? They could connect to the UHaul site or to the site west over Gaylord, and either build a cap or go underground with a peoplemover (like the trains at Denver International). Probably as expensive an option as buying the land from REHCO but on the other hand, it would put that land to good use and allow for the creation of a really unique convention complex on land that might be the most desirable for another use.

[hoya]

I think my next selection would be the North Bricktown site. As part of the convention center design, you could protect the rail line that would run through there. Whatever your preferred future rail path would be (looks like they'd want to curve it south so that it would flow more easily towards the Santa Fe station), it could integrate with the convention center itself. That shouldn't be too difficult.

On one side you'd have Deep Deuce and Aloft. On the other side you'd have Bricktown and the Holiday Inn Express. True, neither of those are convention hotels, but it would be quite convenient to have an extra 250 rooms literally right next door to the convention center. The Skirvin is a very short walk away, and so are the other Bricktown hotels on Sheridan.

Edit: You'd also have easy parking with the Ugliest Parking Garage in the World right on the other side of EK Gaylord. You might have to make up for the loss of those spaces elsewhere, but that's doable.

[Just the facts]

I am surprised no one has suggested the AICCM site as an alternative.

[Spartan]

But it's a very good idea and thought.

I wonder if they'll even consider sites previously not identified in their study.

We would have to pay Populous all over again in that case, I'm sure. But, almost four years have passed since they did they final work.

Why don't we go and get some real consultants instead? Definitely not Populous or CSL, which have track records as shills that just tell you what you want to hear. Find a consultant who gives more critical insights.

[Pete]

It's hard to believe that the site selection was made almost 4 years ago; it was June of 2011. That was after a lot of time was spent in workshops and studies.

And here we sit all this time, money and effort later, back at square 1.

[hoya]

I wonder if the city has already determined where the new location for the convention center will be. Maybe something fell into their laps while they were screwing around with the current group and decided to say screw 'em.

[Pete]

I wonder if the city has already determined where the new location for the convention center will be. Maybe something fell into their laps while they were screwing around with the current group and decided to say screw 'em.

I honestly don't think so.

It appears they made a hasty decision to drop the action completely after the depositions could no longer be delayed or avoided.

They briefed the City Council this AM and filed the dismissal within a few hours. Up until that time, there had been no inkling (unless you happened to be following postings to the case on-line and recognized the escalating issues in the last few weeks).