|
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on January 22, 2008, 12:32:44 pm World Article
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectID=11&articleID=20080122_1__Mayor23086 quote: Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on January 22, 2008, 12:35:58 pm So there is an exclusive window of 4 months for the city to make a plan to bring a stadium downtown in the East End somewhere. They don't know when. They don't know how much it will cost. They don't know how it will be funded.
Thanks for the excitement. At east you're interested in downtown and baseball. But I feel a bit let down. Plans for downtown seem to often fail anyway, what chance does a plan for a plan have? oh, and I'd like the plan for a plan to include a plan for the soon-to-be abandoned Drillers stadium. The city seems to be getting into the abandoned building business lately. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on January 22, 2008, 12:39:30 pm quote: current stadium is on County land, so it's not the City's deal. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: FOTD on January 22, 2008, 12:52:21 pm quote: This is being done to delay Jinx from going forward with the drillheads. Pretty obvious. The ole Sutton Stadium will be used for the relocation of the flea market....Randi Miller will figure sumthin out. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: tulsa1603 on January 22, 2008, 12:56:53 pm quote: I would love to see something come of this, but it seems like "plans" or in this case "plans for plans" come out every few months and rarely come to fruition.....I won't be holding my breath. It does give me some hope that the Drillers seem to want to stay in Tulsa, though. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on January 22, 2008, 01:10:13 pm quote: Good call Joe. Still, I'd like to see SOME plan for it. Expo Square has been a roll even after losing Bells, but I'd like to keep it up! Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: izmophonik on January 22, 2008, 01:12:39 pm It looks like the Tulsa World leaked the story.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080122_1__Mayor23086 Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Ibanez on January 22, 2008, 01:24:57 pm What an underwhelming announcement.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on January 22, 2008, 01:31:32 pm quote: You just posted the link that was at the beginning of the thread. I am more confident in this plan than previous ones. The global plan looked awesome, which might be why it failed. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: safetyguy on January 22, 2008, 01:51:00 pm Maybe Jenks can convince MLS to bring soccer to town since Tulsa never will... [:P]
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: inteller on January 22, 2008, 02:01:18 pm ok, so essentially Krazy Kathy got a gag order until the end of may. BFD. Jenks and Lamson have already spoken enough that Jenks can continue on with plans. When June 1 rolls around and Tulsa has nothing to show for Lamson will say "FU I'm going to jenks" (well maybe he wont say that, but I would).
So Tulsa has 4 months to come up with a proposal that doesn't cost more than Jenks. That means finding a developer who is willing to gamble and then securing a TIF. Any burden they try to foist on taxpayers will be shot down in a bigger ball of flames than the river tax because unlike then, people KNOW there is a cheaper solution. Yeah, good luck with that KK. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Conan71 on January 22, 2008, 02:02:42 pm quote: "So there is an exclusive window of 4 months for the city to make a plan to bring a stadium downtown in the East End somewhere. They don't know when. They don't know how much it will cost. They don't know how it will be funded." No wonder you are feeling a little let down. Didn't we recently have a similar scenario with the county and a "big plan"? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: ttownclown on January 22, 2008, 02:04:30 pm quote: That's a great idea- something similar to Pizza Hut Park in Frisco, TX would work great in Jenks' new development. -Just as the stadium in Frisco, it could also double for High School Football/Soccer/Concerts. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: spoonbill on January 22, 2008, 02:21:26 pm quote: Good guess! Yes, the Jenks group intends to continue with the development of the stadium, with or without the Drillers. It will serve for far more than just baseball. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on January 22, 2008, 02:43:28 pm Jenks could go outdoor ampitheater...
Please? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: perspicuity85 on January 22, 2008, 03:18:52 pm This is step one in bringing the Drillers downtown. Nothing more, nothing less. Inteller, you may be right, this could be a classic example of Tulsa-style bull****. But, I doubt Lamson would forego the possibility of negotiating with the Jenks developers for four months if he didn't at least want to make the downtown plan work, or more importantly, see the potential for profitability in a downtown stadium. There's no reason to jump to conclusions. Tulsa's juxtaposition of unfounded pessimism and unfounded optimism never ceases to amaze me.
I think this is the perfect time for the corporate community to step up. Amid a possible recession, Tulsa's still-prevalent energy companies stand a unique chance to profit. Now would be a good time for them to stimulate the local community by investing in an East End stadium village project. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dayzella on January 22, 2008, 03:22:50 pm The boss has a theory that the private funding is an already involved angel investor from a Tulsa blueblood/red clay family.
I'm not sure if she's in the know on that one, or just engaging in wishful thinking. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Gaspar on January 22, 2008, 03:24:13 pm Wow! This sounds like desperation!
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on January 22, 2008, 03:28:33 pm In case there was any question, it WAS desperation, but it's now a plan. That doesn't make it a bad thing. It is what it is.
Unless the City of Tulsa came up with something (anything) concrete, the Drillers were gone, daddy, gone to Jenks. This was enough to hold that thought and give Tulsa more time to come up with something concrete. I hoped for something more solid. But if this is enough to hold Chuck for four more months while gathering public support, so be it. Whatever works. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Gaspar on January 22, 2008, 04:32:10 pm Anyone have a copy of the site-plan. I'm looking at the site mentioned and I can't see how it all would fit. Are they going to have parking on-site?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: brunoflipper on January 22, 2008, 04:43:38 pm she's already got the seed money...
read between the lines, this is not desperation... the may 30th date ties up the drillers until we get done with the street bond... lamson really, really wants to be downtown... i bet it starts somewhere around 2nd and runs down to 6th street... and there wont be a walmart anywhere close... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on January 22, 2008, 05:52:20 pm My instincts tell me that this has a decent chance of happening. One snag I can see may be the, " I hate downtown crowd joining up with the No Taxes of any sort crowd, combining and saying we can get a ballpark for free in Jenks" people spoiling any possible hotel tax increase if that has to be voted on. Though Tulsans per say wont be paying that hotel tax, the nay sayers wont care and will scream their lines of protest quite loudly.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on January 22, 2008, 06:38:03 pm Taken from other thread:
(http://tulsadrillers.com.ismmedia.com/ISM2/NewsManager/1239.jpeg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on January 22, 2008, 06:43:11 pm quote: I really hope you are right, but my head tells me otherwise. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on January 22, 2008, 07:41:47 pm Anyone want to bet lunch? I'm like 0-2 and willing to bet lunch on this plan coming to fruition!
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Wilbur on January 22, 2008, 08:55:56 pm quote: WE CAN GET A BALL PARK FOR FREE IN JENKS. And what exactly is wrong with that? Why is it worse to have private enterprise pay for things? Better then the 'taxpayers buy everything we don't need crowd' believing the government is the cure to all our ills. Now the government is the cure to all our baseball needs as well. But remember, the city is broke (how many times have we heard that lately) but we got a new city hall. Now we need a baseball stadium. Plus we'll be voting on new streets right after we vote on countless other projects because the city can't seem to figure out what we need. Great priorities. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on January 22, 2008, 09:07:31 pm I like how everyone suddenly thinks the Jenks ballpark is a done deal. No-one has put a billion dollars of private money into anything in Tulsa yet everyone assumes these people have the cash in hand and can make it happen.
If Tulsa can do it without any cost to the taxpayer then do it. There is no guarantee a Jenks ballpark would ever happen regardless of what Tulsa does. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on January 22, 2008, 09:18:36 pm quote: Knock knock. Who's there? A QUARTER OF A BILLION DOLLAR SUBSIDY. The Jenks river development is made possible by a $282 million TIF. Now, what were you saying about private enterprise? These things don't happen without public help. If you don't care whether they happen or not, then butt out. I like baseball. I like urban areas. I like them together. Further, there's no "we." I will reiterate that the suburbs, Jenks specifically, are sucking life out of the city core. This is fueled by specific enmity from suburbanites toward the city core they left behind. If you don't think this phenomenon exists, just go visit the Tulsa World's website and see all the disparaging comments left by citizens of Jenks, Bixby, Sapulpa, and Owasso towards this stadium idea. It's none of their business, either, but they appear to believe they have a vested interest in kicking the city while it's down. Apparently a crappy inner city validates their bland, "safe," suburban existence. Finally, every time these city-hating suburbanites snag another attraction from the city core, it costs the city in terms of population loss, tax loss, and quality of life. The worse the quality of life in the city center, the more people and jobs leave. A vital core is imperative for a healthy city. A baseball stadium has been shown over and over to contribute to the vitality of downtowns. Say what you will about other options, but a new ballpark is a relatively small investment and is always a home run. It's going to cost less than the new city hall and bring hundreds of thousands of people to the center of town, a center in which the municipality has invested billions. Is it fiscally conservative to allow these billions to go to waste? No. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Kenosha on January 22, 2008, 10:07:22 pm 1) There is 40 million set aside in that TIF for a sports facility of some kind...Why does it have to be a baseball stadium? (Rufneck? Where aaaarrrre you?)
2) I don't think the stadium is a dealbreaker for the River project in Jenks. Especially if you look at their location of the stadium. They obviously could have integrated it into the development concept more completely, but to me it looks as if you could just wipe it off the plan and still progress with a pretty amazing development. 3) I think Chuck Lamson would prefer to be downtown if they can make it work, otherwise the trigger would have already been pulled. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Chicken Little on January 23, 2008, 12:30:32 am quote:Nothing's free. Like Floyd said. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: FOTD on January 23, 2008, 06:10:33 am Where's the parking?
It's in the code I thought..... Oh. If it's a socialist developement, the capitalist rules don't apply. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: waterboy on January 23, 2008, 06:24:30 am Is this a done deal as Ch8, and Ch6 are reporting? They say that Jenks has lost the Drillers and that this is merely a negotiation period for terms. I didn't get that feeling from reading the story and watching Lamson. Are they that incompetent or is there something we're missing here?
Sorry to post on both of the threads. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Wilbur on January 23, 2008, 06:28:17 am Can't they just play in the new arena?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: booWorld on January 23, 2008, 07:06:55 am quote: There's no zoning code requirement for off-street parking in the Central Business District. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on January 23, 2008, 08:05:38 am quote: I think it's more of a done deal than the terms of the agreement would make it seem. The reasons I think so are twofold. First, RecycleMichael went to the press conference and reports that the mood was one of true accomplishment--the principals, Lamson included, appeared to believe they had reached a real agreement in principle, leaving only pesky details (every single detail) to be ironed out over the next four months. Second, the updated Tulsa World story contains more quotes from Lamson that appear to back this up. Apparently Tulsa showed him a ton of love when he started dealing with Jenks, and pulled him back from the brink. (Happy to see that our efforts meant something!) quote: Emphasis mine. Apparently Lamson views this move as truly spurning the Jenks group--he's aware that he's burning bridges, and has no guarantee that they'll still be willing to deal after May 31. This is all conjecture, but the underlying mood apparently was this was an affirmative commitment to Tulsa, tentative terms aside. My guess is that there is a lot more going on behind the scenes, and this public show of negotiation was the first step in making the final deal work. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on January 23, 2008, 08:43:56 am I am sure there is still a lot of work to be done. The Drillers want a great stadium that includes things for the fans like berm seating and luxury boxes and things for the players like workout facilities and batting cages.
It is obvious to me that the Drillers want this location as their first choice. The Drillers will succeed wherever they go. This location will help downtown Tulsa succeed as well. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: inteller on January 23, 2008, 08:46:15 am quote: The terms "Channel 6", "Channel 8", and "incompetent" are synonymous. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: breitee on January 23, 2008, 08:50:47 am Don't forget Channel 2, the worst station in Tulsa.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: breitee on January 23, 2008, 08:57:30 am Don't forget Channel 2, the worst station in Tulsa.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TulsaSooner on January 23, 2008, 09:08:23 am What about Fox? I'm sure you all didn't mean to leave them out of the incompetent news conspiracy.
[:D] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: restored2x on January 23, 2008, 09:09:16 am I really hope this works out downtown. Part of the urban redevelopment and revival of my hometown, Baltimore, included a downtown ballpark for the Orioles. I grew up and played around that old railyard as a small kid. The area was ugly, scarred, and very dangerous (murder capital of US). Now it is an area with loft apartments, mom and pop businesses, and a smattering of nice bars and restaurants (local and chain). The hotels became very profitable and the tax base grew like crazy.
Hopefully, private developers will snatch up adjacent land to build affordable (yuppie-affordable) housing. Downtowns don't survive or progress just being a destination. That's why they die in the first place. People move out. Affordable housing is replaced by businesses that fail. Will people come downtown? Just watch a baseball game on TV that takes place in Cleveland's or Baltimore's stadiums. Baltimore City is 70-80% African-American. Scan the stands on any gameday - 90% are white people. Where did they come from? Not the city - most come from "Jenks", "Broken Arrow", "Owasso", etc. Some come from the yuppie rowhouses the city sold to them for $1, contingent on them renovating with a city-carried renovation loan. Brilliant. Now if we could just come up with something a little more comprehensive as far as affordable development of the area around the proposed new stadium. (NOT WALMART) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: waterboy on January 23, 2008, 09:32:36 am quote: Actually, they all appear to have been more insightful than I was. Though, Ch8 breaking the news to a Jenks resident that they weren't getting the Drillers afterall, was a bit unseemly. Even though I'm not a big supporter of tax supported sports (except OU football), I hope it turns out alright so Downtown builds on the Arena, city hall, streets improvement type momentum. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: izmophonik on January 23, 2008, 09:50:20 am Jenks sooooo thought they had this one...It's nice to see another positive thing happen downtown.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on January 23, 2008, 09:56:03 am quote: (http://cache.gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2007/06/nelson-haha.gif) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TulsaSooner on January 23, 2008, 09:56:46 am quote: For what it's worth, I believe OU's Athletic Department is self-supported by the revenues it generates and not tax supported. [:)] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on January 23, 2008, 10:11:22 am quote: Anyone want to identify the other stuff in this picture (other than the stadium and the PSO area) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: spoonbill on January 23, 2008, 10:34:29 am quote: The buildings at the lower right seem to be retail??? but they are 5,000 sq/ft each, and oriented so that each bay would only be 35' deep with some kind of court yard or service access in the center that only measures 21' x 21'. They would require a parking count of 66. Depending on the layout and orientation this would translate to 16,000 to 22,000 sq/ft of parking lot. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Breadburner on January 23, 2008, 10:34:42 am quote: Bingo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: brunoflipper on January 23, 2008, 10:47:33 am quote: city development block to the west... private ownership to the south west... the four smaller insets all show slight variations in the arrangement of the outbuildings with onsite parking lots included... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Hawkins on January 23, 2008, 11:47:17 am quote: I feel a glimmer of hope coming on. Maybe we can still get the Drillers in the river development area in the South Tulsa/Jenks area. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on January 23, 2008, 09:22:34 pm quote: But Camden Yards has a capacity of nearly 50,000 seats... for the first 6 or 7 years from its opening, average attendance was 45,000 fans per game. A stand-alone 6k seat minor league ballpark isn't going to magically spur economic development on its own... Ripken Stadium, Aberdeen, MD, pictured below... five years after it opened in 2002... (http://www.baltimoresun.com/media/photo/2007-07/31158896.jpg) Comparing a major league ballpark at Camden Yards to a new Texas League AA ballpark isn't comparing apples to oranges... it's comparing apples to, say... watermelons. This park should be compared to new ballparks in Springfield, North Little Rock, Frisco, TX, and Springdale, AR... are the benefits going to be worth the costs on a city-owned ballpark? Here's a cautionary tale: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/harford/bal-te.ha.stadium14jul14,0,3949744.story quote: The City of Tulsa has 4 mos... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on January 23, 2008, 10:14:32 pm quote: "Rufneck? Where aaaarrrre you?" (http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/how-scooby-doo-works-5.jpg) The 6th & Elgin site has been the Drillers first choice since at least August 2005-- and they really wanted to piggyback off of Global Development/Kissler after the MLS deal fell through sometime Jan/Feb 2006... I still think the Drillers have been using the Jenks site as leverage to prevent the city of Tulsa from cornering them into accepting a compromise site --- one between a couple of refineries (I don't think Tulsa Landing passed Lamson's "smell test") or another site just north of the IDL around OSU-Tulsa... But Jenks has a viable plan and I wouldn't blame the Drillers if they took it... But if that anchor sporting goods store for the Jenks project is Dick's Sporting Goods, who knows? They are a major sponsor of MLS these days and got naming rights to Denver's new stadium in Commerce City. $40mil ain't gonna buy a state of the art 22k capacity stadium, but that seems like wishful thinking these days anyway... especially after the death of Lamar Hunt, Tulsa's managed to fall off Major League Soccer's post-Beckham/PoshSpice radar screen... for at least the next few years... possibly forever... So, if Jenks ends up building a Union-Tuttle style high school football stadium for the Trojans with a capacity around 10k and add a few extra yards on either sideline to make the field soccer-friendly, it'd be a great facility for a USL1 team... it could have a concert stage on one end, and if you wanted to add a pipedream or two, make the stadium site expandable in the future to 22k-plus capacity... Problem is, the only Tulsa people pushing publicly these days for a place to play pro-soccer outdoors would be Coach Ali Abidi (sponsored by Amini's Galleria?) http://www.okfalconsfc.com/index.php and two un-named folks pushing for a women's soccer team-- if I had to guess, it'd be the Luettes from Thrifty who bankrolled the Oklahoma Outrage women's team who played at Metro Christian for a couple of years... Luette's Okla. Outrage were lucky to draw a few hundred fans per game (although they did manage to draw over 4300 fans for an exhibition against the New York WUSA team at Broken Arrow HS)... Abidi coached the Tulsa Roughnecks men's team in the USL D-3 which folded after the 1999 season... they were lucky to draw 1,000 fans per game. Small potatoes in my opinion. Depressing, really. Another problem is that there are other unidentified people who've signed confidentiality agreements... we don't know if they'd want a team in Jenks, we don't know if they have a ton of money... we don't know if they're purely interested in a Major League Soccer team or if they're downtown-only people... or maybe they were just figments of former mayor LaFortune's imagination... [:P] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Kenosha on January 23, 2008, 11:03:45 pm Pizza Hut Park in Frisco cost 80 million while the Rapids in Commerce City (Denver) cost 131 million, BUT those included all of the site work, utilities, roads, tournament fields etc. Not to mention, if you've ever been to either place, while the stadiums are beautiful, they are in the middle of freaking nowhere. So they spend money on amenities because there is nothing else to do out there. That isn't the case here...you are already building all of the amenities into the adjacent development, plus all of the engineering, road work, etc. can be absorbed into the cost of the project as a whole. If there is room for extra soccer fields, this seems an ideal location for a major league soccer franchise. South Tulsa is Soccer crazy for one...two, you already have 40 mill in hand for an ownership group...and any ownership group worth its salt should be able to raise the remaining cash needed for the facility.
If I were the city leaders in Jenks, I'd be calling the league tomorrow... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on January 23, 2008, 11:14:43 pm Which league?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Kenosha on January 23, 2008, 11:18:02 pm MLS, preferably...I think if you are going to get fans to the game, they are going to want to see Dallas, DC, and LA, just like back in the day with Beckenbauer, Canalgia and whatnot. I also think that an ownership group would only want to deal with the bigs...JMO.
Another thought...Sponsorship.. QuikTrip Park. Thats got to be worth a few million bucks... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: inteller on January 24, 2008, 07:05:01 am quote: or BoK park. You know, last time i checked there were more than two companies in this town. Pretty ****ing sad that everyone keeps going back to those two for sponsorships. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Kenosha on January 24, 2008, 07:43:01 am quote: You are a crank first thing in the morning, inteller. My point was illustrative, not literal, grumpy. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: carltonplace on January 24, 2008, 11:01:56 am quote: Great post FLoyd Two things I think OKC missed out on with their ball park that I hope we don't replicate. 1. Why all that open concrete in front of it? Is that for street vendors on game day? gathering of citizenry? Why can't the ball park back right up to the street? 2. There is room underneath a ball park for retail. Rental space could help pay for upkeep and maybe even pay off construction costs sooner. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: inteller on January 24, 2008, 11:54:40 am quote: it wasn't fiscally conservative to spend the billions in the first place so don't give me that line. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: inteller on January 24, 2008, 11:56:21 am quote: worst? They have the HAWT reporters. That puts them way ahead of the others. Who cares what comes out of their mouth.[}:)] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on January 24, 2008, 12:49:55 pm quote: That's a great idea, cp... It's got the wheels in my mind turning. Call the Mayor's office and suggest it! Restaurants and storefronts abutting the street with the stands over them.. The only issue would be where the ticket office is located. Get the tenants, get the revenue! Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Chicken Little on January 24, 2008, 12:52:58 pm quote:I think he's talking about the billions invested in the downtown core, i.e., all of those tall buildings. And therefore, of course it made fiscal sense to build them when they were built...they were privately funded. I think downtown still has a purpose. I think that businesses still need to interact, and that face-to-face meetings are critical. But even if you think that downtown is a dinosaur built upon an outdated business model, it's stupid to walk away from it. There are billions of public and private dollars tied up in that square mile, even today. All the highways lead there...all the trains, too. Only an idiot would turn their back on all of that investment and not try to seek alternative uses. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on January 24, 2008, 01:27:27 pm quote: Well, I don't think anybody involved wanted to let the ballpark in OKC steal Bricktown's thunder by having retail stores as part of the park itself. The last time I went down there, I didn't notice the stadium as being very far away from the street at all. The space in front is pretty standard (no different than Wrigley Field in that respect), so that any pregame/postgame stuff doesn't spill out into or across the street... The big question is how many fans would walk a few blocks from the new ballpark at 4th and Elgin to the Blue Dome area... in contrast, Bricktown is right next to the stadium, a very convenient walk... so unless there's some attractive mixed use "infill," I don't see baseball/whatever fans actually walking down a couple of blocks of dark streets to get to McNellie's or Tsunami's... if you don't know the area, you could walk the wrong way and end up at the Greyhound station along with the panhandlers... it'd be easier to just get on the highway and drive straight home... I mean, where's the other development? Where's the link?... we haven't heard much from the Tulsa Landing people the past few weeks on prospects for the west bank of the river... maybe they should be involved in the east end/east village instead... hint, hint... BTW, Floyd, why all the animosity towards Jenks? Saying they are sucking the life out of Tulsa is not only careless, but tells me you are no better than the "suburban" crowd you criticize... Since moving here last year, one of my pet peeves is how Tulsans can be so needlessly territorial, and can be so petty about it..... in a city where it typically can take less than 15 mins to drive from Jenks or Broken Arrow to get downtown, it just doesn't make much sense. Sorry, but IMHO, most of midtown looks no different than many other cities' older suburbs. Downtown has a perception problem that it's dominated by crime/panhandlers and traffic and pay parking.... My criticism of downtown is that it has tiny, isolated pockets of activity and is no more walkable than any other part of Tulsa... the east end/east village needs walkable links to the Blue Dome and Brady, not a ballpark as an isolated, self-enclosed shopping mall... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TulsaFan-inTexas on January 24, 2008, 02:34:52 pm quote: Ditto. I agree with you 100%. Why would anyone pro-Tulsa be for loosing their baseball stadium? The next thing you know Jenks will have a superior river development to Tulsa. Oh, that's already happened. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on January 24, 2008, 02:36:19 pm quote: First, on your substantive question regarding infill. . . I completely agree. I am really hoping a large-scale private development is publicly added to this project in the coming months. I have a feeling there will be, and it will provide the kind of devlopment we're hoping for. In the best case, it would provide an opportunity to use a TIF to fund stadium construction. As for what you call my animosity towards Jenks . . . it is nothing more than a reaction towards attitudes towards Tulsa proper that I perceive coming from the suburbs. Since you're relatively new to Tulsa, let me give you a brief history lesson on suburban Tulsa: They are areas that originally grew because Tulsans fled racial integration in the public schools. Tulsa Public Schools enrollment dropped by 50% in the years since 1973, when the 10th Circuit ordered integration. That is fact. Hence the extension of the Union and Jenks school districts into Tulsa proper. This is not an Oak Park or Evanston situation. This is pure white flight. And it was fueled by cheap land, on which cheap houses were built in sprawling subdivisions. In order to justify their existence, suburbanites tend to greatly exaggerate the decline of the city, including crime rates, street conditions, and school success. So - when you read my tirades against sprawl, you're seeing my reaction against ignorant attitudes and the businessmen who take advantage of them to make money at the expense of growth within city limits. I have an emotional attachment to the core of the city, because it's where I went to church and rode my bike as a child, and it's still where my friends and the people I love are. The glee with which those in the suburbs cheer on fringe development while poo-pooing anything good for Tulsa development is ridiculous. And so sometimes I ridicule. Still, when I see massive commercial development outside the city limits, it doesn't really bother me because it has nothing to do with me. I'd rather see the sales tax proceeds go to Tulsa, but whatever. The River District isn't going to ruin Utica Square. But when I see the minor league baseball team whose openers I never missed as a child and whose bleachers I scaled as a teen pitching peanuts and starting the wave being yanked out of Tulsa towards those same areas by people who spurned Tulsa originally and seek to profit by luring city institutions outside the city . . . when I see this happen, it makes my blood boil. It comes down to this: I don't want to see my city gutted by its suburbs. Sometimes this makes me use harsher words than I should. I hope that answers your question. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on January 24, 2008, 03:02:27 pm quote: Well, said. I second it. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: waterboy on January 24, 2008, 03:26:06 pm quote: I agree Floyd, even though my feelings for the Drillers are not as fervent as yours I don't like seeing the city gutted to justify suburbans lifestyle. They have it fine out there and they don't need to raid the antique store to furnish their lifestyle any further. And your history lesson matches well with my memory of that time period. The suburbs of Tulsa were fueled by white flight, cheap land and believe it or not...a clogged downtown. Parking was hard to find and expensive in the 50's to 70's. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on January 24, 2008, 03:28:59 pm quote: I don’t see any reason for animosity. You are upset over Jenks luring the Drillers? The Drillers have needed and wanted a new stadium for more than a decade. The Drillers had a downtown stadium as part of the “Tulsa Time” vote that failed, they wanted to be part of 2025 and were turned down. Most recently the Drillers and Global were going to do a deal for a downtown stadium but didn’t get backing from the city, the city wanted a damn Super Wal-Mart instead. Another developer offered to do a stadium on the river at 21st, but the voters rejected the river tax that would have made that possible too. You are blaming Jenks for offering what the Drillers want when Tulsa has failed to step up over and over and do the same? There’s still no real plan in Tulsa for a stadium, how is that Jenks’ fault? If anything, the only reason that Tulsa is even trying to do anything is Jenks. Tulsa has had decades to do the river but never has. Tulsa flat out rejected the aquarium. Jenks is building attractions that make the entire metro better and more attractive. In all cases they are attractions that Tulsa has rejected. How is that Jenks’ fault? The Aquarium that Tulsa didn’t want, River Development that Tulsa the voters rejected, and now a new stadium for the Drillers that Tulsa has failed over and over to build, that I predict will fail to again. Your anger is misdirected here. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on January 24, 2008, 03:55:57 pm I'm an urban partisan. So sue me.
From my point of view, it has always been understood that the Drillers would end up downtown. The current stadium is perfectly serviceable and not falling apart. Eventually it would need replacing, and downtown was where Lamson always intended the club to end up. But then here comes Lynn Mitchell and company, touting castle-in-the-sand fake downtowns, and trying to disrupt what I saw as the inevitable move downtown in order to make money. EDIT: I re-read my remarks, decided some were too inflammatory/rude, and removed them. Jenks seems like a lovely place, just not for the baseball teams. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on January 24, 2008, 04:15:48 pm The Drillers have made their home in Tulsa for over a hundred years. We are their home and moving out of Tulsa, no matter how close, would be moving away from home.
When the Drillers score a run and cross the plate, I want that home plate to be in our home, Tulsa. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on January 24, 2008, 05:05:46 pm quote: I hardly know it’s “inevitable”, you would think that if it was so inevitable there would not be multiple failed votes to build a downtown stadium and a long track record showing a lack of support from the city of Tulsa for the Drillers to be downtown. And while I want the Drillers downtown if I was going to bet $50 I’m still betting on them going to Jenks. And that’s a good thing because if it wasn’t for Jenks it might just be that the Drillers would end up as the Fayetteville Drillers, just like what happened when we voted no on a new stadium for the AAA Oilers and instead of being satisfied with the status quo at the Fairgrounds they moved on to New Orleans (and now Louisville). Tulsa does seem to have a track record here, and a new baseball stadium being built with public money involved would be way, way against history. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Wilbur on January 24, 2008, 06:50:28 pm Are we naive enough not to believe the Jenks 'deal' was simply used to force the city (Tulsa) to finally take some kind of action, and to ultimately, kick in some cash? I mean, who signs a non-binding agreement, anyway?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on January 24, 2008, 07:31:06 pm quote: [edit: reduced/eliminated longwinded rant) Umm, I grew up here. In east Tulsa and Owasso. I don't really need Tulsa history lessons. My sister and her family live in Broken Arrow. Is it wrong to want your family, which includes small children, to grow up in a low-crime suburb? [:O] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: waterboy on January 24, 2008, 08:42:03 pm Why in the h*ll are you coming back? You seem to think we're all hicks or lilly white liberals and just too slow to realize the importance of soccer. You of course, having spent your youth here, are justified in calling midtowners more racially segregated than lilly white River City? My graduating class was downtown and we had our prom in the Mayo in 1969. So does that mean I can talk about the real Tulsa or is it just too sensitive? Central was the FIRST integrated school in town and the inclusion of Maple Ridge in their district meant that all the families who could afford to, fled to the burbs or sent their kids to private schools rather than send their kids to school with minorities. Didn't read about it, lived it. It didn't just coincide with the growth of Kelley, Holland Hall, Edison, Broken Arrow and Jenks, white flight was the cause. But for heavens sake that's old, old news. Kind of like old Roughnex stories and pics. Dwelling on it isn't necessary but denying or ignoring it is silly.
I have visited the RiverWalk several times and can count on one hand the black couples visiting. Should I then infer that their neighborhoods are averse to brown people like you did Midtown neighborhoods? Rumor is that Jenks found jobs for the parents of one star Hale running back to lure him to play for the mighty Trojans. How does that grab you. BTW, Tony Randall went to Central, that girl who played opposite Tom Cruise in Pelican Brief ...can't remember her name...went to little old Lee smack in the middle of liberal Maple Ridge. Both turned out alright. Those are useless anecdotes don't you think? Save your considerable slash and burn Chicago temperament for stuff that matters. Like cutting me to pieces or you know, like soccer and bringing these slow wit Tulsans to the new age. edit: Tell me where you got your belief that Midtown Tulsa is racially divided and to what extent. This one solidly liberal democratic part of midtown I live in couldn't be described that way. It is more economically divided than racial but then I don't need to tell you anything about Tulsa history. I see a pretty wide variety of blacks, browns, yellows, goths, jr. bushies and lilly whites walking to the bus stop and going the lilly white school nearby. Just wondering if you were spouting out your a**hole or you know some bankers who redline or something. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: booWorld on January 24, 2008, 09:53:03 pm quote: Try this City of Tulsa link (http://"http://www.cityoftulsa.org/documents/ConceptIllustrationComposite3.pdf"). Magnify the pdf for more detail. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: MichaelBates on January 24, 2008, 10:51:55 pm Jenks and Union didn't expand their school districts into Tulsa. Tulsa, in 1966, expanded its city limits into Jenks, Union, Broken Arrow, and Mingo school districts. (I don't remember whether the East Central school district had already merged into the Tulsa district by then or not.)
As a matter of fact, Tulsa had already expanded into the Union district, which once extended all the way to 21st and Yale, by the mid '50s. During that decade, a big chunk of the Union district -- new city of Tulsa subdivisions -- voted to attach itself to the Tulsa district. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on January 24, 2008, 11:18:39 pm quote: Fine. I'll delete my previous post and repost here in more concise terms... Do I think ALL Tulsans are hicks or lilly white liberals? No. Nothing could be further from the truth. FIRST, I am not saying that "midtowners are more racially segregated than lilly white River City".... in fact, I didn't think I implied it.... I've met midtowners who are very economically segregated. And the economic class I am talking about is largely white. You seem to have no problem insisting ALL of Broken Arrow is going to h*ll in a handbasket. That they're doing everything wrong. Wishing for their demise. Insisting that the city of Tulsa show 'em who's boss. Especially after 2/3's of them voted against the river tax... and that they somehow OWE Tulsa. For river development that would have trickled down to them... This site is at its WORST when folks make blanket assumptions that imply the suburbs are ruining Tulsa. There's plenty of blame to go around. As for racism, I want to point out that it exists in midtown, too. Where in midtown? Well, I should find the list of midtown zipcodes with their racial makeup... certain zips are more "lilly white" than the much maligned suburban areas of the Union, Jenks and BA. I also pointed out that ZERO facilities for pro-sports have been constructed outside of Tulsa. Yeah, it's the people in Jenks who are out to "steal" the Drillers. Right. So WB, bring out your midtown pitchforks and invade Jenks and Bixby and BA... have fun stormin' the castle... I will point out, as I did in a previous post, that Tulsans are far more territorial than they should be or have a right to be. And when I say that, I mean NOBODY is blameless... I'll meet somebody at Fox&Hound who wouldn't live north of 51st, or some native-Tulsan from midtown who would never travel south of 51st... the level of condescension is surprising and something I wasn't ready for when I moved back here last year... did I only say territorial?... let me add, territorial AND clique-ish... I don't like the cliffnotes version of Tulsa's racism and white-flight that determine the good groups in the city and the bad groups in the suburbs, based on where people live in 2008... because it's inaccurate and gives certain people a false sense of moral superiority. Back to the subject of the stadium, Jenks' process has been much more public and forthcoming (not to mention faster) than Tulsa's... There are good Tulsans who simply want the best plan for a new ballpark to win, not the one that insists a certain part of town is "owed" something... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on January 25, 2008, 01:12:45 am quote: That link really helps!!! Looks like they already thought about the whole retail-facing-the-street thing. Looks nice... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: waterboy on January 25, 2008, 07:57:28 am I personally dislike BA because I worked there among the business community from 1981 to 1989. Talk about provincialism. They hated Tulsa and anything related to the city. They felt all crime and sin emanated from the big city and they were God's country. Now those people are well entrenched among the city's school board and municipal government.
But I have no general dislike of suburbs and small towns surrounding the city. I currently work in far South Tulsa and Bixby area. Jenks is a lovely little town. Sand Springs shows signs of visionary leadership. When visiting with COC people in Jenks, or watching the suburban representatives during the Channels discussions, the River vote debates and general blathering from their mayors, I sometimes see vestiges of that BA provincialism. Especially in the Jenks area. Vreeland is sometimes hostile and the IVI bridge fiasco stirred ill will between the two areas. Still, if they make the better offer on Drillers and snag them, well fine by me. I know of no one other than a few posts here that express any real animosity towards the burbs. We all have family and friends there and visit for one reason or another. I detect nothing more than a little good natured competitive chest thumping for the most part. For instance the remarks about the Aquarium being dismissed by Tulsans. WE never had a chance to vote on it. A small group of RPA board members thought they had secured support for its placement along the river in Tulsa. At the last minute a board member with a conflict of interest flipped and we lost it by one vote. Hardly a citywide repudiation of river development. Each of the development issues turned down by the city in the last decade had a fatal flaw that naysayers seized on with vengeance. The tired old tirades against crime, government sloth, and taxation are always effective tools here reality notwithstanding. Of course the burbs want our treasures. Of course they will take them if we repeat such stories or show weakness. And that will cause enmity from those of us who staked our claims in the "crime ridden" (read liberal, diversity laden) inner city. Thus has it ever been so anywhere. I hope we can get the Drillers or something else similar downtown to make our investment in it start to pay off. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on January 25, 2008, 08:51:00 am For whatever it's worth on the side track discussion...
In my midtown neighborhood the house to my left sold for $150,000 (single attorney with 1 BMW), to my right $70,000 (family of 5 with 3 pickups). Across from me is a single middle aged black woman who lives next to an Indian family, on the other side of her is a retired white couple. Who live next to a black family. Down a couple houses they have an Infinity and a Hummer. Next to the family of 5 on my side the driveway has a new Camero and a Mercedes in it. The guy next to them owns a tree service company. What I'm saying is it is a diverse mix of incomes, races, and ages. I'm fairly confident you can't find a more varied demographic than my neighborhood. Stereotypical Jenks = rich and white. Stereotypical North = black and poor. I'd be hard pressed to put a stereo type in my area. So to whomever said, implied or didn't... I'd have to disagree and assert at least portions of Midtown showcase amazing diversity. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on January 25, 2008, 10:29:40 am Rufnex, obviously my remarks struck a nerve. Apologies, as far as that goes. You said you moved here recently and I thought that meant you were new here . . . didn't realize you meant you moved back recently. That was a brain fart on my part, as the biggest Roughnecks fan in the United States probably hails from Tulsa, OK. I really didn't want to start a pissing contest here.
And I certainly didn't mean to imply that all suburbanites are racist. But it is hard to deny that the growth of the suburbs was caused in great part by white flight. And in my opinion, some residents of the suburbs seek to denigrate the city as a way to justify their suburban residency--the crappier they make the city seem, the more sense it makes to live 20 miles from downtown. You asked me where my attitude toward the suburbs came from. I said it was a reaction toward what I just described, which you can see in remarks both by private citizens and the mayors of Jenks and Broken Arrow, as well as from my own experience. No matter who is to blame for this us/them mentality, it exists. And I am convinced that it's why Lynn Mitchell wanted to lure the Drillers. He sensed a business opportunity to take advantage of the dollars of those folks who won't venture all the way down to 15th and Yale. I guess I can't blame a guy for trying to make a buck, but I will CERTAINLY continue to characterize it as "stealing" the Drillers from Tulsa. Because the result of the move would be, in effect, to take minor league baseball away from one municipality in the metro and its corresponding demographic, and give it to another municipality and the demographic there. If you're in favor of the move, you can call it "doing what's best for the metro." If you're against it, as I am, you'll call it "stealing." And I'll continue to say Jenks tried to steal the Drillers, because that's how I see it. Please don't take it personally. Footnote: I don't see how the Jenks process was any more out in the open than the Tulsa process is. Every fact of the River District, from land acquisition to design to negotiation with the team, was hidden from public view until it was ready to unveil. The Tulsa process, on the other hand, came from a grass roots effort to keep the team in town and resulted in a public period of negotiation. The part that was secret was in retrospect necessary--the negotiation for the land purchase option had to take place behind closed doors to prevent speculators driving up real estate prices and costing the city more money. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on January 25, 2008, 10:47:46 am Hi Jay Cronley! Glad to see you reading the forum. Jump in any time, if you haven't already.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080125_1_A9_spanc18031 Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on January 25, 2008, 11:00:32 am quote: Well, the current location is not in the municipality of the city of Tulsa either, it’s across the street from the City of Tulsa, and the location in Jenks is only slightly further being across the river. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on January 25, 2008, 11:02:02 am Sorry. The argument that the stadium is not in Tulsa because it's on county land is pure silliness. The only people making it are you and Roscoe Turner. Silly, I say!
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on January 25, 2008, 11:30:01 am quote: The land is not just county land, it's a non-annexed area of the county. It's not silly, it's the legal truth. The city of Tulsa does not collect sales tax in Driller Stadium, does that sound like it's "in" the city? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TulsaSooner on January 25, 2008, 12:30:48 pm It will be officially annexed and sales tax will be collected (except for the Arabian horse show) beginning January 1, 2009.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on January 25, 2008, 09:36:40 pm Pretty Pictures of Proposed Tulsa Stadiums... anybody want to guess which is which?!?
(Edit: to match sgrizzle's post below, swapped pics B & C, since the letters were previously on the bottom left-hand side of each picture... now each letter is above the pic) A) (http://www.footballstadiumdigest.com/images/new_tulsa.jpg) B) (http://kotv.com/newsimages/214/5ca29f21-8309-43ee-85ba-0c70108a6c19.jpg) C) (http://kotv.com/newsimages/640/a5d4f6ce-51f7-43f7-9abd-5b2c89771c96.jpg) D) (http://www.globaldevelopmentpartners.com/images/EastEndThumbNail.jpg) E) (http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1245/1480077198_2c2051ba45_o.jpg) F) (http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2005/051118_A1_Citym117_a1soc18.jpg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Composer on January 25, 2008, 10:40:26 pm This forum is great because it allows people to debate their ideas and opinions back and forth.
I am from Broken Arrow and there has been some talk about Broken Arrow on this thread. I am here to say that I was happy when the Driller's decided to stay in Tulsa. People can go on and on about how suburbs are stealing shoppers from the cities but in the end, people really do not want to drive a long ways away anymore to shop. When it comes to entertainment like baseball, that should NEVER leave the city. I would hate if they announced a move to Jenks or Broken Arrow. While I love living in Broken Arrow, I would much rather see the Drillers in Tulsa. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: carltonplace on January 25, 2008, 11:15:06 pm quote: Composer, welcome to the forum. Thanks for a thoughtful first post. The city and its neighbors the suburbs are in this together. What is good for the core is good for the burbs and vice versa. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Composer on January 25, 2008, 11:29:58 pm Thank you!
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: fung shui on January 26, 2008, 10:58:33 am Sorry Composer, but you need to be corrected. Chuck Lamson has not agreed to stay in Tulsa. He has agreed that Tulsa has until May 30 to meet certain defined deadlines such as a site, design and funding (passage of a 3% lodging tax) for a new stadium in Tulsa. After that he can say "Bye" with a clear conscious.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on January 26, 2008, 11:11:35 am A Skelly stadium (concept)
B Tulsa Project MLS stadium (concept) C River District Jenks (concept) D Global Development Group's East End (concept) E Tulsa Landing (concept) F Skelly Stadium (actual) Here is a better picture of B (http://kotv.com/newsimages/640/5ca29f21-8309-43ee-85ba-0c70108a6c19.jpg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Composer on January 26, 2008, 11:36:33 am I dont think a correction like that is needed. You know what I mean. I meant I am glad to hear that they are considering Tulsa.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on January 27, 2008, 11:57:57 am quote: Actually, both A and F are incorrect now. The metal bleachers at Skelly have been torn down and after cleanup, they'll proceed with the rest of it. They're replacing all the seats, repainting it, adding a brand new scoreboard, constructing a new press box with luxury suites, and building a large plaza to the west. This isn't conceptual, it's happening as we speak [:P]. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on January 27, 2008, 06:11:55 pm quote: Nice catch, DScott. Although I think sgrizzle was just trying to literally identify the pics. Pic A is from the initial announcement last year of $18mil in renovations for Skelly Stadium and its new name: Chapman Stadium. Last I checked, the price of the renovations to be finished before fall '08 is up to $20mil - $24mil... not sure where I read that. Even though there have been estimates of 30k capacity, the number of "fixed seats" has been quantified: 26,000. Wonder if the new field is going to be grass or fieldturf? Pic F gives you a dramatic view of how much seating is being scrapped for the new super-duper pressbox/suites. Hmmm.... so what game is Pic F from??? (says the guy with the not-so-hidden agenda who posted it). [;)] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: FOTD on January 27, 2008, 07:46:10 pm Lorton World reports this morning that John Q Hammonds built the baseball park in downtown Springfield. This was news to me. Sppringfield never had a downtown so to speak.
I got an idea. Let's let the Lorton's foot the bill on our downtown ballpark. World Pub Park! Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: brunoflipper on January 27, 2008, 08:25:30 pm quote: Pic F is the model of a stadium that would have been built with a new sales tax as part of "The Tulsa Project"... the tax was rejected by voters in 1997... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: booWorld on January 27, 2008, 08:34:13 pm The Tulsa Project ?? .... ah, yes --- one of those long-dead issues.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: brunoflipper on January 27, 2008, 09:07:06 pm quote:cute... the post was from yesterday, not 9 months ago... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: booWorld on January 27, 2008, 09:21:56 pm The Tulsa Project is about a decade old now.
Yet, it's included in an open topic on this forum. It's good to remember issues from the not-so-distant past. I remember yet another proposal for a stadium downtown drawn up way back in 1989. Themes repeat over time. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on January 28, 2008, 12:19:57 am quote: Yeah I know, but I just had to point it out...[:P] Have any of you driven past the stadium lately?? Quite the eye-opener. I made sure to get my last nighttime downtown shots from there about a month before they started demolition. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on January 28, 2008, 10:16:20 am Did someone say something about TU? [}:)]
The renovations are well underway. Adding to the new Case Center of 2006 will be the image pictured above. It is more than just a concept or a proposal as SQ indicated above - it is an approved and funded design. What's more, it is underway and will be completed in a matter of months (deadline Sept. 20th - do or die). The last I heard the field is supposed to be the newest field turf (similar to what Bama has, so it even looks like it was mowed with directional colors and all that). The capacity will be in excess of 30,000 but their will only be sold seating for 26,000. It will have new box seating as well as new suites to compliment the case center does. While many are not too happy about shrinking the stadium this much - it is what had to be done to get a top notch stadium at Tulsa. Hopefully we sell that thing out so often they bowl in the South end zone, get rid of the dirt pile, and add complimenting arches (to match the rest). Plans and live web cam: http://tulsahurricane.cstv.com/facilities/tuls-chapman-renovation.html Also worth noting that the new entrance is starting to form. Well worth a deviation to see all the work in progress if you have not been that way in a month or two. (http://graphics.fansonly.com/schools/tuls/graphics/tulsa-slide-2.jpg) (http://graphics.fansonly.com/schools/tuls/graphics/tulsa-slide-7.jpg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: carltonplace on January 28, 2008, 09:54:47 pm Question, is the GDP deal completely dead? I didn't get that impression when I contacted them.
GDP announced (actualy Ruff scooped it right hear on TN) a plan to build a bb stadium in downtown, speculation ran rampant, Nordam quibbled and broke their contract with GDP and offered the site to the Wal*Mart developer, a new plan was announced, Wal*Mart backed out, the developer signed the contract option to the city, the city announces a plan to build a stadium. If GDP is still viable wouldn't it make sense to get them back in the game? Are they just fly by night? What's the deal? I need an education. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Oil Capital on January 28, 2008, 10:28:34 pm quote: The real question is... Was GDP ever viable? GDP itself has apparently never completed a project. Their website lists a number of projects their principals were involved with prior to forming GDP. It also lists TWO, count them TWO "current" projects. Tulsa's East End and the Howard Road project in DC. Any guesses how far along the Howard Road project is? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on January 28, 2008, 11:43:09 pm Right - my understanding is that they were a group of principals who had gained development experience on other projects, most notably/successfully the Gallery Place project in D.C. If I had to guess, I'd say that they substantially overestimated the amount of easy capital available for the East End project. Obviously they couldn't put the financing together in time. Then the credit crunch hit and any hope of getting the project off the ground ended. Of course, with the Fed lowering the funds rate, money just got a lot easier to find. So, while Global is likely out of the picture, it's still within the realm of possibility that another developer could emerge and try to take advantage of suddenly looser credit. After all, the Tulsa real estate market never boomed like much of the rest of the nation, meaning that free-flowing capital could find its way here.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: booWorld on January 29, 2008, 07:11:35 am quote: That is one reason I doubted the projected ridership numbers for the BA-Tulsa commuter train. "When you only have two pennies left in the world, build a fountain in the middle of the intersection of Fifth and Main with one, and build a fountain in the middle of the intersection of Fifth and Main with the other." ~DTU proverb Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on January 29, 2008, 11:31:44 am quote: Unfortunately, they turned out to be, IMO, a "well-constructed house of cards"... In the summer of 2005, Kissler and Lauterbach became the toast of Major League Soccer, having purchased DC United from Anschutz Entertainment Group (Phil Anschutz is known as "St. Phil" in soccer circles)... they agreed to buy the team from AEG for a reported $25mil, flush with success after their roles in the Gallery Place TIF that included an arena in DC..... AEG sold to them convinced they would be most likely to negotiate the local DC bureacracy, so Global Equity Partners was formed to develop the Anacostia/Poplar Point plan for a stadium/mixed-use for DC United... they fronted for alot of "investors" and looked like the best chance MLS had for a TIF stadium development to materialize for DC United in MLS. They surfaced for the first time in Tulsa around August 2005, the month after they purchased DC United... http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5988372&postcount=1 quote: In the beginning, Global Equity Partners had a specific "sports & entertainment" division partially dedicated to running sports teams-- so, considering they only had ONE team, DC United, speculation was that they wanted more... likely to include an MLS team in Tulsa. [:D] Their momentum also carried them to another mixed-use stadium project for Richmond, VA, this one with a ballpark... another project proposal surfaced for a complex in Boca Raton for Florida Atlantic Univ including a stadium... they were rumored to be advising Salt Lake's people on their plans for a soccer stadium/hotel/retail... GDP was teaming up with Milwaukee's group for MLS... and then in Tulsa... http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6757777&postcount=1 quote: What happened next? Well, this seems to be as good of an explanation as any... http://dcunitedblog.blogspot.com/2006/01/united-for-sale.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/17/AR2006011701016.html http://dcunitedblog.blogspot.com/2006/05/when-deals-go-bad.html So, suddenly the East Village mixed-use/MLS stadium TIF morphed into LaFortune talking about a ballpark....... then Global had a legal problem or two... http://washington.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2006/05/15/daily64.html quote: Strangely enough, Global eventually ditched the Milwaukee MLS group in the fall of 2006 to concentrate on Tulsa..... if Taylor and Co. weren't interested, common sense would dictate Global wouldn't have put all their eggs in the East End basket... Nobody could have known in the summer of 2005 how bad things could have progressed for Global by 2008. Makes me wonder if LaFortune would have allowed the kind of silliness that allowed GDP and WalMart to play an East End game of monopoly. Too bad. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: carltonplace on January 29, 2008, 08:57:13 pm Thanks for the insight Ruff
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on January 29, 2008, 11:10:33 pm Originally posted by USRufnex
Pretty Pictures of Proposed Tulsa Stadiums... anybody want to guess which is which?!? Answers....... A)H.A. Chapman Stadium... this is the only pretty picture that will actually come to fruition thus far. I was hoping for a grass field, but if they go with sportexe, how 'bout some fiber-optic turf???... Turf TV, baby!!!http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070313.wsb-turf13/BNStory/specialSmallBusiness/home (http://www.footballstadiumdigest.com/images/new_tulsa.jpg) B)This is the 1997 Tulsa Project Soccer/Track&Field Stadium. The stadium was sold to the city by Susan Savage & Co. as something that would, along with a natatorium and an arena, turn downtown into a sort-of amateur sports mecca... the stadium was supposed to also be part of the plan for Major League Soccer to come back to Tulsa, but when push came to shove, the actual proposed stadium was only going to have a 5k-seat capacity, far below the size of facility that would attract MLS... I posted this pic, since KOTV erroneously referred to it as a "ballpark" a few months ago and said that previous projects included a ballpark for the Drillers. Neither the 1997 Tulsa Project or its sequel (It's Tulsa Time) included a new ballpark... renovations? perhaps... new stadium? Nope. (http://kotv.com/newsimages/214/5ca29f21-8309-43ee-85ba-0c70108a6c19.jpg) C)The initial draft for the River District in Jenks, including the ballpark. This one deserves a "webby" for creative use of styrofoam... [:o)] (http://kotv.com/newsimages/640/a5d4f6ce-51f7-43f7-9abd-5b2c89771c96.jpg) D) The August 2006 ballpark proposal from Global Development Partners. (http://www.globaldevelopmentpartners.com/images/EastEndThumbNail.jpg) E) The mysterious Tulsa Landing plans released a matter a days before the vote on the River Tax. This was a 22k-seat AAA ballpark that wasn't really a ballpark... the developer says one thing, the Tulsa World tells us it's not for the Drillers... it is whatever you want it to be as long as you vote yes... [;)] (http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1245/1480077198_2c2051ba45_o.jpg) F) Skelly Stadium, with the Upper West stands. It's a pretty dramatic view of how much seating is being bulldozed for the new press box. I'm disappointed nobody guessed the game it's taken from: the April 2003 Major League Soccer exhibition game between the Kansas City Wizards and the Dallas Burn (now, FC Dallas). [:P] (http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2005/051118_A1_Citym117_a1soc18.jpg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on January 30, 2008, 08:57:11 am Ruf,
They don't want grass in Skelly for several reasons: 1) They allow student's to use the field for intramurals (sp?) 2) Fans can take to the field after the game 3) The field is used as a practice facility 4) The field is used year-round for various purposes (practice/student use) That's not to say it can't happen, but if you had a grass field those things really can't happen. You can't use the field much outside game day with real grass and fans are not allowed on actual turf. And when dormant, no one is allowed near grass fields as they can get worn too easily. I also think there is a monetary savings in the long term with artificial turf. Someone correct me if I'm mistaken - but keeping turf nice in Oklahoma requires specialists and a ton of constant work. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on January 30, 2008, 02:15:43 pm The rumor I heard was that a natural grass field was being seriously considered. That rumor's a few months old, though. And it's entirely possible that alot of the costs for natural grass could be a budget buster because of the $$$ it would take to not only remove the field, but to take out the concrete underneath it...?!?
Univ of Houston has a grass field at Robertson Stadium... maintenance costs can be pretty hefty. But some of the sportexe stuff is pretty costly, too..... artificial turf ain't just carpet anymore... (http://www.sportexe.com/images/product_sidebars/product_web_momentum.jpg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on January 31, 2008, 01:12:26 pm Here's a quick map of downtown I created in Photoshop, with the Drillers Stadium in place. It shows how it would fit in with the rest of the developing districts (East End, Blue Dome, Brady) all the way over to the BOk Center.
I thought it would be easier to see with a map how it all connects rather than just using the layout of the park alone and guessing where everything else is... (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2347/2233279560_2a36ab4434_o.jpg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on January 31, 2008, 02:01:15 pm Nice work. That really puts it into context. Here's to hoping the East End actually becomes something other than abandoned warehouses.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: T-TownMike on January 31, 2008, 02:31:55 pm Great job, DScott! Also, notice the perfect rail access. I'm just hopeful Tulsans can see the light and are willing to become a progressive city once again. There's a lot of great projects in the works, I just want to see them come to fruition.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on January 31, 2008, 06:40:40 pm Seeing that map that way and also imagining the rail from Jenks to Downtown, I do actually think that line would have a lot of potential. Not as just a commuter line that ran twice a day but as one that ran a couple times in the evening as well. You would be connecting more high density nodes, activity centers, and interesting parts of town than the BA line.
River District, Aquarium, Riverwalk, Casino, possible River developments in Tulsa, the river parks in general, Downtown business district, BOK Arena and convention center, Brady District, OSU Tulsa, Blue Dome, Ballpark, etc. I would use that and spend the day going to those different areas, and would be more likely to consider living...in several areas, along that route as well. Waaay more so than the BA line. Interesting to consider anyway. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Composer on January 31, 2008, 08:19:05 pm Great map. I am excited about the possibility of Tulsa getting a commuter rail and making more of a link between entertainment districts. Tulsa has a lot of what OKC has in terms of entertainment. It is just located in different areas of the metro instead of a single area like Bricktown.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: FOTD on January 31, 2008, 08:21:53 pm quote: Brady district's north end extends all the way to ODL or 244. It includes Cains Ballroom. Color it blue. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on February 01, 2008, 01:45:37 am quote: Thanks FOTD. I wasn't quite sure where its boundaries were... Is the western boundary correct?? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on February 01, 2008, 05:45:37 am West boundary of the brady looks correct.
You might include everything within a block of the stadium as "the east end" so east of elgin, north of 7th. That was the area as specced by GDP, I believe. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: we vs us on February 01, 2008, 07:01:19 am One more vote for your map being very cool, Dscott. Very Simcity. And it really does put the transportation options in better perspective to see what would surround it.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: brunoflipper on February 01, 2008, 08:59:06 am here, fixed it...
(http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/8610/fixedlt7.jpg) [:D] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on February 01, 2008, 10:18:20 am quote: If you're gonna do that, take out all the streets under construction. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on February 01, 2008, 10:31:25 am and put in the broken fountain.
IF someone was feeling non-productive, they could add surface parking in gray, and ramps in black (or whatever). Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: brunoflipper on February 01, 2008, 10:45:43 am updated
(http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/9687/fixedfa3.jpg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: we vs us on February 01, 2008, 11:16:30 am quote: Definitely getting better. LOL @ Churchy Town! Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on February 01, 2008, 11:51:08 am quote: Hahaha. [:D] My next project actually WAS to identify all the surface parking with the help of the Terrain function of Google Maps. It's going to take a lot longer than this first map... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: we vs us on February 01, 2008, 12:03:31 pm quote: Can you add Lunch Lane? It's right smack dab in the middle of Abandonburg. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dayzella on February 01, 2008, 12:09:43 pm quote: Please fill in the newbie - what/where is the broken fountain? How is it broken? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on February 01, 2008, 01:15:15 pm It's in the middle of the intersection at 5th and Main, and drunk Owasso girls kept crashing into it after leaving the bars at night and getting lost, until they took measures to increase the fountain's visibility.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on February 01, 2008, 01:17:10 pm Now I am all for drunk women coming into the big city and all.
But we got to get them to stop driving into our fountains. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dayzella on February 01, 2008, 02:20:07 pm quote: Aha. Y'all are sure it is broken? It was on yesterday. Very pretty - the water burbling + the snow falling. Unless the broken part is that it won't shut off? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on February 01, 2008, 02:43:37 pm I think when the drunkies ran into it the poured concrete was cracked--hence the "broken fountain." But I'm pretty sure they patched it up just fine.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: restored2x on February 01, 2008, 02:58:07 pm Kinda like the Liberty Bell for Tulsa. Cracked, but historic.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Townsend on February 01, 2008, 04:04:01 pm quote: Holy crap...that's so much better than "comfortably cosmopolitan" Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on February 01, 2008, 06:48:31 pm Maps are nice things, but don't tell the whole story. There are blocks of nothing in the east end and Blue Dome areas... there are entire blocks of businesses that will be dormant after 5pm-- well, except for the Greyhound bus station and the adult book store, those will be open. [}:)] Will baseball fans (and their families) walk to or from El Guapo's and McNellie's before or after the ballgame and would the Drillers even want that, since a big part of the Drillers' profits seem to be tied up in concessions (not gate receipts)? Where will new businesses(?) be leased/developed if the ballpark succeeds? Will there be "mixed-use"? Will there be "walkable urbanity?" Is there going to be any TIF in place here?... or is this just going to be a "tax it, build it" project???
How would this compare to the last proposal by Kissler/Adwon/Global Development? or the WalMart proposal? or the proposal that a certain "admin" from Tulsa Now openly criticized back in late 2005...? http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2680&SearchTerms=Downtown+soccer+stadium? quote: So, where are the "homes and stores" in this new proposal? Where's the "40-acre development"? Where's the "Tulsa Landing" or "East End" style plans that use the ballpark as an "anchor"? Jenks has these plans... downtown (so far) has pipedreams of a type of magic ballpark that will ATTRACT development. Victory Field in Indy was a nice addition in the 90s... but it hardly served as a catalyst. OKC's Bricktown was already popular BEFORE the ballpark was built, and there were areas right next door to the ballpark that benifitted... there were places for other restaurants, etc. to locate... The best argument for a ballpark is that it will get a reasonable number of people to come downtown who wouldn't normally go there. But when they go there, what will they find? And will that justify $70mil in new taxes? 4 months is NOT a long time... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on February 02, 2008, 12:16:44 pm quote: Unless you think that downtown will not revitalize, it just a matter of timing. It would indeed be nice if we got the ballpark along with a lot of other stuff. However that hasnt seemed to work for us. Downtown WILL fill in and revitalize. So we are chipping in to get the ballpark first. At least its something now and I bet it will spark some development around it. The Global people still own some property in the area and want to do something with it for their time and investment. Stuff first then chip in for ballpark. Ballpark first then stuff. It doesnt work only if you dont believe downtown will ever see any other infill or revitalization. I think it will revitalize. Not as quickly as anyone would like, this stuff never does happen that way. But it will eventually. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on February 03, 2008, 02:22:19 pm quote: What you refer to as "Jail ville" I nicknamed "The Clink" back when. I vote for mine. [:P] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: EricP on February 03, 2008, 08:10:44 pm quote: The actual fountain pool was cracked/chipped a bit, that was repaired... but there was a decorative chalice in the middle of the fountain that rose up that was severely damaged and removed. So now we are left with some water jets instead of a decorative fountain. I think the drunken b**ch that hit it should just be made to pay to replace it how it was. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on February 04, 2008, 08:49:27 am I've worked in three separate buildings in Abandonburg and eaten in a half dozen others.
Per the fountain, no - it's not really broken. But for a while it was every other weekend. It might be worth the expense of keeping it up in the long run if we can ticket and remove from the roads those drunk enough to fail to see a large concrete fountain in the center of the road. and if we're in to labeling everything - shouldn't we have the civic forum complex on there and the Pearl is just visible too. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on February 04, 2008, 09:28:37 am The outlook for a stadium downtown is pretty dim.
http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8582&whichpage=6 The hotel industry people want the hotel tax increase expanded so that there is more funding for the convention and tourism bureau of the chamber. Increased funding for the Chamber is going to be a hard sell, KFAQ and company will be all over that. And also check out the reader comments at the bottom of the article. The same tired old, no taxes, do the roads, downtown sucks, etc. Lots of those comments. Even if the city and the Drillers can get a plan together in 120 days the tax is going to fail. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: perspicuity85 on February 04, 2008, 11:19:57 am quote: Why would anyone care about a hotel tax? How many local residents are going to end up shelling out cash staying in local hotels? Are they all pissed because it will cost them an extra 45 cents when they cheat on their wives with the after hours cleaning lady? The hotel tax will be almost exclusively coming from out-of-town wallets. If they do propose this tax, I hope they plan on only allowing the city to vote, not the entire county. We have already seen what happens when we let the suburbanites vote on city issues. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on February 04, 2008, 02:54:39 pm quote: I don't think you put the right link in. Without seeing the article, I can tell you the commenters are the same 10 trolls who pounce on anything remotely connected to Tulsa development. Don't let them give you a skewed perspective on the Tulsa electorate. Downtown baseball is a winning issue, ESPECIALLY if the hotel industry WANTS the tax. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on February 04, 2008, 04:04:18 pm Never mind. I found it.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080203_1_A1_hSeve16652 Looks like this thing will come to a vote--at least, that's what it appears P.J. Lassek is being told off the record, because that's what his stories are anticipating. But they're obviously trying to get the lodging industry on board, which makes sense. Nothing like the bearers of the tax burden saying, "tax me! tax me!" to shut down opponents. By the way--someone please explain how ordinary Tulsa residents might feel the burden of this tax. I guess their guests staying in hotels might have to spend a couple of bucks more. I'm trying to figure out other negative consequences of a higher lodging tax--I guess you could in theory get diminishing returns by keeping visitors away. I'm not sure that an 8% tax versus a 5% tax makes a lot of difference in that regard, though--doesn't seem near a "ceiling" that would make Tulsa seem too expensive to host a convention in, although I don't know the calculations in such matters. Thoughts? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on February 04, 2008, 05:27:47 pm If there were to be an increase in a hotel tax they believe that there are more pressing needs than a ballpark. Some would rather have it go to roads, police, etc. Better out of towners helping to pay for roads, otherwise any amount that is going to a stadium instead of roads will indeed likely come out of Tulsans pockets. They are tired of taxes and money being spent on "Kitties downtown toys" versus using it on roads.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Rico on February 04, 2008, 05:59:55 pm quote: If there were to be a tax increase in "motel and hotel" sales tax it would have the overwhelming support of the TMC... In this instance that may not be bad. The GOB's at the Chamber will gain a slight increase to their yearly allowance but for once will have to focus their attention on a DT Tulsa issue. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TeeDub on February 04, 2008, 10:25:21 pm If the Chamber gets more money, will they promise not to squander it trying to fight 1804? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: tulsa1603 on February 05, 2008, 01:02:09 pm quote: I travel a lot, and I never notice the hotel tax until I've already completed my stay and get the final bill! I think total tax was $22.13 on my recent $149.00 room in Denver - that's about 14-15% total tax. It always shocks me to see it, but I never look at those things beforehand, so I can't imagine others would be researching it to decide where to go, either. It might affect convention business, but I don't think it would affect it any more than the stigma of having a convention in somehwere that is thought of as boring, like Tulsa is. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: T-TownMike on February 05, 2008, 11:25:24 pm Tulsa needs to wake up. The hotel tax is done in all major metropolitian areas. Kansas City passed it to fund the Sprint Arena. I'm surprised to see how many Tulsans are so reluctant to improving their community. It won't even come out your pocket.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: perspicuity85 on February 06, 2008, 10:08:25 am quote: Start a petition, T-TownMike, and I'll be the first to sign. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Breadburner on February 06, 2008, 10:20:28 am quote: They will hire a consultant to see if the fight is worth it and then fight it anyway....Then hire another consultant to see if it was worth it.... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on February 10, 2008, 11:41:51 am Excellent read:
#06038_The Economic of Sports Stadiums: A Simple Discussion An Essay by Jacob Benedict http://ab417.org/items/index.php?itemid=36 Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on February 11, 2008, 09:01:55 am quote: quote: I tend to agree. UNLESS the stadium is part of a development that creates an "attraction" that will draw people from the suburbs, encourage conventions to see Tulsa as a destination, or encourage further development in Tulsa instead of elsewhere. Which he gets to a little later: quote: His conclusions seem logical and justified and his suggestions at the end seem spot on. Don't tout this as a miracle economic cure for downtown or for Tulsa - but try to make it one just the same. What's more, a stadium or any other item to make downtown vibrant only matters if there are in fact, people downtown to enjoy it. _______________________ My money's on this not happening. Our city government can't get anything decent done in less than a year and even then with a marginal success rate... let alone months. Lets hear it for the Tulsa Driller's of Jenks and the Tulsa 66ers of Bixby. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on February 11, 2008, 09:48:33 am quote: First off we arent concerned with "a region" its keeping Drillers games in Tulsa versus in Jenks. He says that spectators will spend money at the stadium and couches that as a regional thing. I we were concerned about the county, fine, that logic would hold, but we are concerned about the city. This will be part of more development downtown. It is not a "miracle cure", but it will help, Its one more piece in a larger puzzle. As for "a stadium or any other item to make downtown vibrant only matters if there are in fact, people downtown to enjoy it." Whats that about? The drillers dont just draw from the couple of neighborhoods around the current stadium. They draw from all over the city and county. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on February 11, 2008, 09:56:25 am quote: Did you see the article in the World this weekend about the stadium? Support for public funding is weak on the city council and even weaker among the candidates running for council seats. Opposition is led by Martinson, Wescott and Jack “What’s in it for me” Henderson.. Eagleton is iffy on it. http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080210_1_A19_hTheC42121 It may not even make it out of the city council. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on February 11, 2008, 10:35:17 am What you see in the paper is election posturing.
The rosy-but-realistic scenario for what is going to happen is this: by the end of the negotiation period, Lamson and Taylor, probably flanked by a currently anonymous "angel," are going to emerge with a public-private partnership to build the thing. Sounds like it's probaly going to involve a hotel tax, which the lodging industry comes out and supports the tax on itself. Lamson will probably sign something bindng, contingent on the passage of the tax. The council is going to hem and haw, but the support of the lodging industry, combined with Lamson's binding promise, will convince them to "let the people decide." Then, a modest hotel room tax increase will pass among Tulsa voters. It might not be the prettiest election, since none are these days, but it will go through. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on February 11, 2008, 10:43:25 am quote: +1 Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on February 11, 2008, 07:45:22 pm I'll also point out that I just booked a hotel at the downtown Westin in Chicago and the listed room tax was 15.4%. Now, I know Tulsa ain't Chicago, but if we raise the rate from 5% to 8%, we're still at barely half that.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: brunoflipper on February 12, 2008, 10:01:55 am going to seattle this week, the hotel tax is 15.6%...
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on February 12, 2008, 10:27:37 am We also should take into account if we are worried about convention competitiveness that more important to people booking conventions than the size of the hotel tax is the average hotel rate, which is very low in Tulsa. Not only is the hotel tax low, the rate that is taxed is very low.
Pass the temporary 3% or 4% for the stadium and an additional 2% permanent hotel tax to increase the marketing dollars for the convention and visitors bureau. Hell, extend the temporary tax a year or two and do put some of the money that the arena grabbed out of the funds for the convention center and do the convention center the right way, the way 2025 was marketed. Build the stadium, do the convention center right and market the city better. Hotel owners will love you for it and it won’t cost local taxpayers a dime. If the math on this tax makes sense to the people that own the hotels, who are the impacted parties, it should be fine for the rest of us. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on February 12, 2008, 10:35:49 am I am in DC today. My tax here is 14.5%
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: perspicuity85 on February 14, 2008, 07:37:47 pm quote: I couldn't agree more swake. I'd also like to point out on a boring academic note that a slight increase in the hotel rate tax is very unlikely to affect the elasticity of demand for hotel rooms within the city. Since the tax will obviously affect every hotel in the city, there will be virtually no decrease in the quantity of hotel rooms demanded. Customers shop around for hotels within a city, sure. But, you can't stay in OKC to conduct business in Tulsa without an added negative consequence (being 100 miles away). Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on March 05, 2008, 12:56:07 pm It's now been six weeks since the announcement and the deadline is less than 90 days away.
I know there's not been anything in the news about the stadium, is anyone hearing anything else about any progress here at all? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on March 05, 2008, 04:50:19 pm I am going to Memphis tomorrow.
The hotel tax is 15.95% Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TURobY on March 17, 2008, 03:20:24 pm http://www.typros.org/events.asp?id=11&eventsid=727
quote: Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on March 17, 2008, 03:55:06 pm Anyone going??? Tell us everything!
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on March 17, 2008, 04:19:44 pm quote: Negotiations must be going fairly well if Lamson agreed to do this for the Chamber. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on March 17, 2008, 05:01:48 pm Here's where I think things are: Lamson has made his needs clear. He has explained to the city exactly what configuration and amenities the Drillers organization wants in a new ballpark, and "negotiations" are basically over. Now the city is working on funding options. I assume they've already got a hotel tax ready to propose, with a contingent agreement from Lamson, binding upon approval by voters. But, I hope they're also shopping out the development to private builders, as well as courting community businesses to get on board. The very best case, for all involved, would be a fully private development that is basically a clone of what Global Development proposed way back when. I doubt this happens. But I also doubt that we'll be presented a bare bones plan, void of any private proposals, at the end of May.
All speculation aside, it will be interesting to see what comes out from behind the curtain on May 31. I cannot imagine a scenario where the negotiations "fail"; it's just a matter of what, if anything, goes before the voters. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on March 17, 2008, 05:03:38 pm quote: What is there to negotiate? The Drillers correctly want to be downtown, but the Drillers also don't pay any significant amount of rent and will not be a real part of the financial package to build a stadium. The whole question is how is the city going to pay for the stadium. The Drillers aren't going to pay more than they would in Jenks or at the Fairgrounds. That amount currently is a whopping $18,000 a year. A 3% increase in the hotel tax would earn about $4 million per year. It would take a long time for that to fund a $70 million stadium, and that's only if a vote to raise the hotel tax passed. Naming rights might contribute a few million more. The state is currently pleading poverty so don't look for any money there. The negotiations aren't the issues, there's a funding gap for the stadium measured in the tens of million of dollars and no one has said anything about how that gap can be closed. the "negotiating period" is now almost half gone and there's been zero public movement on funding. I really want there to be some good news from this meeting. I personally doubt you will have anything more than hot air though. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on March 17, 2008, 05:30:18 pm Makes ya wish we had some more wealthy headquarter corps here willing to generously give to the community. We cant expect to have eeeverything named the BOK this or the QT that.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: carltonplace on March 18, 2008, 06:37:58 am ^I remember the tax payers sending a wad of money over to American Airlines a few years back. Maybe we could have the "AA AAA" park.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on March 18, 2008, 06:57:35 am I like the concept. American Airlines could sponsor fly balls, The American Automoble Association could have the naming rights to the parking lot, Alcoholics Anonymous would sponsor the non-drinking family area, The American Association of Advertising Agencies would buy an ad on the outfield wall and Duracell could pass out promotional AA and AAA batteries with the driller logo imprinted on them.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on March 18, 2008, 07:23:50 am quote: You just identified the single biggest reason why Tulsa today isn't the Tulsa of the 1970s. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on March 18, 2008, 07:51:35 am quote: I disagree, Tulsa is as it has always been. We lost the Oilers (AAA Baseball) due to our unwillingness to build a new baseball stadium in the 70s when the old one was literally falling apart. We voted down river development in the 70s and downtown redevelopment plans that included new arenas twice in the 90s. We went 20 years without any downtown arena at all after the Coliseum burned in the 40s. I really think that decisions like these over the years are part of why Tulsa failed to grow like Dallas. In fact, I think it's progress that Tulsa is somewhat willing to spend on improvements today. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on March 18, 2008, 08:28:09 am quote: It is interesting, on the one hand we had lots of big business in the 70s and before. But I dont recall them spending a lot on things as businesses contributing to the city. But regardless one thing that does seem to be true is that we had all the money and high paying jobs in the world and that helped make the city a better place for many reasons. We could attract people to our city because of all the money that was sloshing around in the 20s and 70s. But now that the money/oil is largely gone we realize that we didnt invest in basic infrastructure. The good times will always last... right? Think colleges for instance. One of the reasons we didnt create a public university system or even really grow any private ones at those times was because we didnt need to. It was almost beneath us, keep the pesky kids away somewhere else. Now we know we need to have a good college system to compete with other similar sized cities. Beautiful streets, beautiful neighborhoods, wonderful buildings, great jobs with a "compared to many cities" smaller population paying good taxes, more compact city... Now with the big oil largely gone we are pretty much left to our own devices just like every other city has been. And we are having to scramble to catch up and adjust to this startling reality. Things truly arent the way they used to be in the good ol days. A lot of the old timer/voters still dont realize what we need to do to be a competitive city. Oil paid for everything, not them. Plus its going to take extra effort to turn this ship around and make her run as she ought to, considering the new realities. I wish the state would realize that the oil isnt going to always be here as well. As dire as the national economic situation is.... These are still the good times for Oklahoma. Dont waste it or we will reeeally be in a world of hurtin when these good times are over. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on March 18, 2008, 09:06:39 am quote: The urinals and toilets could be sponsored by DoubleA since he generally (urinates) and (poo-poos) on everything. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: jackbristow on March 18, 2008, 02:31:51 pm quote: Ummm let's see, Williams, OneOK, SemGroup...there are others in town that may like the exposure. And you are ignorant and have no clue if you think they don't give to the community. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on March 18, 2008, 03:00:07 pm quote: I don't think he was insinuating that these companies don't give back; rather, this was a reference to companies like Phillips and Citgo that used to be headquarted in Tulsa but have moved to Houston (damn poaching Texans . . .). Without doubt, though, those you named are on the short list of corporations being courted by the city for a partnership to build the stadium. The success of a ballpark is in the best interests of any company located downtown. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: PonderInc on March 19, 2008, 09:43:17 am Did anyone make it to the TYPros meeting last night with Chuck Lamson? If so, what did he say???
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on March 19, 2008, 02:57:24 pm quote: Your absolutely right " however I might take a bit of exception to the ignorant and have no clue part" Those are some other great companies we have in town. And lets not forget Henry Zarrow, Helmerich, Schusterman... They do so many great things for our city and you see their names on many buildings. However, a lot of those folks are getting up there in years, who is going to replace them when they are gone? Whats the next company headquarter, the next big donor? I was mostly saying that because of other discussions on here where people dont often seem to understand the imprortance of having Headquarter Corporations here and what that can do for a city. Supporting good local small companies which can hopefully expand and become the next large corporation that will give back to the city. And yes the importance of creating a city where companies may want to move their headquarters to and indeed doing some little extra things to make sure they stay if at all possible. Its the company that has its headquarters here from which you get those huge donations. The profits from elsewhere come to Tulsa. Otherwise the profits leave the city and go to pay for nice stuff in other cities. I remember reading that TI gave half a billion dollars to a college there in Texas. Thats a lot! I wish we had more companies like that. No matter how much gas you buy at Total or some other station, they are not going to donate here like QT will, nor Mc Donalds or some other company located somewhere else. If you want nice things for your city, you have to have headquarters located there, or at least a major presence, otherwise your just working and existing while others get the extra stuff. Seems lately that BOK and QT have been in the headlines with big donations to a lot of things. Kaiser/BOK buying up properties, doing the river trail, leasing out some of the building that will be the new City Hall to make that viable, the Arena, the Mathews building and other projects downtown, etc, etc. QT doing the new park, new development on Brookside where the Camelot was, the QT center at the fairgrounds, etc. etc. Though I am sure the names you listed donate to local charities, and support events and other things, just like Kaiser and QT, I would hope that we also see some "named things" type donations from those other companies as well. What are some of the public, city, things they have donated to or helped build? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: hoodlum on March 19, 2008, 09:09:41 pm I made it to the TYpros event last night.
I was pleasntly suprised by what I felt was the true possibility that this ball field is going to happen. He mentioned somehting along the lines that as things were progressing they would like to break ground in the last quarter of this year. I was happily shocked by this. he answered several questions about the financing of the project which will involve 100% private funds. overall he really professed his commitment to being a part of downtown revitalization and thought that the drillers could be a catalyst for that revitalization. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on March 19, 2008, 09:57:53 pm quote: Fantastic news! I wonder who the magical, private donor is... Only so I can thank them! :D Let's get this thing built!!! Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Wrinkle on March 19, 2008, 11:12:14 pm The ONLY way this park will get built is by private funding. Though, it's hard to tell what back-door deals are happening.
We're just the public. Keep repeating it. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on March 20, 2008, 05:30:32 am I can't imagine any public project being 100% private funded. I would be we will see a lot of future projects be like the river is, some sort of split 50/50, 70/30, etc.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on March 20, 2008, 07:37:42 am I have a feeling that we are all going to be pleasantly suprised by this project.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on March 20, 2008, 08:32:47 am quote: +1 Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on March 20, 2008, 09:14:05 am quote: That is very encouraging, but 100% private financing is not the same thing as 100% private funding. I don’t see someone donating $70 million for a new stadium. I don’t really think that would be the best use funds donated to the community anyway. How about a new central library instead? This actually sounds like someone is going to float a loan for the city for a stadium, like what the River District is wanting to do in Jenks. This sounds like a TIF is coming, but there are no current plans for any new development in the area that would provide the new tax revenue needed to create a TIF. So, is this area really going to be developed on a larger scale than just a stadium? Is there something real in the works with real funding? This is what I have been asking, there’s a big funding gap in what has been talked about. A TIF on a big new East End development would be able to close that gap. So, does anyone know something about what is going on? Is there a real plan or is this just another weak proposal soon to be forgotten. Joe, you are hinting that you know something. What is it? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: PonderInc on March 20, 2008, 09:59:48 am I am confident that if a stadium goes into the East End, other developments will follow like lightning. It's the area of downtown with the most potential for all different sorts of developments...residential, retail, entertainment...and plenty of space (including some cool old buildings) to do it.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: jackbristow on March 20, 2008, 10:08:38 am quote: Sorry for coming across in a harsh manner. You are obviously more schooled in the history and current condition of things in Tulsa than I am. I was just pointing out that there are other companies in town who have major headquarters here that "could" do things similar to what BOK and QT have done recently. One thing that comes to mind is the SemGroup Championship LPGA golf tournament. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: CoffeeBean on March 20, 2008, 10:09:02 am Kasier?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on March 20, 2008, 04:02:27 pm quote: Just a high degree of confidence in this project. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on March 20, 2008, 04:28:58 pm quote: I know soooomething youuuu doooont,,, but I cant say anything, na, naaa, na na na.[:P] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on March 20, 2008, 04:43:15 pm quote: I have no information whatsoever, but Lamson's demeanor (to me, at least) is quite telling. From the start, he has been proceeding as though the ballpark were a done deal. This could be posturing, but if so, it's awfully well done. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on March 20, 2008, 05:41:26 pm Hmmm... privately financed or privately funded?
TIF? or not? If you're wondering why the Drillers don't want to pay for any of the stadium's costs themselves, well... here's a soccer-centric guy's sad story of political compromises in using stadium construction as urban renewal... http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080129/NEWS01/801290344/1002/NEWS Rhinos could lose stadium City considers takeover as bank sues for $10.8 million in past-due loans Citing a newly filed lawsuit claiming that the Rochester Rhinos organization defaulted on nearly $11 million in bank loans, city officials said Monday that they are contemplating steps to take over PAETEC Park. The city already has met with a potential investor who the professional soccer franchise hopes will bail it out. Or the Rhinos' bankers could step in and operate the team. Whatever happens, city officials say, the goal is to ensure that the stadium is a financially viable home for pro sports. But time is running out and options diminishing as more becomes known about what Mayor Robert Duffy calls "a total financial mess." The Rhinos are scheduled to open their 2008 season May 2........ Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on March 23, 2008, 09:20:23 pm The devil's always in the details... ummm.... it'd be nice to get a few details before the end of May.... hint, hint...
Rochester, New York's Triple-A ballpark, Frontier Field, built in 1996 with a seating capacity of 10,868... http://pressboxpowertrip.blogspot.com/2007/10/gop-machine-and-frontier-field.html quote: How much does it cost to run Frontier Field? http://pressboxpowertrip.blogspot.com/2007/10/how-much-does-it-cost-to-run-frontier.html quote: Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: perspicuity85 on March 25, 2008, 02:05:34 pm Ruf,
I think the comparison to Rochester may not be applicable here. Rochester's MSA has been losing population for over a decade. I'm not talking about the city of Rochester, I'm talking about the entire metro area. There is certainly some negative economic forces at play in that area- I'm guessing a large loss in manufacturing-sector jobs. Rochester has a lagging local economy and is not known for tourism. It is much smaller(about 1 million MSA) than other traditional industrial cities such as Pittsburgh or Detroit, who have been able to utilize their large population base and national importance to lessen the effects of a downturn in the manufacturing sector. Post- oil bust and post comm-bust Tulsa is much much better off than Rochester. Tulsa's economy and population will probably support a baseball stadium much better than Rochester. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on March 25, 2008, 04:42:30 pm It doesn't matter. He is still barking up the wrong tree.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on March 25, 2008, 07:47:42 pm quote: So, a healthy dose of skepticism is "barking up the wrong tree." Once again, the PUBLIC needs to find out details. Why does this city insist on being so secretive with EVERYTHING? If the stadium is 100% privately funded, that's great... argument over. If a TIF district comparable to what Jenks offered is going to happen, as far as I'm concerned, that's great. Argument over. Tie goes to something that "connects" downtown. I brought up both examples of what Rochester, NY did to point out that city officials typically gloss over some of the finer points that could jeopardize the taxpayers.... I don't begrudge the Drillers a new ballpark. In the summer of 2006, I visited Rochester... the last of many times. My company had a facility there and I was looking at transferring. The housing costs were much cheaper (than Chicagoland) and the city had a nice "feel" to it. I got cold feet because of the unemployment, crime and the general "vibe" of the job market... and ended up moving to Tulsa. Frontier Field is a nice downtown ballpark that's in a very comparable location in comparison to what's being proposed in the East End. This is a downtown triple-A ballpark and the Rochester team draws over 7k per game. And there are ZERO developments around the stadium... zero. The soccer stadium is only a few short blocks from the ballpark (kinda like East End's proximity to OSU-Tulsa???), but happens to have no convenient parking and sits directly across the street from a very marginal area of town-- I got hit up for quarters and saw abandoned homes directly across the street from the stadium... don't know if taking your kids to a soccer game that's only a stone's throw from crack houses is a very bright idea... ? OKC had Bricktown as a destination already in place BEFORE the ballpark was built. The stadium enhanced the entertainment value of the area... but didn't magically cause development that wasn't already there. two months left... the countdown continues... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: PonderInc on March 29, 2008, 09:42:16 pm Just went to the sold out Chicago White Sox vs. Texas Rangers game at the Bricktown Ballpark in OKC. I am now more convinced than ever that we must bring the Drillers downtown.
Thousands of people were at the ballpark, but more importantly, all the nearby restaurants/bars were PACKED before the game. It only makes sense that downtown Tulsa could reap similar benefits with 70 home games per year, plus other events like outdoor concerts, etc. (I believe Dave Matthews will be playing at the OKC ballpark in the coming weeks...) What can we do to help? Do we support an increased hotel/motel/rental car tax? Do we support one of state bills that would return a portion of the state sales taxes to municipalities for roads? (To help pacify the "fix the roads first" folks.) What is needed? What can we do to help make this a done deal? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on March 30, 2008, 02:06:37 pm I'm glad another one sees the light. I'm convinced that no one who has actually experienced downtown baseball can be against it.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: perspicuity85 on April 03, 2008, 12:31:27 am quote: Much agreed. All one has to do is look at the difference between St. Louis Cardinals games and Texas Rangers games. The Cards continued to play in downtown St. Louis, even when it was really dead and really dangerous. Now, downtown St. Louis is really coming along, and there is a vibrant urban environment around the new Busch Stadium. The Rangers, on the other hand, play in an Arlington ballpark that is surrounded by parking lots. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: waterboy on April 03, 2008, 06:56:15 am I support a downtown ballpark. Locating in Jenks is fine too. But don't risk ignoring what Ruf said. Its true. Bricktown was already popular with entertainment crowds as far back as the 80's before the stadium was built there. Partly due to the proximity of OU. Development didn't magically spring up as a result of a ballpark being built there and if we don't concurrently encourage East End development we're naive to think it wil just appear. The Jenks tif recognizes that reality. Note that there is no big increase in businesses around the Arena either as was predicted.
Great distinction Swake made about private "financing" vs private funding. I do not want to see us on the hook for a debt service arrangement that allows the Drillers to be profitable as long as the taxpayers pony up for overhead. Ignoring these two insights seems pretty dangerous. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on April 03, 2008, 08:59:29 am quote: If I were a developer looking to do some sort of retail or residential. I would do something in the East End once a ballpark was there, over something by the Arena. The East End has a lot of potential to become a bustling urban neighborhood than the area by the Arena. The Arena is still going to be a big plus for downtown and will see some development around it, but most likely people will go from the Arena to the:Brady District, Blue Dome, East End and Greenwood areas before and afterwards. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: jackbristow on April 03, 2008, 11:33:07 am quote: To say Bricktown was popular in the 80s is quite a stretch...as is your notion that it is close in proximity to OU. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: OSU on April 03, 2008, 12:09:37 pm [/quote] To say Bricktown was popular in the 80s is quite a stretch...as is your notion that it is close in proximity to OU. [/quote] He might have been referring to the medical school, which is very close. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on April 03, 2008, 12:37:19 pm quote: OU kids that I know of didn't start rolling up to Bricktown until around 2000. Mid-1990s it was no more happening than Blue Dome, probably less. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: waterboy on April 03, 2008, 02:26:00 pm You think I make this crap up?[;)]
I was visiting Bricktown when you guys were in kinny-garten (well, maybe middle school). Around 1986 during business meetings. Good bars and even then it had potential without the fake river. OU is a mere (appx)19 miles away (about the same as Keystone to Tulsa). They ran party busses for years from the campus to Bricktown at least from 2000 or so. One was featured in Playboy. The point is that there was momentum and established businesses already existing when the stadium moved. It wasn't too much of a stretch for them. Downtown wasn't completely dead and carved up into parking lots. Sandwiched on one side by Edmond with the Bronchos and on the other side OU with about 22,000 young people didn't hurt at all. Blue Dome is in place, but I don't sense any momentum like they had. IOW, the stadium wasn't taking much of a chance. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on April 03, 2008, 03:00:13 pm I will grant that a 2nd Street location for the stadium, so as to be closer to established bars, might have been a better choice for synergy of the 'hood. But I think the East End site will be just fine.
And it's not like Tulsa hasn't had the downtown bar scene going for a while. I remember 6 years ago having a couple of drinks at Arnie's before walking over to Cronies to watch Cross Canadian and Pat Green. I know Cronies isn't there anymore, but McNellie's has come since. Tulsa has maintained a nice bar scene downtown for at least 10 years. The stadium and other improvements, though, should be the shot in the arm to transform it into full-on entertainment district. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on April 04, 2008, 09:53:43 pm Someone leaked something (it wasn't me).
http://www.newson6.com/global/story.asp?s=8121293 But, there is still more "interesting" news to come. Really though, sometimes the press should wait on things. Hopefully this wont mess something up. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TulsaSooner on April 04, 2008, 11:42:45 pm In the article, it mentions hopes for a 5k or 6k seat stadium. It would be nice to have something near the size of the Bricktown Ballpark in hopes of attracting OU-OSU games and, perhaps, Big XII tournament games.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: godboko71 on April 05, 2008, 02:01:33 am Very exciting news agree, hope this doesn't mess anything up.
I really wish kotv would turn off comments. I miss the old KOTV site, simple basically featureless just showed me the news and weather. All there "features" take you to other people's sites like what the heck. Sorry for the derailing rant. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on April 05, 2008, 11:09:09 am quote: Not a lot of substance here beyond what we had already pieced together from bits and hints. Nice to get media confirmation that the lodging tax won't go up, so there won't be a popular vote after all. Let me put on my detective hat . . . we're now down to two possibilities as far as I can figure. 1) A major donor or group who will announce they are giving the City of Tulsa a philanthropic gift to build a stadium. 2) An unnamed entity waiting in the wings to develop the area immediately around the stadium, for whom secrecy is paramount because public knowledge would create inflation on the real estate they're eyeing. My money's on choice #2. Haven't heard much about the West Bank lately from Larry Huffman and HCW. I wonder if they are casting eyes toward the CBD . . . Downtown Landing, perhaps? Just spitballin' here; PM me if I should shut up. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on April 05, 2008, 11:53:59 am I am sure its the same "spitballing" everyone else is doing. Plus, this town is so small, all the players probably already know what is going down regardless.
Now I am interested to see what the renderings will look like. What the baseball stadium will look like. They probably arent even worried about that at this point. However that will have some impact on the cost of the project. Most likely it will not be an "iconic" structure, but will be "suitably handsome". Far as I am concerned thats just fine. We just need to get it done and get some action over there. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Friendly Bear on April 05, 2008, 12:51:13 pm quote: 66 home games per year is hardly a Dynamic Economic Engine. That means it probably sits empty another 300 days per year. In that part of town, it will need 24-hour per day security. Also, a very big part of the earnings from a ballpark are the concessions. Do the stadium concessionaires REALLY want to be competing with surrounding bars and restaurants? Answer: NO. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on April 05, 2008, 03:01:06 pm quote: Oh no! The taxpayers will have to pay for LOCKS! What a WASTE of taxpayer's MONEY by the EVIL TAX VAMPIRES! And, woe be to us! Those Powerful Concession Interests must have managed to keep bars and restaurants from opening anywhere near stadiums across the country! I mean, just check out all those new ballparks the Conpiracy has prevented new entertainment options around them! Friendly Bear hates fun. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on April 05, 2008, 08:33:30 pm 66 home days is 66 more days of having a few thousand more people down there than there are now. Thats something right there. There will be other things along with the stadium. Each little thing adds up. The Arena will bring more people downtown that will also go to any restaurants, etc. by the new stadium. Just removing some more blight from downtown will be an improvement. We will likely hear about more living going in near the area soon as well. Pretty quickly things will cross a threshold, all these initial risks and efforts will spark a spreading fire that will new life to Downtown. Its going to be a very different city in 2012. Those parking lots and abandoned buildings will be but a vague, distant memory. And soon there after we will have to turn our attention to revitalizing the run down, abandoned, 71st corridor. [:D]
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Wrinkle on April 05, 2008, 08:50:42 pm They must've gotten all those environmental issues resolved about cleaning up major industrial contamination of this site by its' owner.
Hope they paid for it and not us. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on April 06, 2008, 10:18:04 am quote: Skelly Stadium isn't used much either... unless you're counting TU intramurals (which is not really appropriate use of the stadium, IMO)... but it is a landlmark. Direct economic impact is probably the weakest argument to build one of these suckers... What leaves me scratching my head is the idea that Tulsans will walk from the ballpark for blocks to McNellie's or Guapo's... most Tulsans don't know how to walk anywhere, so unless the few blocks around the stadium are made "pedestrian friendly," I don't see the comparison to Bricktown here... and Bricktown enhances the success of OKC's ballpark just as much or more (more IMO) than the ballpark enhances Bricktown... Lamson said last year that a new ballpark would double attendance. Well, I guess it would using the same business model the Drillers have-- low rent/high profits off concessions/lotsa ticket giveaways through sponsorships The Drillers would hafta change their business model to something that is more ticket-based... Durham Bulls http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/minor-league-baseball-team4.htm quote: I'll put a ten-spot on the Tulsa Landing people... "East End Landing"? [;)] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on April 06, 2008, 02:39:14 pm quote: It's not unreasonable to expect that the area between 4th and Frankfort and 2nd and Elgin will attract attention from commercial developers. In fact, I just realized that the present KOTV studios sits directly between those two points--wonder where this little scoop came from? [;)] It seems likely that the sale of this parcel and others around it are being negotiated as we speak with the city or my imaginary private development entity. In fact, I would bet a plug nickel that the option has already been purchased, because otherwise they wouldn't have allowed the story to break. I could also be full of it. Again, just spitballin'. EDIT: Oh wait, I don't think I'm full of it. The story states: quote: That's where KOTV is. They've got to be in on the deal. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: godboko71 on April 06, 2008, 03:42:42 pm Maybe it will be the KOTV, or the Griffin Communications Stadium.
Either way interesting times lay ahead or downtown. Hopefully they utilize the stadium for things other then baseball to increase over all revenue during the year. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on April 06, 2008, 05:06:35 pm "Hopefully they utilize the stadium for things other then baseball to increase over all revenue during the year."
Ah, guess that's my cue...... http://www.uslsoccer.com/insider/229134.html TOPIC: EXPANSION / USL-1 TEAMS (Mikey - Charleston, SC) Is USL or any potential owners, actively pursuing an expansion franchise in the near future, particularly in Division 1? Including the recently announced Austin Aztex franchise which will begin competition in 2009, there are presently 12 active USL-1 clubs. It is our objective to reach 16 clubs by the 2010 season at which point we expect to further evaluate league growth and expansion. This is genuinely achievable without sacrificing quality in the process. Clearly, we need to increase our footprint west of the Mississippi in USL-1 and therefore this is primarily where our proactive efforts to identify ownership groups are focused. A short list of markets from which we believe a USL-1 franchise could be successful with the proper ownership and venue include, but are not limited to (in no specific order): Omaha (NE), Tulsa (OK), San Antonio (TX), Tampa (FL), Phoenix (AZ), Boise (ID), Oklahoma City (OK), Albuquerque (NM), Memphis (TN), and Birmingham (AL). We are currently in advanced discussions with interested parties in several of these markets. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: godboko71 on April 06, 2008, 05:29:56 pm Only problem with two leagues in the same stadium is having to change over the field, and if the seasons over lap the having to make sure the games are scheduled so that they never are on the same day or even with in days of each other so the change overs go smoothly.
Other then those small problems (which can be over come) I would have no problem with a multi team use facility. Anyway I wish you luck on your pursuit to pro soccer in Tulsa. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on April 06, 2008, 09:24:00 pm quote: I heard the Talons/Oilers ran into this one year when they accidentally froze the turf. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on April 06, 2008, 09:25:47 pm Well I could have had an easy 10 bucks. But from what I know its not the "Landing" people. Nothing that grand. But still everyone has to admit that just having the ballpark downtown (and possibly not having to raise much or any taxes to pay for it) and it removing some blight from the area is a good thing. That alone would make it more tempting for other developers. Not because of extra people, but because the area will look and be nicer. And, if along with the ballpark we get one or two other things as well.... Thats only additional sweetening to the deal.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on April 07, 2008, 08:22:04 am 1) I'm sure D-Fest would love to have a stadium nearby and other concerts would utilize at least a few days. Also the OU-OSU game is usually in Tulsa and would probably like to utilize a new facility. Throw in a high school championship/regional or whatever and it could get some utilization to it.
But the sad fact is FB is correct in that most sports facilities have a low utilization rate. OU's football stadium is only used 7 times a year as is OSU's "new" $140,000,000+ stadium, Tulsa is spending ~ $40mil on a facility with a similarly poor use pattern. The Reynolds Center or even the Mabee center probably have less than 66 dates a year. Few would say those assets are wasted. So while it is a factor, the percentage of use is not the deciding factor in the development. 2) The joke about the "industrial contamination" is that if it is left undeveloped it can be contaminated forever. Apparently it isn't bad enough to warrant any action unless some poor SOB actually wants to do something with the land. Does that not sound a bit off? - - - Overall I hope downtown works. I think a stadium is an important part of that, but not a necessary part. If the number simply don't work, then it should not be done. I do not believe if we build it, they will come. [edit] quote: Ummm, in that case my retirement is a done deal. I just don't have the financing. [/edit] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: PonderInc on April 07, 2008, 11:29:19 am The Drillers will play 70 home games this year. If you add other games like city and state HS championships, major league pre-season games, local college matchups...and music concerts...you're looking at a lot of bang for the buck.
Plus, if it's a public investment, there's more than one way of looking at the ledger sheet. If a private company builds a venue, they have to generate enough profits to pay for it. If it's a public investment, the profits/success will be measured by increased tax base, increased sales taxes AND the profits generated from the facility itself. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: chlfan on April 09, 2008, 09:25:08 am quote: http://www.newson6.com/global/story.asp?s=8135260 Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: FOTD on April 15, 2008, 09:57:10 pm Catch Gumble's HBO sports show this month. Frank Defore touching story on Mike Coolbaugh and his family worth seeing.
What's new on the stadium? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: brunoflipper on April 25, 2008, 09:38:06 am ok, somebody cough it up...
word on the street is its a done deal... come on, let us see it... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on April 25, 2008, 09:54:16 am Different word than I've heard. I've heard "mostly" and "pretty much" but not "done."
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on April 25, 2008, 11:02:33 am quote: That's the sum total of what I know. But there's a bit more that can be guessed at between Lamson's statements to various parties and the KOTV report. Lamson's comments to the YP group that the financing would be private and there would be no vote, plus the fact that KOTV, which happens to own land it will soon be vacating adjacent to the site, got a scoop, means something. If it isn't going to a vote, it can't be a hotel room tax increase, so the public funding will mostly likely come from tax increment financing. A TIF does not work unless there is new development nearby. This is where the KOTV land comes into play. I would guess that, once the city had its exclusive negotiation period, some third-party developer took interest and brought a plan for development adjacent to the stadium to Taylor and Lamson. I would expect that this third party has been acquiring options to the surrounding land--the non-stadium city stuff, the KOTV block, and the Global Development block. These options will be contingent on the city approving the TIF. Just guess work. Who really knows? Some on this board, but their lips are sealed. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on April 25, 2008, 12:09:23 pm quote: The land being acquired isn't just the 4 blocks needed, Bill White said he wanted to sell out to the city, that is a lot of developable land around the stadium. Also, the left outfield is a hotel if you look at the sample drawings. If this is going to be donation/TIF then lets raise property taxes for roads and the hotel/motel tax for mass transit (bus/rail/helicopter/whatever) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: brunoflipper on April 25, 2008, 06:11:19 pm my guess is that it is privately funded (and theres a tif), manhattan construction is building it and it includes two new hotels... but that is just my guess...
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on April 25, 2008, 06:21:53 pm I went to three of the first six game homestand and now three so far of the current eight game homestand. The team looks pretty good. They have some decent pitchers and lots of speed in the outfield. Tomorrow night is the first fireworks game of the season. We will probably go, but might just listen to am1430 till it gets to the eighth inning and then go park in Lowe's parking lot.
It will be great to have the games downtown. I sure hope it happens. Downtown needs a couple more hotels too. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on May 05, 2008, 09:05:04 pm "Chuck Lamson to the white courtesy phone please... Mr. Lamson to the white courtesy phone..." [?]
http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9963 Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Gaspar on May 12, 2008, 06:15:53 am quote: The fireworks this year are amazing! I took my family and expected a nice quick display after the game, and was blown away! You are so close to them that you can feel the heat! It was really nice! . . . . . . 18 days until the announcement. . . . . . Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on May 15, 2008, 01:04:15 pm 15 days till the tipping point for downtown . . .
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TeeDub on May 22, 2008, 01:13:33 pm Where is the plan... they only have a week left? Right? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: chlfan on May 22, 2008, 01:53:27 pm quote: Right left. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 22, 2008, 01:59:37 pm Left
Left Left Right Left Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on May 22, 2008, 02:15:32 pm up up
down down left right left right B A B A Select (two player) start. Name the games that applies to. Wait, don't. /tangent Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 22, 2008, 02:32:33 pm quote: down -- roll to --> forward + Low punch Only move I was ever coordinated enough for. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on May 22, 2008, 02:43:46 pm quote: There's a plan. Not public yet. But a done deal. (I have no details, just repeating all that people who know the details will tell me.) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: waterboy on May 22, 2008, 07:45:13 pm Chlfan- I love your tag line. Anyone remember who was infamous for that bumper sticker?
Oh, yeah. And what's the mayor talking about with trying to get a tif district by the river? (Tulsa World story early this week) Sounded like she was intimating that a baseball stadium might be just as acceptable on city owned land west and south of 23rd. Is this part of politicking at the state level? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on May 22, 2008, 08:55:28 pm hmmm... now that would be a surprise.
I guess I just assumed from reading between the lines that the Drillers were either going to go to: A) Downtown Tulsa -- East Village B) Jenks River District - - - - - - - - - C) The west bank of the river-- but only after he** freezes over... [;)] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on May 22, 2008, 09:42:45 pm Drillers are a lock for downtown. I have this from multiple, confident, knowledgeable sources.
I also have a good idea what a matching TIF for the West Bank might be, but only from conjecture. It's going to be Tulsa Landing. It's probably happening, so get excited. The mayor and company learned their lesson--stay under the radar until these things are a lock. Without ANY media attention until it was PASSED, the mayor and Tulsa reps managed to DOUBLE the TIF money available to the city. I think we're going to see Tulsa's own version of the River District announced shortly, with or without a soccer stadium. Seriously. I am hesitant to hand Mayor Taylor credit, because it's not yet clear she's deserving, but damn--the next six months may be VERY good for City of Tulsa. EDIT: I'll just come out and say it. I think our Mayor was busy down in the capital city kissing NBA and OKC donkey in order to ensure big TIF money for the downtown stadium and the West Bank as well as $25 million for an Arkansas river damn and $25 million for "flood mitigation," AKA the Pearl District canal. We'll see what happens. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on May 23, 2008, 07:11:50 am Floyd, I hope you are correct on all fronts.
The "keep it on the DL" strategy is FAR better than announcing every flash in the pan. Not only from an observers standpoint (when these things rarely materialize) but also from a business stand point. Also, if she was sending Tulsa money down the turnpike in exchange for some heading back up this way... then it's just politics. I hope you end up being right on that. And above all, I hope the impressive landing happens as well as the downtown improvements. I guess we'll find out next week what the city is thinking in this regard. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: chlfan on May 23, 2008, 07:55:22 am Waterboy... LOL, Here ya go: http://www.bumpertalk.com/bumpertalk/BC209A.html
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Townsend on May 23, 2008, 08:27:09 am quote: Giggidy Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 23, 2008, 08:30:17 am (http://www.slotslogic.com/images/blog/quag3.jpg)
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: stymied on May 23, 2008, 08:43:23 am quote: It is actually (D), none of the above. Can anyone guess where it will be? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TURobY on May 23, 2008, 08:51:23 am quote: Old City Hall? [?] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on May 23, 2008, 09:08:09 am quote: False ^^ Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Gaspar on May 23, 2008, 09:24:47 am I have absolutely no idea where an appropriate place would be for the new ball park? Where could you possibly find a spot with parking, great access, and for a good price?
I wish we had a piece of land next to the new arena for a baseball stadium. I mean isn't that what other cities do? If we only had such a spot. Woe on us! Where oh where could such a piece of available land (preferably with an existing 6 story parking structure that we could use) be? Ho hum! I guess we will just have to give up. Such a spot couldn't possibly exist! (http://www.tulsalandopportunities.com/propertyphotos/site3_mediumzoom_full.jpg) [:I] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: stymied on May 23, 2008, 09:30:48 am quote: I don't know you, but I will wager you the location is none of the above. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on May 23, 2008, 10:10:26 am I like any downtown location better than a river location. Near the arena, east village, gunboat park, brady arts...
My dream wish is that it was near OSU-Tulsa, built with help from state funds and the home field for a newly created OSU-Tulsa baseball team. It would be close to Greenwood and have connections with Tulsa's history and walking distance to all the brady bars and restaurants. I have always thought that the best property potential is between the colleges and the castles. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: stymied on May 23, 2008, 10:18:01 am quote: getting warmer... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dbacks fan on May 23, 2008, 10:23:49 am quote: I'm guessing slightly south and west, but more towards the south where a large GM dealership used to be. 3rd & Frankfort near TFD Sta. 1 perhaps? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: stymied on May 23, 2008, 10:47:45 am quote: colder Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on May 23, 2008, 11:13:15 am FinTube
City owned property. Will link in with the new rail. City can lease property to developers. Though road access is troubling and development there at this time will not really compliment downtown. My other guess (and it would be my favorite area) is where the Hartford Building is. Close to Greenwood, Blue Dome, OSU Tulsa, the rail and would help downtown infill. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dbacks fan on May 23, 2008, 11:14:26 am quote: Ok, second guess. East of 244 or north of 75, where the industrial area was. At one time there was a paper recycler in one of the buildings. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: PonderInc on May 23, 2008, 11:44:14 am It has to stay within the IDL. And I hope that it doesn't sacrifice too many historic buildings.
My only complaint about the previous ballpark/mixed-use proposal was that they wanted to tear down several historic buildings for small surface parking lots. Those attractive older buildings will be the bars and restaurants and retail of the future...we have to be smart about what we tear down. Downtown has enough scorched earth for surface parking. Any parking should be structured with ground-floor retail. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on May 23, 2008, 01:24:53 pm quote: What's the bet? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 23, 2008, 01:27:15 pm quote: I'm in Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on May 23, 2008, 01:44:56 pm Don't bet with stymied.
He is probably an insider. My guess is that he is Hornsby, the Driller mascot. How he types so well with those big hooves is beyond me. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 23, 2008, 02:09:04 pm I enjoy people who are 100% sure about where something isn't.. but have no idea where something is.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: OSU on May 23, 2008, 02:20:24 pm quote: 3 words dragon naturally speaking, all the mascots use it. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on May 23, 2008, 02:40:57 pm Has anybody besides stymied heard a PEEP about any location other than the East Village? I sure haven't. And when I asked someone about the KOTV property being involved I got a smile and a nod.
Evans Fintube isn't accessible enough and won't pique retailer interest. The old City Hall property is too small and there's no room for the development a TIF will require. Hartford Building is a great location but would require closure of 2nd Street. So, I still expect it at the Nordam site. Hartford Building won't shock me, but anything else will. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on May 23, 2008, 02:59:02 pm quote: Yes. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: PonderInc on May 23, 2008, 03:27:44 pm I've got the perfect location. All we have to do is demolish the jail...
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on May 23, 2008, 03:30:38 pm After further review, I'm not taking stymied up on his bet. But rest assured, it's downtown.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on May 23, 2008, 03:34:56 pm Fascinating.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on May 23, 2008, 04:08:25 pm http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080523_11_Anexc88311
Downtown Drillers stadium talks extended by: P.J. LASSEK, World Staff Writer 5/23/2008 12:00 AM An exclusive agreement to negotiate terms to build a new downtown baseball stadium to house the Tulsa Drillers has been extended for 45 days, Mayor Kathy Taylor said Friday. The agreement was set to expire May 30, but Taylor and Drillers owner Chuck Lamson mutually agreed to extend it. “There is a lot of details with the financing and building of a ballpark and we are working both of those tracks simultaneously and want to make sure we get everything in place,” Taylor said. Lamson agreed adding that he feels “very good” about the progress so far. “The work to get the right stadium and the right deal for both the Drillers and the city takes time,” he said. “Our discussions have been very positive, and we are very encouraged.” In January, Taylor and Lamson announced that they had entered into an exclusive four-month agreement to negotiate a deal to bring the baseball team downtown. At that time, it was discussed that the ballpark would be publicly owned and located in the East Village on a site of two previous projects — a Wal-Mart Supercenter and a prior baseball stadium proposal, both of which fell through. But Taylor said Friday that she has sought private donors to fund a new stadium and hopes to have a final agreement to put forward by July 15. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on May 23, 2008, 04:37:26 pm Uuuugh, so now we have to play the waiting game again. And we know less than we thought we knew before lol.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on May 23, 2008, 04:45:43 pm We have waited this long...what is another 45 days?
Based on the quotes, I think it is clear both parties are happy with the progress. That makes me happy. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on May 23, 2008, 04:50:30 pm Wow, this is not what I expected, but I agree with RM--it shows things are moving along well. Good momentum, and I like the sound of "private donors." Kaiser Stadium?
I'll be in town tomorrow. Time to beat the bushes and see what I can find out. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: joiei on May 23, 2008, 05:02:44 pm quote:THis would be a definite plus, reusing existing buildings, design a park around the building styles that already exist to make it look like it has been there a long time. Maybe they can even use up some of those empty parking lots, isn't that part of the idea of infill? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dbacks fan on May 23, 2008, 06:38:51 pm Final guess, not including TFD Sta. 1, Frankfort to Lansing, 4th to 6th, and Bill White Chevy, bcomes a multi level parking garage. The boundry I laid out is larger than the foot print of the current statdium and if you point centerfiel north to north west you could have a good view of the skyline and the sun would not be that much of a problem for day games or a twilight double header. Plus there are multiple routes to the freeways and it's just of of the Blue Dome District.
Just my 2 cents. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: stymied on May 23, 2008, 07:36:38 pm quote: Ballparks don't ever point NW. Nearly all are pointed NE. A few are pointed SE. Here is a hint--if this ballpark was situated in one of the orientations mentioned above (NE or SW) it would have a stunning view of the city skyline pointing directly downtown. With the other orientation, there would be no view of the downtown skyline at all except the extreme 1st base or 3rd base end seats. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: waterboy on May 23, 2008, 10:08:13 pm The old Safeway? er...Homeland at 11th & Denver.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on May 23, 2008, 10:09:42 pm Hartford pointing SE. [8D]
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: chlfan on May 24, 2008, 08:26:13 am W of river pointing NE.
Warmer? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on May 24, 2008, 09:17:01 am quote: Hey, quit baiting them. [|)] Kudos for scooping everybody, though. I really thought you were full of it at first. You're not. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on May 24, 2008, 11:54:25 am The Schusterman owned property near 11th and Denver?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: waterboy on May 24, 2008, 06:02:24 pm quote: Hey, Off my cloud! Thats my guess! Get your own or sign on to the Waterboy dreamland list of non mainstream possibilities. That area seems underutilized to me considering the access to 75, 51, Riverside, TCC and downtown. It isn't so close to perceived undesirable areas (except the QT), has a view of the river and the skyline, is close to a couple hotels and everything has pretty much been flattened already. You can get drunk on a Saturday night at the ball game and stagger over to the churches the next morning. [;)] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: brunoflipper on May 24, 2008, 10:47:46 pm quote:nope... i just found out today... not that it matters, but i am totally for this site... it is a great spot and the obvious choice... im thrilled... OT, anyone going to see matisyahu at the cains? should be an awesome show... talk about a homerun... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on May 24, 2008, 11:05:39 pm quote: I don't think the Schusterman's own the Homeland, but they do own land for a couple of blocks on the other side of Denver. And it is mostly surface lots. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on May 25, 2008, 07:16:22 am How did you guys come up with the south part of downtown after stymied said "warmer" to the area around OSU and Brady Arts?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: waterboy on May 25, 2008, 07:27:23 am quote: As for me, just not paying attention. Someone just spill the beans and be done with it. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on May 25, 2008, 07:28:16 am There's no room for a stadium in the 11th and Denver area without some serious demolition and street closure.
Not saying that forecloses that part of town, but somebody needs to show me on a map where a stadium could possibly fit. And then someone needs to explain to me why the city would located the stadium in the farthest corner of downtown possible from the bars, restaurants and future rail link. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on May 25, 2008, 07:36:49 am quote: Agreed. This has gotten silly. We shouldn't have to play treasure hunt here. Somebody PM me and improve my day. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on May 25, 2008, 07:47:12 am I drove all over the area between Brady arts and OSU-Tulsa and still south of the highway. I didn't find home plate, but there was a pitching mound.
It is a cool area. It connects the historic Greenwood with future sites of KOTV and the new arts museum. It is close walking distance to OSU-Tulsa and the Cain's Ballroom. There are already a dozen places to get a pre-game bite or an after game drink. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on May 25, 2008, 08:17:27 am Hmmm, I am not sure I would like it in that area. That area has great potential to become a funky neighborhood and arts district. A large structure like a baseball stadium and I assume parking, unless OSU Tulsa is able to be used for parking, wouldnt quite fit. Starts to seem a bit "mass marketing" versus organic. Thats what I dont like about OKCs Bricktown and people are already pointing out that it is dying. Its artificial and faddish not..."real". Areas like Brookside and Cherry Street work precisely because they are not contrived spaces. The Brady Arts district has that potential too. I would rather it be a real neighborhood not an area of shiny new "attrations" for the suburbanites to frequent. The area where the Hartford Building is, for instance, is between Blue Dome and Greenwood, off to the side so to speak such that new development around a baseball stadium would act as a transition from the baseball stadium to the other "naturally grown" areas. A funky, hodge podge area that has evolved is better than a disneyesque, artificial, construction.
Dont specifically know where or if the baseball stadium would go if it were near the Brady Arts district so cant say too much, will just have to see. Plus, do we really want that many straight people in the area? [8D] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: chlfan on May 25, 2008, 01:51:08 pm Would this be the area you're talking about or a little further west, N of OSU Tulsa and E of Horseshoe Hill?
(http://www.tulsalandopportunities.com/propertyphotos/site1_zoomout_full.jpg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on May 25, 2008, 01:57:31 pm quote: That's funny. What makes you think baseball players aren't gay? You know, baseball players have a real fashion sense. Even the manager wears a form-fitting uniform. Football coaches don't wear pads and helmets and basketball coaches don't wear shorts. But baseball coaches and managers wear it all, even the stirrup socks. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dbacks fan on May 25, 2008, 04:03:21 pm quote: That was my second guess on the previous page. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on May 25, 2008, 06:00:15 pm The above would have been one of my guesses. But its supposedly still in the IDL, so thats not it either.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on May 25, 2008, 06:18:08 pm quote: Some very well may be lol. But I envision the type of crowd that goes to a baseball game as more middle America, ma and pa, apple pie, family with kids sort of thing. Then in the Brady Arts district you have a more bohemian arts scene starting, the teens and young adults out at the Cains wanting to act silly, a few gay clubs, etc.... in other words lots of people who often get along but probably dont want to be hanging out in the same area as their folks and little sis and bro. Not the best example there lol, but it just seems like your putting 2 different types of groups or "scenes" together. Urban, edgy, artsy and gay with squeaky clean, middle America, family fun. Course what time are most games over with? Ma, pa and jr may be long gone before us sinners come sneaking out into the dusk lol. [8D] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 25, 2008, 07:59:23 pm The fintube land has horrible road access and the homeland area has great access but not room to develop around it. You have highways on two sides and a substation on a third.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: JoeMommaBlake on May 25, 2008, 11:37:05 pm I'm still wondering what happened to the proposed site in the "east village."
I went to the TYPROS thing with Lamson and it seemed like this was the spot. I still think it's the best spot. The rationale I heard that night from someone was that the stadium and the arena would "book-end" 5th street to allow for an established commercial corridor. I think that sounds great. . . plus the land it would be built on is arguably the ugliest part of downtown....so it wouldn't suck to bulldoze it. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: tulsa1603 on May 26, 2008, 08:04:01 am That former industrial site north of the IDL would be horrible IMHO. I think most of Tulsa's problems lie in things being too spread out - just a little too far to walk from one thing to another. That area would be great if redeveloped into residential or something, but not the stadium. I think the best location would be from that original proposal in the east end....Close enough to walk to bars and restaurants before/after games. The only other location that makes sense to me would be on top of where the Tulsa County Jail and homeless services places are...but I doubt THAT will happen. :)
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on May 26, 2008, 09:23:21 am quote: Seriously, I'm still waiting on somebody to explain what has changed here and why. Too many winks and nudges, not enough hard rumor. [:P] That site made all the sense in the world. The only other site that makes sense is the Hartford Buidling area but that would include closing 2nd street. So confused . . . Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: OkieDiva on May 27, 2008, 09:20:27 pm Turn on Channel 6... where Scott Thompson now sits will be within spitting distance of home plate. KOTV has broken ground on a new station northwest, between Spaghetti Warehouse and Mexicali. TFD HQ no longer needed due to new city hall. What else is over there to demolish? Heck, if they plan right there will even be an "adult bookstore" - what husband calls the best looking building in downtown - right outside the front gates. And beer bars within walking distance. It's a hardcore ball fan's dream come true....
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on May 28, 2008, 10:26:02 am +1 on the industrial site near OSU being too far out to be any good for this project. If the idea is to help frame downtown that site will do nothing but further isolate it. Plus, there is no room for development next door nor anywhere for that development to attach to/glean from on non-game days. May as well rebuild at the Expo grounds.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: stymied on May 29, 2008, 08:36:06 pm quote: Saw the new design, new location. Let's just say that a few foul balls may land on KOTV's new roof. The park is actually facing slightly SE, but will still have stellar views of DT. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on May 29, 2008, 08:47:03 pm quote: The trucking company site that Kaiser is rumored to have bought on Main in the Brady District? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 29, 2008, 08:53:23 pm quote: I'm gonna call BS until I see it due the lack of available large enough property in that area. You need a superblock for a stadium Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dbacks fan on May 29, 2008, 09:14:32 pm quote: I have to agree. I did some measuring with Google Earth of the existing stadium and got a perimeter of about 2300 feet. The foot print of a good size stadium is probably, and I'm guessing at this moment, 36,000 square feet, or to close to 3/4 of an acre. The perimeter around Chase Field here in Phoenix is roughly 3100 feet. As for TFD Station 1, I don't think it would go away, it may, and I mean "may" be relocated but there will always be a station in that area of downtown. The station off of the BA and Denver is not enough to cover it's own area and the majority of downtown. JMO the area between 3rd and 6th and the IDL and say Elgin or Frankfort is to me ideal. JMO. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on May 29, 2008, 09:15:32 pm I believe stymied knows of what he speaks.
Why he taunts us with clues is another story. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: CoffeeBean on May 29, 2008, 09:52:26 pm quote: So the left fielder will be looking directly into the sun? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on May 29, 2008, 10:41:09 pm I hope they incorporate a big grassy area in the outfield where people can spread out like a picnic.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: spoonbill on May 30, 2008, 04:53:52 am quote: Can't aim a field that way. Against the rules. Go to MLB site and download field orientation rules. Nice try! Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 30, 2008, 05:45:07 am quote: You have to agree? He is talking about it being in the brady district and you're agreeing by talking about the east end. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TUalum0982 on May 30, 2008, 06:35:58 am quote: they have that in San Diego, and it is very friendly oriented. I think it's 5 dollars a person, and families can bring blankets, food, etc. Nice setup they have out there at Petco. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Kenosha on May 30, 2008, 07:05:58 am quote: Dont forget PNC Park (New Pittsburg stadium) and US Cellular Field (White Sox)...both line up SE. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Chicken Little on May 30, 2008, 07:27:32 am In addition to the three that Kenosha and Twizzler mentioned, other SE facing ballparks include: Comerica Park (Detroit), Miller Park (Brewers), Great American Ballpark (Reds).
http://www.baseball-almanac.com/stadium/ballpark_NSEW_AL.shtml Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on May 30, 2008, 08:15:02 am quote: Ok, we get the general idea as to where, now I am curious about the design. Any clues on that front? Hows this puppy looking? Hotel with it still? Pedestrian friendly? Old fashioned, contemporary? Anything going around it development wise? As a part of the structure? Parking... havent even thought about parking in that area. Sooo many questions, so few clues lol. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on May 30, 2008, 09:09:23 am quote: One of the outfielders looks into the sun no matter what. At the current Drillers ballpark, the right fielder looks into the sun. The key is to not have the batter looking into the sun. Whether the ball park faces northeast (current Drillers Stadium), southeast (Rangers, Reds, etc) or due east (Yankee Stadium) the requirement is that it have an easterly orientation, not westerly. stymied is exaggerating slightly about one thing -- foul balls will not land on KOTV's roof. Unless foul balls start traveling further than home runs. [:P] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: bacjz00 on May 30, 2008, 09:59:07 am I'm starting get the feeling that this park will still be on an "island" even as it sits in downtown. Can someone clue me in here on where this actually is?? God help us if someone tries to build a parking lot around this thing or doesn't put it somewhere within 1 block of some entertainment, shopping or eating.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 30, 2008, 10:09:19 am There will be food nearby.. I bet they even have a shrine to people like Joe Dimaggio, Yogi Berra, and Mike Piazza.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dbacks fan on May 30, 2008, 10:21:50 am I'm gonna call BS until I see it due the lack of available large enough property in that area. You need a superblock for a stadium
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have to agree. I did some measuring with Google Earth of the existing stadium and got a perimeter of about 2300 feet. The foot print of a good size stadium is probably, and I'm guessing at this moment, 36,000 square feet, or to close to 3/4 of an acre. The perimeter around Chase Field here in Phoenix is roughly 3100 feet. As for TFD Station 1, I don't think it would go away, it may, and I mean "may" be relocated but there will always be a station in that area of downtown. The station off of the BA and Denver is not enough to cover it's own area and the majority of downtown. JMO the area between 3rd and 6th and the IDL and say Elgin or Frankfort is to me ideal. JMO. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You have to agree? He is talking about it being in the brady district and you're agreeing by talking about the east end. I was agreeing with you sgrizzle. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 30, 2008, 10:59:05 am oh, I wouldn't agree with me. I'm an idiot.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: pfox on May 30, 2008, 11:10:09 am quote: Too easy. This stadium would be a nice place for OSU to play a few games each year. Driller Park in Greenwood! I am thinking that Greenwood=Wrigleyville in this scenario.... We could sit on top of those buildings, have a cold beer, watch some ball...sounds pretty freakin' nice to me. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: chlfan on May 30, 2008, 11:52:33 am Someone post an aerial of this location with an outline of where they think the park is... please !!
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 30, 2008, 12:10:23 pm quote: Here it is, but I had to pixelate it to avoid giving away any secrets: (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2150/2537024760_59a9a0a466_o.jpg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on May 30, 2008, 12:18:50 pm (http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2008/bigmapdrillers.jpg)
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2008/east_end_map.jpg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: bacjz00 on May 30, 2008, 12:24:59 pm Uh...I thought this thing was no longer a candidate for the East End. Isn't the area being talked about further north???
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dbacks fan on May 30, 2008, 12:25:51 pm quote: Thanks, that is what I pictured, and it's close to freeway access. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 30, 2008, 12:32:55 pm That is the several month old version. Stadiums can be kinda like Gypsy's and wander around.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: chlfan on May 30, 2008, 12:37:24 pm quote: HA!! That's funny... but, not funny. Sorry if I wasn't clearer but I was asking for the speculated area in the Brady District to be more clearly defined, that's all. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dbacks fan on May 30, 2008, 12:38:14 pm quote: The AZ Cardinals know that all too well. U of P Stadium (Cardinals Stadium to me)was at one time being considered in six or seven different locations. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: OSU on May 30, 2008, 01:13:10 pm quote: so is the gypsy's part a nice little clue that it will be near that coffee house? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on May 30, 2008, 01:25:14 pm That would put the new stadium near Spaghetti Warehouse.
Are we talking baseballs or meatballs? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Gaspar on May 30, 2008, 02:29:48 pm So, any non-pixelated news?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dbacks fan on May 30, 2008, 03:38:24 pm In the first one the red line show the ball park, although I included PSO, and the black line is the old Bill White Chevy that they could build a parking structure on. The other two are open areas around OSU.
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p309/kallsop2/Ballpark2.jpg (http://"http://") http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p309/kallsop2/Ballpark3.jpg (http://"http://") http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p309/kallsop2/ballpark4.jpg (http://"http://") Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 30, 2008, 04:17:12 pm I can't say. Some Gypsy named Cameron threatened to sick his friends from Detroit on me and drag me to some Italian Warehouse and beat me with switches made from green wood.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: MichaelBates on May 30, 2008, 04:37:18 pm quote: Driller Stadium -- just the grandstand and the field, not the surrounding concession areas and offices -- fits in a 500' x 500' square. You could fit such a footprint in the vacant land northeast of Archer and Elgin, west of the buildings on Greenwood. Putting it closer to Cincinnati, across the street from the new KOTV studios, would require closing streets (bad) and demolishing buildings (bad) including Gypsy. It would also impinge on the land set aside for the Race Riot Memorial (Detroit to Elgin, just south of I-244) (also bad). Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Townsend on May 30, 2008, 04:42:02 pm quote: So you're saying he's "juuuuuuuust a bit outside". say it out loud...it's funnier. I hope the "they" realize those things are bad. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 30, 2008, 04:55:21 pm Based on all the vague descriptions and hints. I'm betting we're looking at this:
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3131/2536729745_7be4bdb64f_o.jpg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dbacks fan on May 30, 2008, 04:58:45 pm quote: One word................... Parking Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 30, 2008, 05:00:11 pm quote: Yeah, Tulsa has a hard time turning grassy fields and empty buildings into surface lots.. this site only has two occupied buildings within a block. I don't know. I haven't seen the designs. I just photoshopped Crowley's sketch onto the nearest open land to KOTV and leaving the greenwood area open. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on May 30, 2008, 05:05:32 pm quote: Yeah, abound. I think any location in that area is just a bad, bad location, because they would all require the closing of streets, or like MB points out, the demolition of existing, reusable buildings (not the warehouses), etc. I'm still placing my bets on the East End. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dbacks fan on May 30, 2008, 05:08:27 pm [/quote] Yeah, Tulsa has a hard time turning grassy fields and empty buildings into surface lots.. this site only has two occupied buildings within a block. [/quote] At least they are not Art Deco buldings like alot of the ones Tulsa lost in the 70's. They should build a parking structure with retail on the grond floor. Also it's not bad for freeway access, there are several quick routes to the freeways that, with planning traffic control with TPD on game nights, would help the flow of fans out of the parking structure easily. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 30, 2008, 05:08:40 pm If it was closer to greenwood you could put a huge parking lot where I drew the stadium and not demolish/block anything major.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on May 30, 2008, 05:15:43 pm quote: Looks like there is some parking within several blocks. That area beside the highway, if its flat enough, could be great for parking as well. Parking along that highway would be a good use for that land and it could be used at other times and for other things in the area. You would probably need a shuttle bus for some parking garages, but you also WANT to have people walking a few blocks. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dbacks fan on May 30, 2008, 05:22:03 pm Just out of curiosity, can some one tell me what the average attendance has been for the Drillers?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on May 30, 2008, 07:56:37 pm Last year the attendance was 296,017. That was down 35,000 from the year before. In fifteen years, they have only been below 300,000 twice.
There are around 70 games a year (not counting rainouts and playoffs). Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dbacks fan on May 30, 2008, 08:35:20 pm quote: Thanks RM. The reason I ask is that from the original article from the World at the begining of this thread was that they wanted a stadium that seats 6,000 with a grass area in the outfield for picnics and such, plus another 4,000 in luxury suites for Big 12 tournies and the bedlam series between OU and OSU. Going by an average of 300,000 per season for 70 games that makes for an average per game of about 4900 in attendance. JMO they should make the seating for 8000 plus the outfield or down the lines grass area and 2000 for luxury suites, and I think that may be an over estimate for luxury suites. The other thing that I think that they should and probably are looking at is other events that they can lease the facility for. That is why I think that the east end is the better location for the facility because it places it close to the Blue Dome District, has alot of parking opportunities and good freeway access, but with proper traffic control from TPD they can change traffic to suit the size of the crowd. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheTed on May 30, 2008, 09:58:20 pm quote: That'd be a pretty ugly entrance. Right next to the freeway. The entrance should be larger and have some type of gathering area. That problem would be solved if we put the entrance in a nontraditional location like somewhere down the right field line or beyond the right field wall. Indianapolis has its main entrance in center field. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: bacjz00 on May 30, 2008, 10:35:04 pm The Blue Dome is the closest thing we have to a REAL entertainment district in downtown...to me the Brady and Greenwood areas just haven't attracted the people spending money like Blue Dome has. We need to tie this stadium in with Blue Dome IMO.
It just seems like in all of this downtown revitalization talk, we're making it as hard on ourselves as possible by separating ALL of the major projects and attractions downtown as far apart as possible instead focusing all of our attention in one area. What is this strategy all about??? It's hard to really transform the image of our DT when you're not throwing all of your weight in one area, but instead just sprinkling stuff around 100 sqaure blocks. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: JoeMommaBlake on May 30, 2008, 11:19:30 pm How about where the permit office is now. Big parking lot right across the street. There's no need for the permit building after it moves, and the Blue Dome fun is right next door. Also, 244 access is very close, it's close to the trolley stop and if rail really happens, a rail stop can basically drop you off at the ballpark.
This theory, which is my only offering to this speculation, is perhaps still inferior to the 5th streetish "east village" location. I have no facts other than that I've heard it mentioned once a while back as a possibility by a blue dome area business owner who may be in the know. It is fun to speculate, I guess. It's almost as fun as my favorite game of speculation - casting the mythical A-team movie with today's actors. Hannibal - George Clooney or Bruce Willis Mr. T - 50 Cent Murdock - Matt Lillard or Ryan Reynolds Face - Josh Lucas or Owen Wilson It turns out they're actually making the A-team...just looked it up. Bruce Willis, Woody Harrelson, and Ice Cube are rumored. John Singleton (who already ruined Shaft) is on to direct. I like my cast better....and I'm sure I'd be better at directing it than John Singleton. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheTed on May 31, 2008, 01:10:22 am The location in the northeast corner of downtown is definitely inferior to the East Village. It's not walking distance (at least for Tulsans) to much other stuff. Tulsans won't walk from their jobs in the center of downtown. They won't walk from their to McNellie's and the rest of the Blue Dome.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: brunoflipper on May 31, 2008, 07:51:19 am well, it is a done deal.... so just accept it.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on May 31, 2008, 07:54:31 am Yes, an East End location would be ideal. But there must be some reason why they are considering a Brady Arts location.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on May 31, 2008, 09:37:43 am I really just can't make myself like a location that removes 50% of the access to OSU-Tulsa. Don't we all want some kind of growth in (student) housing, funky shops and maybe some restaurants in the area between OSU-Tulsa and Brady/Blue Dome? This ballpark location would sever another way in and out and would only serve to confuse the already confondu drivers? How is there to be a link to the north if we close roads? It's not just a road, either--there is a 6-lane highway that serves as another huge barrier, both physically and psychologically.
The location in the East End would also be located within a superblock, but A) it's one that has been such for decades, B) there is no direct highway underpass connecting to eastern neighborhoods that would (or has been) be severed, C) the existing street pattern would remain the same, D) the existing infrastructure surrounding the area could be re-used (which is what we want, isn't it?) for retail and restaurants instead of being torn down, E) it would put people within stone-throwing distance from the Pearl district and just across the highway from Centennial Park (where people could meet before a game and have a picnic, or go after and take a stroll around the lake) as well as serve as the downtown anchor for a 6th Street Redevelopment Plan, and F) it would create a bookend on the east side of downtown while connecting to East Village and Blue Dome districts, two areas ripe with existing businesses, within walking distance of the East End location. I don't want to see any street closures as part of a ballpark deal. Downtown has too few connections with surrounding neighborhoods as it is; it doesn't need to be cut off even further. There was a rumor pasted a few pages back that said something about KOTV being near home-plate. Well, that would be fine with me, if it's the current location near the East End. The building they're currently in could be razed (it's neither reusable nor desirable) to make way for a hotel or a collection of bars, shops and restaurants. (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2347/2233279560_2a36ab4434_o.jpg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: bacjz00 on May 31, 2008, 10:29:30 am Why must we continue to make such horrible decisinos when it comes to this stuff? Now we're going to have an Arena and a new baseball park that are NEITHER part of an actual development.
Where will we put all of our hotels and restaurants and entertainments spots? By the arena, by the baseball park, in the core business district or by the new museum???? Well how about neither...how about we make downtown as completely disjointed and as spread out as possible to avoid any posssible hope of concentrated energy. I hope to god SOMETHING other than a baseball park is announce for the Brady area that is more than just a damn parking garage. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 31, 2008, 10:34:20 am One benefit I could see is that this location could be done as part of a greenwood development since they were planning a hotel, retail, etc.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on May 31, 2008, 01:24:11 pm Everybody just needs to calm down.
The exact location has not been correctly identified on this thread. The drawing grizz posted is incorrect -- the John Hope Franklin Reconciliation Center is going in that location between Detroit and Elgin, north of Cameron. So everybody is getting all up in arms over misinformation. Take a deep breath. The biggest advantage to the location that seems to be in play is that it would be connected to the Brady District AND the Blue Dome District AND Greenwood. Within 3-4 blocks you could walk to Caz's OR McNellie's OR Lola's OR Arnie's, etc, etc, etc. Not only would it provide superior connections to BOTH major downtown entertainment districts, it would be out of the way on nights when there isn't a game. It wouldn't be in the middle of either district, it would be on the edge of both. Parking would not be a problem. There are hundreds if not thousands of surface and on-street parking spaces within a 3-4 block walk. There would be room to create parking for handicapped patrons, staff, players, media, and VIPs on site. There would also be ample opportunity to create structured parking if that's necessary. It would also have the advantage of being directly served by light rail (within one block) if and when that comes to fruition. The same stop could serve the ballpark and the Blue Dome District. It would have a cozy, urban feel right out of the gate. Any associated developments would only add to the already existing urban feel, not create that feeling from scratch. There would be specific quirks and possible amenities that would make this project unique among minor league ballparks. Most of those are tied directly to the site. There's another major advantage to this site relating to acquisition costs. That's all I'll say about that. So everybody -- relax. Put a smile on your face. This will be a good thing. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 31, 2008, 03:35:02 pm quote: I said earlier in the thread I was an idiot and not to agree with me.. It sounds to me like you're talking about putting it in place of the building with the one stop permit center. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on May 31, 2008, 05:07:53 pm quote: You're the furthest thing from an idiot and it's not going on the site of the permit center. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on May 31, 2008, 05:26:37 pm quote: Y'all are lowering my IQ with all of your "hints," very few of which agree with each other. I'm about to have an aneurysm just trying to decode it all. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on May 31, 2008, 06:28:39 pm I know... they are building it up over the railroad tracks. [:D]
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on May 31, 2008, 08:20:35 pm Yeah, I gave up with the decoding already.
It's a good thing that it's going to be in the IDL. Until I know what a Brady site will look like, I just can't say whether I think it's ideal. I can tell you this--I'm with the majority of posters as being skeptical of that location until I see more. The East End site made a lot of sense. We'll see whether the Brady location does as well. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: MichaelBates on May 31, 2008, 08:53:43 pm quote: All that points to the site northeast of Archer and Elgin, which TDA already owns (no acquisition cost) and which would be within easy reach of Greenwood (and OSU-Tulsa's big parking lots), Blue Dome, and Brady. It should also mean no demolition -- except for that forlorn, single-story, windowless building in the middle -- and no street closing. If that's the pick, that's great. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on May 31, 2008, 09:28:12 pm quote: I don't think TDA still owns that site... Was it not sold to the Greenwood Association? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Kenosha on June 01, 2008, 05:37:29 am quote: BINGO. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on June 01, 2008, 08:05:40 am Now thaaat area I like. There are a lot of neat old buildings around that could be turned into something, like around the Spaghetti Warehouse. Some vacant property for new stuff. Not IN the Brady Arts District, but close enough for foot traffic and other synergies. Still close enough to the Blue Dome as well. It would actually help further concentrate things and spur development in one corner of the inner dispersal loop. Is close to rail, other parking and OSU Parking.
Definitely a change for Greenwoods plans though. I could see them as having been either, very against it, or gung ho about the possibility. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: brunoflipper on June 01, 2008, 08:19:11 am that is the spot and it is great...
the hotels and retail/residential development that will come along with it will help to bring greenwood back... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Rico on June 01, 2008, 08:32:43 am [;)] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on June 01, 2008, 09:35:33 am Unless something has happened that you know and I don't, the Greenwood Chamber of Commerce purchased the land and had plans for a $30 million development at the corner of Archer & Elgin.
From another topic, quote: http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080122_1_A1_hAGre24513 quote: I seriously doubt the ballpark even has the chance of being located there. Unless, of course, TDA found a new way to screw over our Greenwood residents. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on June 01, 2008, 12:17:04 pm The Greenwood Chamber has a contract but not necessarily the funding. I would think if they were using that land it would be a mutually beneficial deal or as part of a greenwood development. Think "Franklin Park"
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on June 01, 2008, 12:45:40 pm Think all of that stuff they were originally wanting to develop in Greenwood as part of the ballpark or nearby. They can still get all the development they want, just perhaps not in the same spot. And have a baseball stadium to boot.
If the Greenwood people didnt want this, and it was somehow being "forced" on them... I guarantee you we would have heard it. The city and all the rest, cant make these plans without Greenwood on board and they certainly cant keep it a secret like they have without them at least being interested in negotiations and whats going on. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: brunoflipper on June 01, 2008, 01:00:05 pm quote: correct... they had a contract but no money... my understanding is that when he had no funding, rueben wanted TDA to GIVE greenwood chanmber the land... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on June 01, 2008, 05:11:36 pm Here's what greenwood would look like if it was on archer (it could also scoot north about half a block conceivably)
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2401/2542458899_5c18a8929e_o.jpg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: bacjz00 on June 01, 2008, 06:42:32 pm quote: I'm sure most are tired of hearing me gripe, so if you're not interested in negative opinions on this deal it's okay to skip this post ;) If this indeed is the area, I'm still quite disappointed. The massive Railroad right-of-way and high arching bridges which cross over the railways create a very distinct barrier between this ballpark location and the core of downtown and also the Blue Dome district. I'm very much against this. I'm not saying that develompent can't sprout up around the ballpark, but it certainly can't "spill" over into the Blue Dome to further invigorate that development with the train tracks separating them. I would like to see the Blue Dome get more preferrential treatment in this whole thing considering the amount of investment that Tulsa business owners continue to make in that area. I just honestly don't see much of a Blue Dome tie-in here with the alleged location. I can't see hordes of fans making the 2-3 block walk up and over deserted railroad tracks to enjoy live music and a beer after the game. More later probably...just trying to be objective, so I apologize if I'm coming across TOO negative. I have a heart for the Blue Dome in case you can't tell :) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: stymied on June 01, 2008, 06:49:05 pm quote: This is looking pretty close to the site drawings I saw. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: joiei on June 01, 2008, 07:07:19 pm Where is KOTV going in? I thought it was that location. I guess I could drive over and look it over for myself, doh. So I KOTV going on that vacant lot between Detroit and Elgin next to the freeway?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: stymied on June 01, 2008, 07:15:30 pm quote: No, they are between Cincinnati and Boston and North of Cameron to 244. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: godboko71 on June 01, 2008, 07:15:34 pm (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3146/2414503453_6c6d5b4c71.jpg?v=0)
That is KOTV's new lot, right across form Gypsy Coffee House & Cyber Cafe 303 North Cincinnati Avenue (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2046/2415326486_5443e83fea.jpg?v=0) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on June 01, 2008, 07:19:54 pm quote: I'm right there with you, bac. The bridge does serve as a huge barrier between this part of downtown and Blue Dome, East End... I'm not sure it would completely keep people from making the walk, though. I'm against this because of the proposed development at this site which would then be taken completely off the table if it were to proceed. People had a proposal for the use of this site, a proposal that includes brownstones, shops, restaurants, and a hotel; a proposal that would've started rebuilding some sense of urban fabric in the area, created a three-dimensional, living neighborhood, that would expand on the few existing buildings LEFT in the area. Sure, you might argue that if they really want all those things then they can push their development south instead, but why should we stop a positive neighborhood development from happening when there is a perfectly fine location for a baseball stadium in the East End? Who are we to say, "No, you'll have to put your development that will create homes, retail and lodging somewhere else because I want to build a baseball stadium here, and I think it's a better idea than yours"?. Are we going to continue to stymie efforts to revitalize the area? Don't try to tell me that the building of the stadium will only spur interest in the Greenwood neighborhood--it's taking a huge chunk of land that they wanted to develop and telling them to go elsewhere. "Imagine this with the Greenwood development", artist? If this happens where that image indicates, there IS no Greenwood development. I really don't understand why one would try to remove potential positive development. If Greenwood could find another place, so can the Ballparkers. The East End location wouldn't preclude any kind of planned development WHATSOEVER. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: chlfan on June 01, 2008, 07:36:02 pm Maybe this is why they wanted to take another 45 days, to make sure they take a look at all the possibilities. Having drawings made doesn't necessarily equate to a done deal does it? I think it's a good thing to have options so hopefully the powers-that-be are taking a long look at ALL of the pros and cons that each presents.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: brunoflipper on June 01, 2008, 07:52:41 pm quote:it is not replacing the grenwood plan... the greenwood plan was unfunded, pie-in-the-sky... that is why rueben wanted tda to give them that parcel for free... greenwood chamber does not have the money to acquire even the land, let alone build the development... it was all talk... there is no greenwood development... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on June 01, 2008, 08:35:39 pm quote: The crossing into blue dome (down elgin) is at-grade. Next argument. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on June 01, 2008, 08:39:07 pm The Greenwood crossing is at street grade as well. I agree with bruno...this doesn't replace an actual development, just a dream with no funding.
I like the location. It is so close to OSU-Tulsa that their parking lots could be used. I still want to have them start their own baseball team. I wonder what the Athletic Director's job at OSU-Tulsa would pay? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on June 01, 2008, 11:16:46 pm I can understand wanting the Greenwood "plan", but it was just a hoped for, wish list, nothing that anyone had any money for. Plus there is still property just to the south on Greenwood itself where the same things could go, buildings that can be rehabbed into things, a hotel is supposedly part of the Ballpark, there is property just to the north of where the ballpark may go, etc. I still think you can end up with the same amount and variety of things in the Greenwood district, on Greenwood even, that their idea had,,, just not in the exact same spot.
And yes, there is no bridge there. Also the ballpark would be a block closer to Mc Nellies and the Continental in the Blue Dome, than to Lolas and Caz's in the Brady Arts. Sounds like someone is going into negative reaction mode without taking a breath and getting an accurate idea of what the situation in the area truly is. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: bacjz00 on June 02, 2008, 07:40:03 am quote: Fair enough...so perhaps the crossing is not as high as I imagined. But do you all still not see the RR/ROW as a barrier to expansion into the core of downtown? I'm willing to look at other angles here, I'm not trying to bully anyone from up here on my pulpit, lol. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on June 02, 2008, 07:45:38 am quote: I (tentatively) agree with bacjz00. I'll hold any real criticism until I see plans or renderings. As happy as I am that there will be downtown baseball in Tulsa, I have this sinking feeling that the city will end up having traded the best option for the cheapest. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on June 02, 2008, 08:09:19 am 1. I hope the layout has an aesthetic appeal. An entrance that is both inviting AND directs traffic flow from the park to entertainment and other places to spend money (BrickTown ballpark did this well).
1.5 Along those same lines, place it within *very* easy access of places for people to spend money. Some things are likely to pop up, but the entertainment centers of the Blue Dome and Brady are unlikely to shift TO this ball park. So build it nearby. I imagine a sports bar, restaurant, or even a hotel could pop up near it to fill in some space - but for gods sake place it where people can spend money. 2. I hope they orientate the park so the outfield view is attractive. We have a great skyline, beautiful hills and terrain, and some ugly warehouses and freeways. Please don't showcase the latter. 3. Place the park somewhere that visitors and passersby SEE it. From the freeway, from their hotels, from the entertainment districts... such that even if they are NOT going to a game they can see our fabulous new venue and say "hey, I'll have to catch a game there sometime." Or at least see that Tulsa has things to offer. 4. Don't surround it with a sea of asphalt. It looks horrible, discourages density, is underused, and goes a long way of ruining the "park" feel of a ball park. If you build it, they will find somewhere to park. 10,000 people or 5,000 cars is not that many parking spaces for any place down town to absorb within a reasonable walking distance. Provide a drop off zone and close parking for people who need it - but the rest of us lazy bastards can figure it out. 5. Go all out or don't go at all. It doesn't need to be massive. It doesn't need to be marbled or gilded. But add a few features (fountain, kid park, grass areas for blankets, allow picnics) and design it to be interesting. Why replace an existing functional structure with another bland product? /my buck-0-five Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: bacjz00 on June 02, 2008, 10:30:33 am quote: I couldn't POSSIBLY agree with you more on all points. #4 and #5 are no small matters. Tulsa should try to hit a "home run" (sorry)architecturally with this ballpark and create something that is once again iconic. Something that borderlines on a destination even while baseball isn't being played. And having an area at the ballpark that is family friendly is very important. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on June 02, 2008, 10:53:07 am I am not expecting iconic with this. Its likely to be a small stadium and also, since its not tax funded but funded through donors and business interests, they will probably make sure its practical and "handsome" but not have a lot of extra expense to make it fancy.
If I were to paint a best case scenario, I would hope that it be brick, not old timey brick like "Bricktown" but contemporary with perhaps a nod to some art-deco elements. It would be nice if at least one side, on one street, have street level retail. It would would be nice if the south side of the stadium had retail so that it would tie into the little strip on Greenwood Ave, the north side have the hotel and the west side have a nice sidewalk with trees and lighting. The South West corner would have a fun, welcoming entrance with an open courtyard space in front. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: bacjz00 on June 02, 2008, 11:42:44 am quote: Perhaps "iconic" was the wrong choice of words. I suppose I wouldn't intend for this ballpark to be studied by future generations of architecture students. However, I think it's important that it have a grand entrance or something that has a certain wow factor. It would be nice to see people lured to it by its design and not see it just get bypassed on days when there are no games. Making it a part of a bigger development of course would encourage that further. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on June 02, 2008, 12:48:36 pm I think with the BOK Center they overlooked on opportunity and hopefully they won't overlook it here. Sports Bar & Grill overlooking the event. People would eat there on a weekday just to sit at a table overlooking an empty field for the ambiance.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: PonderInc on June 02, 2008, 01:30:08 pm The RR crossings are currently at street level. This is only a problem when trains are actually going by (which they do quite frequently each day). You'd have to wait for the train to pass before you walked across. (Cars and some pedestrians will go the extra block and cross over on Detroit.)
Now, imagine if we had commuter rail in Tulsa. This would be the "Ballpark Stop" with a platform and pedestrian access from both the north and the south. Train passengers could hop off for either the ballpark or the Blue Dome district...and pedestrians could safely cross over the rails. That would be ideal. Are we far-sighted enough to make it happen? Time will tell. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheTed on June 02, 2008, 01:33:30 pm quote: That would be awesome. I love eating at the bar and grill in Toledo that overlooks the field. It's in one of those buildings in right field. (http://www.ci.toledo.oh.us/Portals/0/Gallery/Album/4/Photo%20%20531.JPG) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Gaspar on June 03, 2008, 06:37:37 am quote: Could put the permit center in the stadium! I'd like to go get my permits in a baseball stadium! [:D] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: pfox on June 03, 2008, 02:03:09 pm quote: Yep. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: pfox on June 03, 2008, 02:06:15 pm quote: Large parking lots already exist within walking distance of the stadium at OSU Tulsa and in the blue dome.... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: T-TownMike on June 03, 2008, 04:27:35 pm I have to say I think it is a wonderful location for many reasons. Like was mentioned by some, this location INCLUDES the Blue Dome District, especially if Tulsa really brings light rail to the equation. The drop off point would be right in the middle of the two areas, which should help spur big time growth.
Another reason I like the location is because it helps revitalize another district in downtown, which is still close to the other areas that are primed for growth. Greenwood itself is a historic district and to bring the masses to a place with historical value could really help elevate musuems, restaurants, hotels, etc...It's also the gateway to the North and should be considered a Tulsa Gem. The location ties in the other areas helping spur growth for all districts, IMO. I believe the location could allow OSU to play some games there and help bring in additional revenue to the area. I also think the view could be stellar-access seems good, especially if light rail takes place. I can't wait to see the plans on this. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: joiei on June 03, 2008, 05:39:07 pm Something that no one has mentioned yet, the Mathews building, which will be a Museum when that project is finished will also be in walking distance.
As for the tracks, personally, I think people are making too big of a deal over it. There is a bridge a block away if you are in such dire need of alcohol after a ball game. Between the two likely locations, I prefer the Brady district one. And for the style of architecture, Tulsa has such a wealth of Art Deco to draw from to make this park stand out in the crowd of ballparks. Pay homeage to what we already have. I am sure there are plenty of local architects who would be able to understand and work with this idea of design for the park. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: bacjz00 on June 04, 2008, 03:55:42 pm Went to McNellie's last night...
It's just a hop and a skip over to this proposed site...I'm willing to admit that I probably made too big of a deal about the railroad tracks. If we could incorporate a light rail-stop at Elgin, folks would be getting dropped right into the middle of the Ballpark area and QUITE close to Blue Dome. Now, I'll also go on record as saying that light-rail isn't coming to Tulsa anytime in the next 10 years. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on June 07, 2008, 01:07:04 am quote: Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on June 09, 2008, 07:22:01 am What is the "this is it really really" revised plan date?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on June 09, 2008, 07:36:43 am By July 15th.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on June 09, 2008, 08:14:10 pm quote:There will be a really really important announcement every 60 - 90 days until KT wins re-election. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TURobY on June 10, 2008, 06:54:02 am quote: Well, she's got my vote. [:D] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: stymied on June 13, 2008, 10:04:03 pm East Brady/Greenwood site done deal as of this evening. Too many people trying to get rich on the other site. Too bad for them. Good for Tulsa. Onward and upward from here. Anyone else see the renderings?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on June 14, 2008, 06:32:54 am Yes.
I like them. Play ball. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TURobY on June 14, 2008, 06:56:27 am So, will we have a view of downtown, or the highway?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on June 14, 2008, 09:06:40 am quote: Thats exactly what I thought. Some greedy old SOB's hangin on to property in that area. Was painting the mural at the Central Center and one day a rather crotchety seeming, older gentleman wandered in talkig to someone. Was talking about some of the different property he owned in the area and I heard him say something to the effect.... They think its too much but they WILL pay what I want for it sooner or later... then he laughs. I dont know exactly what property over there he was talking about, but I didnt get a good vibe from the guy regardless. This new location is a better location anyway. [8D] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TulsaSooner on June 14, 2008, 10:49:24 am quote: I'd like to know too. I'm sure it has been covered ad nauseum in these 17 pages but where again is the location going to be, specifically? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: stymied on June 14, 2008, 11:28:34 am quote: both! [:D] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TulsaSooner on June 14, 2008, 11:37:51 am I'm still not familiar with the site but I'm thinking it's viewable to the east from One Technology. I toured it a while back and the view from the top floor executive conference room was to the east and it was not very attractive. I nice, new ballpark out that way would be a huge improvement over the vacant buildings and empty lots.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on June 14, 2008, 02:59:17 pm quote: See top of page 16. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TURobY on June 14, 2008, 05:08:01 pm quote: Is that the orientation? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Markk on June 14, 2008, 05:11:57 pm quote: I'm guessing it is. The unfortunate part of building to the east or northeast of downtown is that you lose any chance of a view of downtown from the stands; otherwise, the afternoon/evening sun beats down on everyone. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on June 14, 2008, 06:02:04 pm quote: Any discussion of a Mickey Mantle museum or anything like it? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on June 14, 2008, 07:11:40 pm From the north side grandstands, you should be able to see downtown pretty well. The only way to get a better view would be the west bank of the arkansas.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: stymied on June 14, 2008, 10:12:52 pm quote: This has been discussed, yes. sgrizzle's photoshop version is pretty close. There will be no additional parking less a few hundred for players & VIP. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TulsaSooner on June 15, 2008, 09:44:44 am So when will it be announced?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on June 15, 2008, 12:20:34 pm quote: Good, as long as it's on the agenda. Thanks for the inside info. I'm still waiting on plans/renderings before I make a judgement. I thought the East End was perfect, but I imagine the Brady site will work quite well too (I guess they can still build the Wal-Mart over there). Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: joiei on June 15, 2008, 01:56:47 pm I still hope that whatever architect gets the job keeps in mind the historical and artistic connection to Tulsa and Art Deco and does not design a ballpark that could be built just any old place.
I forgot, and PLEASE, no Tuscan palace, that belongs out in south Tulsa. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on June 15, 2008, 04:40:07 pm These guys...
http://www.hok.com/cfm/ProjectArchive.cfm?Tag=Sport%20Venue%20Event Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: chlfan on June 15, 2008, 05:44:02 pm quote: Same guys who did One Technology Center (the new City Hall) huh? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on June 15, 2008, 06:43:35 pm They have done buildings and sports stadiums all over the world.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: USRufnex on June 15, 2008, 08:46:58 pm HOK's Minor League Ballparks:
http://www.hoksport.com/projects/portfolio_milb_all.html Selected projects: http://www.hoksport.com/projects/index.html ***if memory serves, this site in the Brady District is really close to the original location (same spot?) discussed/rumored for the Vision2025 Major League Soccer stadium that didn't make the list of projects back in June 2003... It's reasonable to think it could connect Blue Dome and Brady... and may actually connect to within a block or two? of Gypsie coffeehouse... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on June 15, 2008, 08:57:22 pm Interesting.
I really dont care what style it is, just as long as it has some style. Something artistic and not boring. Art-Deco or completely modern, or heck both. I really like these designs that they have done. http://www.hok.com/cfm/ProjectDetailArchive.cfm?Tag=Sport%20Venue%20Event&projectID=43&TagList=Architecture%5ESport%20Venue%20Event%5EAmericas http://www.hok.com/cfm/ProjectDetailArchive.cfm?Tag=Sport%20Venue%20Event&projectID=49&TagList=Sport%20Venue%20Event%5EAmericas Their Busch Stadium isnt bad, but it really just looks like any other brick baseball stadium. I can imagine that they go with brick with this new stadium, but you can do some really neat stuff with brickwork to give a unique deco look. Whats frustrating when you ask architects to do something with a deco twist though is that they say something to the effect,,, oh we dont want to do something in an old style, thats been done before, you want to do something fresh. But then they turn right around and do something in brick and put hints of older, classic, styles in it (Busch Stadium). Why art-deco cant be considered in the same way, I dont know. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: dsjeffries on June 16, 2008, 02:15:45 am They only did the lighting and streetscaping for Busch Stadium, not the stadium itself... so don't blame them for the nostalgic, All-American, cookie-cutter stadium design.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Oil Capital on June 16, 2008, 07:07:17 am HOK designed Busch Stadium as well as the lighting and streetscaping.
quote: Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Hoss on June 16, 2008, 07:17:45 am quote: I've seen Busch Stadium up close, and that is a beautiful ballpark. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on June 16, 2008, 07:40:24 am quote: Funny... when all the concrete donut multi-purpose stadiums were being replaced by these new retro-styled ballparks, the prevailing thought was good riddance to the soulless cookie-cutter stadiums from the 1960s. Now the new parks are being called "cookie cutter". Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on June 16, 2008, 08:13:03 am quote: Yeah, I would disagree with that characterization to the extent that it negative. When it comes to baseball, "nostalgic" and "all-American" tend to be good things. Certainly it's "fan pleasing." Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on June 16, 2008, 08:48:03 am What I meant to get at was that we could have a nostalgic design thats not cookie cutter. An art-deco twist to the brickwork would help make our stadium stand out and say "Tulsa". If your going to use brickwork and have classic elements anyway, might as well play up that Tulsa character. It wouldnt take any real extra effort or money to do it that way and the people of Tulsa would reeeeeally appreciate it.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on June 16, 2008, 08:54:24 am quote: +1 Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: PonderInc on June 16, 2008, 09:28:02 am I agree. When I think of Tulsa, I think of all our amazing downtown architecture (at least what remains of our amazing downtown architecture...). A stadium that pays tribute to our deco heritage would be fantastic!
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: chlfan on June 16, 2008, 09:53:44 am How about moving the Golden Driller down to the new ballpark and replacing it with a supersized QT mug at Expo Square?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: mrB on June 18, 2008, 01:58:24 am (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3112/2589790404_bef880ef17.jpg) He doesn't need to move, just needs his new shirt from the new boss! Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: waterboy on June 18, 2008, 07:00:42 am quote: Didn't we draw inspiration for the Arena from the QT coffee cup lid? The Driller with his new shirt would certainly complement that iconic status. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: PonderInc on June 18, 2008, 11:07:13 am Latest from the Tulsa World on the stadium:
"The creation of a Tulsa Stadium Improvement District, the first step toward securing funding for a downtown ballpark, is being considered, Mayor Kathy Taylor said Tuesday. "The district would allow for a 6 1/2 -cent assessment per square foot to be collected annually on commercial real estate within the Inner Dispersal Loop. "The district would replace the city's current Downtown Tulsa Improvement District, which was adopted nearly 30 years ago and is set to expire June 30, 2009." Isn't the "Downtown Improvement District" the thing that funds DTU? Would this change put the money in the control of some other, more appropriate, entity? Public hearning July 10 at the City Council meeting. Here's the TW article (http://"http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080618_11_A1_hAshar941339"). Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Wrinkle on June 19, 2008, 11:54:48 am Since DT is suffering from near 30% vacancy rates, if economics are set based upon that, then when that situation improves, the City makes a lot more money. Where would that money go? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on June 19, 2008, 12:41:14 pm quote: The article states: quote: Sounds to me like like Downtown Tulsa Unlimited is getting replaced with a trust, which would have a fiduciary duty to handle the same duties as DTU currently does as well pay off the stadium debt as expeditiously as possible. So it's really a TIF on all of downtown--whatever increase occurs in revenue with the IDL will be used to service stadium debt and provide downtown services such as street beautification, promotions, etc. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Wrinkle on June 19, 2008, 04:07:34 pm quote: Off the cuff, if my 30% vacancy is about right, the current rate would raise about $2 million/year, but with 100% occupancy would increase by 50% to around $3 million/year. If the approx $1 million per year in extra funds would pay off $30 million in 30 years, then another $1 million per year could double that amount, all while still putting $1 million per year into former DTU responsibilities. Won't happen overnight, of course. But, large amounts of funds should be addressed. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on June 20, 2008, 05:38:20 pm quote: Somebody pinch me. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on June 20, 2008, 07:06:56 pm quote: Yeah, I think everyone's just kind of watching, jaws slightly dropped, happily stunned. For the longest time I was completely unimpressed, but "Da Mare" keeps impressing me. I think she's learning on the job. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on June 20, 2008, 09:15:44 pm Well everyone knows I have been a fan and have had high hopes. Not everything has gone well for what she, or I, have wanted "RIVER cough", but she just keeps on trucking and coming up with creative, out of the box, ideas that suprise even me.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: swake on June 23, 2008, 11:16:23 am So, here is a photo of the mockup of the new baseball stadium downtown.
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2008/Thumbs/20080623_park23_article.jpg) http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/article.aspx?articleID=20080623_61_A11_hEDITO230061 This seems to place the stadium at 1st and Lansing, but with the stands pointed away from downtown. Great location, bad orientation. What do you think? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on June 23, 2008, 11:25:37 am a) Anyone on the berm seating will have views of downtown.
b) The view of the stands with the buildings rising behind them will be that much more picturesque--a batter in the box, stands full, pitcher winding up, and the skyline in the backgound. c) If I'm recalling what Lamson wanted, it included a broad concourse surrounding the stadium for family events, etc. The views from this concourse will naturally include the skyline. That's my quick, glass half full take. EDIT: Sorry, should have caught this before--that photograph is old. The rendering the mayor is pointing to is of the East End location. It doesn't represent the current Brady orientation. But my points about ballpark orientation still stand. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: joiei on June 23, 2008, 11:44:30 am After doing some google map comparing, what I see as the street surrounding the proposed ball park are 4th and 6th and Frankfort and Lansing. Isn't that one of the original areas you all talked about.
If you reoriented the park to downtown views it would get all that afternoon sun right into the eyes of the players and the fans. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on June 23, 2008, 12:17:23 pm Yes as stated before, that is a several months old sketch done by Jack Crowley on his kitchen table for IF the stadium went to the East End.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: tillyato on June 23, 2008, 07:46:27 pm This picture is posted on a City of Tulsa website Q&A about the Downtown Ballpark Assessment (http://"http://www.cityoftulsa.org/OurCity/district.asp") in the works:
(http://www.cityoftulsa.org/OurCity/images/TulsaDrillersbradyarts-rfconcourse-small.jpg) Looks like the Greenwood/Brady District location. It also mentions that their will be a Q&A about the assessment district on June 27 at 7:30 a.m., held during breakfast at the Summit Club. Seems like they are getting pretty close to announcing some specifics on the stadium plans! Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on June 23, 2008, 09:20:27 pm Nice find.
I gotta wonder what this means for the renewal of the Brady District TIF. It pretty much failed the first go-round, at least as far as raising cash was concerned. But now with actual business relocations and an impending baseball stadium, it seems like it would be quite successful. But would it be necessary, given that the growth is already happening? Would the growth continue without it? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TulsaSooner on June 24, 2008, 07:29:16 am The Brady Village TIF business owners are expected to ask the Council to extend the TIF 10 years to the 25 year limit allowed by the state. It was discussed in last week's Council meeting in a report on all of the TIF districts. The Councilors seemed agreeable. There was an article about that report in Sunday's paper, I believe.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: SXSW on June 24, 2008, 02:52:43 pm quote: A large well-lit and well-landscaped commuter rail stop at Elgin could effectively bridge the gap between the baseball stadium/Brady and the East End/rest of downtown. That station could be the KEY to doing that successfully. With the way things are setting up, downtown could have three stations: one by the ballpark/East End, one at Union Station which could be re-converted back into a train station for commuter rail/Amtrak, and one by the BOk Center/convention center. Getting people from outlying areas to their jobs and major events would be a breeze. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: DowntownNow on June 25, 2008, 02:24:20 pm I've been a huge fan of downtown development and revitalization but I've been a lil concerned being a business owner in the IDL as to what the Mayor and the 'donors' want. The Tulsa World published their last report a few days ago and after reading the comments, I just thought I would post what I had written and see what everyone thought of it.
Oh and the meeting at 7:30 on the June 27th is the pitch to the IDL owners for the 6.5% assessment from what the letter I received says. FYI Posted from Tulsa World: Play Ball 6/23/08 DowntownNow, (6/25/2008 11:09:34 AM) Perhaps the best questions to ask are the following: 1 - How did a stadium that was projected to cost $30-35 million (this was for the ball park only as defined by Chuck Lamson at the YPros presentation) jump to $60+ Million. What is the rest of the money for and who does it benefit? 2 - Money was already spent on presentation and planning for the east end site between 4th & 6th and yet, that site is apparently out of possibility and they are looking at other sites. Why can't the mayor get the committments she needs in place before hand? 3 - Who are these 'donors' and what do they get out of all of this? Funny how none have been mentioned. 4 - If a ball park (the stadium itself) only costs $30-35 Million (including reasonable cost for the land they need for just the park) and they have that donation committment from the 'donors', what does the Mayor need with the other $25-30 Million? What is it buying and how is it benefitting the city at large? What are the 'donors' really donating if that extra money is needed? 5 - Is the Mayor really promoting the growth of the city at large or the select few that will benefit from the assessment, its monies, a new ball park and whatever else is being being planned for the extra monies that struggling downtown businesses will be forced to contribute? 6 - What benefit do the companies that are located in downtown yet provide services perphaps more nationwide get out of this? They say it will increase business for all in the IDL but it may benefit only those businesses that caer to the needs of the ball park goer...the restaurants, the clubs and the parking lots. It does nothing for the energy companies, the law firms, the architects, the doctors, etc etc that will also be forced to pay. While its not a tax per se, it is a fee that - while it simply continues after the expiration of the original - is a fee Im sure downtown businesses were hoping to be done with and could put into their own growth and expansions that would benefit the city but leaving that growth in their own hands There are many in downtown that want to see it grow and want to see businesses boom...we just need the city to stay out of how and where we choose to spend our money. As soon as you get the city to stop being a hinderance and move towards being a help for small businesses, you might just see that larger committment and growth but without passed on expense to others. DowntownNow, (6/25/2008 11:24:26 AM) Oh yeah...anyone else notice that one of the consulting groups that was helping with this ball park idea still hasnt anted up the report that was promised to help our fair city grow and market itself? Different topic I know but since some dont want to cover the development... Jones Lang LaSalle has had direct conversations and helped with this ball park fiasco. This is a company that by all accounts has failed to make good on the $375,000 contract given them to report to the City (and not just the Mayor and her staff) on what can be done with lots of city properties sitting vacant. These properties that could be used by developers and investors to help transform Tulsa. Sure they have made a lil website, sure they have put out a request for proposals for one of em...but who else thinks its funny that an outside firm, hired at a good rate, has yet to issue and make public the promised report? Who else feels its funny that while we have great professional businesses that do that very sort of thing right in here Tulsa, they were by-passed for an outside firm with no knowlegde of Tulsa? Who also feels slighted by the fact that this Jones Lang LaSalle is also the outfit that has the exclusive right to broker these lands? They get a commission but where and how do the local brokers get to play and who pays them? If you read carefully, you see that any broker other than JLL has to find their own commission in the deals they bring...how arrogant, how misguided and how insulting this is to Tulsans. But this is a Mayor that believes in this city and the contributions of its citizens...just not enough to entrust them or give them a fair shake. I guess in all this the biggest quesiton really is....is Mayor Kathy Taylor the mayor of the City of Tulsa or the Mayor of whoever pays to play and is the next big contributor to her re-election campaign? Ask yourselves Tulsans... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: perspicuity85 on June 25, 2008, 03:00:29 pm quote: Good idea, but I still like my streetcar idea: http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=10368&whichpage=2 Increased public transportation + broader public transportation market + tourist appeal + accessibility between all of Tulsa's entertainment districts = Streetcars! Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on June 26, 2008, 05:33:46 am That faces alot more south than I imagined.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: BierGarten on June 26, 2008, 07:19:00 am One of my more favorite Jack Henderson quotes (from this morning's Tulsa World article):
"This is a homerun for everyone," City Councilor Jack Henderson said about the Greenwood site. “It’s a fit that helps the north community.” Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: FOTD on June 26, 2008, 07:33:01 am Jack's almost correct....IT'S A GRAND SLAM!!!!! Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TulsaPride on June 26, 2008, 07:43:43 am This is wonderful news. Hopefully it becomes a reality. Way to go Tulsa!
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Wrinkle on June 26, 2008, 07:44:35 am Not that it necessarily applies, but seems what's good for the National League might be good for all of baseball.
quote: REF: Ballpark Orientations (http://"http://www.baseball-almanac.com/stadium/ballpark_NSEW_NL.shtml") I would imagine this becomes a larger issue if day games are played, as well as for any other possible uses of the facility during daylight. IAC, this layout has no views of downtown, as was once considered the zoom reason for being in the downtown area. It'd be interesting to know what precipitated the move to the Brady District almost overnight. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on June 26, 2008, 07:45:22 am Not complaining here, just curious... but why did they orientate it that way?
The only thing I can think of is to avoid the evening sun in the batters eyes. Which makes sense. But it loses half the view of downtown. I look forward to seeing the details of the plan hatched out. [edit] The E by NE orientation would have us looking over the I-244 elevated highway as the focal point. I'm not a big fan. Plus, there are many parks that don't follow that orientation. Several will share our orientation including: Cincinnati Milwaukee Pittsburgh Chicago White Sox Detroit and the Rangers So I wouldn't consider that a huge negative. But I saw none orientated to the SW... so probably no hope for a perfect skyline shot. http://www.baseball-almanac.com/stadium/ballpark_NSEW_NL.shtml [/edit] Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on June 26, 2008, 08:02:07 am First of all, the World doesn't have it exactly right. It won't be oriented quite that north-south. Home plate will be in the northwest part of the site.
We've been over this and over this. Earlier in this thread, in fact. Despite anything that MLB suggests, ballparks simply need to face east and not west. You can't have the setting sun in the face of the batter trying to hit a 90mph fastball. Whether home plate is in the southwest (Rockies), northwest (Rangers) or due west (Yankees) part of the site is irrelevant -- major league parks face a number of directions, but all face the east. If the stadium had been oriented with home plate in the southwest corner of the stadium, the entire stands would face away from the skyline. With the proposed orientation, the seats down the third base line face the skyline. btw, that's a nice benefit of a downtown stadium, but not the primary reason for moving the stadium. It's the economic development opportunities. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: FOTD on June 26, 2008, 08:02:48 am It's fan oriented.....visual of skyline for fans.....also, the article in TulsaWhirled makes it clear the stadium will be utilized for other activities.....
Here come the hecklers? Bet they strike out. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on June 26, 2008, 08:03:39 am From the article... sounds like they snagged the Mickey Mantle museum.
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on June 26, 2008, 08:35:31 am quote: That would be good if a real opportunity didn't just fly by us on the way to OKC for once. I am glad Ruben and JAck saw this for the great thing it is. Also for wrinkle, it is far from overnight. That location was posted her on this forum almost a month ago. It has been months since anything official even mentioned the east village end. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: cannon_fodder on June 26, 2008, 08:43:21 am Here is a link to the Street view of the area. The entire East stands would have a good view of downtown. But my thoughts of a perfect downtown simply can't happen given the orientation in either the Brady nor East Village locations.
Which I am perfectly willing to accept. http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=Cameron+St.+%26+Elgin,+Tulsa,+OK&ie=UTF8&ll=36.163847,-95.986626&spn=0.012092,0.018797&z=16&layer=c&cbll=36.160737,-95.987976&panoid=8QzivEfCVGvRJo0W0KW7hQ&cbp=1,160.81122805645316,,0,-4.3972798895017515 BUT... "walking" around the area lets hope that new development takes place. Else we'd have a not-so interesting walk through nothingness to get anywhere. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Conan71 on June 26, 2008, 09:20:48 am quote: Fairly similar to the bonuses for Staubach and Co. if the Borg Cube deal happened. What incentive did that create for objectivity in their "study"? A lot of local talent gets by-passed in favor of national firms who, IMO, don't necessarily do anything different nor bring better ideas to the table than Tulsa natives. It's a certain arrogance and I do think some of our leaders believe the rest of us are a bunch of hayseeds who aren't capable of having a great vision for Tulsa. I don't think it's the Mayor per se, but probably some people she and others in elected and high bureaucrat positions listen to who influence a lot of the out-sourcing. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Renaissance on June 26, 2008, 09:36:00 am I've got extensive thoughts but I'm slammed at work today and will have to relay them later.
This is heady stuff, though--that corner of DT is going to get crowded in a hurry. I think it looks pretty solid. Back with more late tonight. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: chlfan on June 26, 2008, 09:48:27 am Looks to me, from that orientation, that the right field foul pole would be back-dropped by the skyline... ?
Also, they mention the outfield berm seating, is that the little green spec just beyond the left center field wall? If so, pretty small area. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on June 26, 2008, 10:57:27 am quote: Exactly! [:)] All the fans along the third base line will have skyline views. All the fans on the first base line will have Greenwood views. The building with the rotating U-Haul truck on the roof will be beyond the centerfield wall. The warehouse at Brady & Elgin with the "East End Experience" sign will be right across the street from the first base entrance of the stadium. Cool stuff. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: rwarn17588 on June 26, 2008, 11:01:49 am A few observations:
-- Another reason not to face home plate to the west or southwest: If a fastball gets away from a pitcher as a batter looks into the setting sun, somebody's going to get killed. -- Because the prevailing winds come from the south during the summertime, I suspect the stadium's architects will shrink the ballpark's dimensions. Nobody's going to hit a home run with the typical winds if it's 340 feet down the line. -- I think the Mickey Mantle Museum probably will be in the NE part of the state. I've been in contact with the fellow who owns it in Grove before, and he wants it in Tulsa or somewhere on Route 66, maybe Baxter Springs, Kan. OKC isn't on this guy's radar. But Commerce is probably out because Mantle didn't like his hometown much. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: booWorld on June 26, 2008, 12:01:11 pm quote: The Greenwood location and the East End locations have been discussed on this forum for at least 30 months or so. I remember discussing the pros and cons of both locations (among others), the need for the batter to be facing away from the setting sun, etc. I think sportyart began the discussion around September 2005, but I can't find it in the archived topics to confirm. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: PonderInc on June 26, 2008, 12:34:51 pm quote: So if a hitter can peg the rotating truck, will everyone in the stands get a free hot dog? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: chlfan on June 26, 2008, 12:42:53 pm quote: No... but everyone will be required to "move" to another seat. [:)] <sorry> Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: joiei on June 26, 2008, 05:15:23 pm I don't think you all would be happy with anything, from hanging around here for a while, you would complain everything no matter if it made sense or not.
So big deal that there is not a magnificent view of downtown from the cheep seats. And you might have to walk two blocks to get to Arnies for a beer. Bringing baseball downtown to add to the entertainment factor and to give me a reason to find out where to dine downtown after dark, that is a plus in my book. I look at the new stadium as a plus, there is no place even close to the current stadium that is not fast food drive through for after game fun. From the proposed new location I can walk to Caz's for chicken fried steak or Lola's or before the game and go check out the new chocolate guy. And afterwards if it is an early game, catch a show at the Brady, plus plus and still get something for dinner and go for a latte at the Gypsy. That chocolate guy btw is doing some pretty great stuff. I would rate Patrick right up there with Christopher Elbow of Kansas City. For you guys wanting to impress your sweetie, he does a much better job than Russell Stover at Utica Square. His biggest client is the Venetian Casinos in Las Vegas. But when you live as far south as Intellar it is not important. Almost Mounds is much better than anything north of the Creek. After all, they built a new Walmart just for Intellar. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: SXSW on June 27, 2008, 12:39:11 pm Stadium site plan:
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2008/200806_A1_626driller.jpg) Can't wait to see more details about the design and especially the "mixed development" and "proposed hotel" that are slated for the area around it. I like how Elgin and Greenwood become central avenues of activity with this plan. Both will work to better connect OSU-Tulsa with this development and the East End. Also in the TW article they mention the light rail stop at Elgin, which is a positive sign... Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on June 27, 2008, 01:19:20 pm I was expecting something more like this:
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3099/2616703020_8e9810cf1e_o.jpg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: stymied on June 27, 2008, 02:01:37 pm quote: That option is still being discussed and is preferred by many because it is a more preferable orientation for the players and a more efficient use of the smaller site. There are 2 plans being studied right now. Also, FWIW, the proposed hotel on that drawing is not going to happen in that location. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on June 27, 2008, 02:13:21 pm I like the idea of having one side parallel with elgin. You could easily enclose it and put retail/offices under the bleachers. Great place to put a bar and call it 'The Dugout.'
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: SXSW on June 27, 2008, 02:52:56 pm quote: I also prefer the orientation that puts 1st base/right field along Elgin. Not sure what they are thinking design-wise but having a brick concourse right there along Elgin with the field depressed and then two levels of seating, one below street level and another above, would be cool because you could see in from the street. Have the "main" entrance be where Brady Ave. runs into home plate at Elgin, if the stadium were shifted a little to the south so that it was tight (along the sidewalk) with Elgin and Archer. Have another "secondary" entrance at the corner of Elgin and Archer. Eliminate that "mixed development" on the southside of the stadium and allow views into it from the street/sidewalk along Archer which connects Greenwood to the Brady District. Then encourage streetfront retail/lofts (like 120 Brady) to encircle the stadium along Brady, Elgin, Archer, and Frankfort. Parking would be at OSU-Tulsa just to the north or in the East End (lots of parking available) with some smaller lots by the main entrance (north of the stadium) for disabled and box/suite ticket-holders. Move the hotel to a different location nearby, maybe at Elgin & Archer just south of 120 Brady? Anyone know much about the proposed Greenwood Chamber Community Center?? Renderings, site plan, etc.? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: tillyato on June 27, 2008, 03:15:22 pm A new Tulsa World Slideshow (http://"http://www.tulsaworld.com/webextra/content/2008/slideshows/newtulsadrillerstadium/index.aspx") has drawings of the proposed Driller Staduim and surrounding development. Note the proposed light rail connection in the second drawing, and the parking garage to the north.
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2008/200806_ln0627TulsaDrillersbradyaerial.jpg) I couldn't get all of the images to post since they are part of a Adobe Flash slideshow, but it looks promising. It does, however, sort of look like they have yet to finalize plans for most of the mixed use development around the ballpark, and just have filler structures in the drawings. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on June 27, 2008, 03:24:09 pm Beat me to it!!
The advantage to having the stadium running more north/south is that the third base stands point directly at the skyline. Although, there would still be skyline views if the stadium ran parallel to Elgin, just not as dominant. Either way, it works. Great site. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheTed on June 27, 2008, 06:12:35 pm quote: I really hope this park has some unique/cool features. Toledo has knothole where you can peer into the stadium. There's even a sculpture of some kids looking in. They also have a sports bar and grill in right field that butts against the stadium concourse. The windows face into the stadium. (http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/7869/434duj2.jpg) Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: stymied on June 27, 2008, 06:22:18 pm quote: That isn't a parking garage. It is a player parking lot only. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: sgrizzle on June 27, 2008, 07:46:50 pm As for views of downtown, I think the berm seating and 1st base "party deck" will have great views.
Glad to see they went with a sub-grade field. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on June 27, 2008, 08:51:41 pm Less than one quarter mile away will be Caz's Chowhouse, Caz's bar, Lola's, Club Majestic, The SoundPony, Mexicali Border, Spaghetti Warehouse, McNellie's, 1974, El Guapo, The Continental Club, Jordan's Fish Market, Tsunami Sushi, Blue Dome Diner, Dirty's Tavern, Gypsy Coffee House, Arnie's Bar, Blank Slate, Exit something, and some I have missed.
The ballpark is going to anchor a wide variety of places to go before and after games. I am excited. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TURobY on June 27, 2008, 11:17:41 pm quote: Just a correction, but McNellie's is expanding into The Continental's space. The staff and club will re-open, but I don't think they've said where yet. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: joiei on June 28, 2008, 05:33:37 am quote:I didn't realize there would be SUCH variety already in place. I like the idea of a sports pub as part of the new complex. I don't think there is anything like this mix adjacent to the current ballfield. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: MDepr2007 on June 28, 2008, 06:10:49 am I am sure traffic on the highway won't be distracted enough to make it a hazard[;)]
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on June 28, 2008, 10:03:43 am quote: There is NOTHING adjacent to the current ballfield. If you want to cross a major arterial, there's a Taco Cabana nearly half a mile away. You could also walk half a mile up to Tally's. Those are your options within a half mile of the current ballpark and you pass by nothing but chain retailers (Walgreen's, Lowe's, Target) on the way. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: brunoflipper on June 28, 2008, 11:39:25 am quote:umm, HELLLOOOOO! your forgot the ritz cabaret and CAFE Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: booWorld on June 28, 2008, 11:52:01 am Sounds similar to the traditional D.E.A.D. planning approach as described by John Fregonese...
Decide - through analysis and research Educate - the public about the solution Announce - the plan Defend - the plan Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: AVERAGE JOE on June 28, 2008, 02:32:35 pm quote: Has there ever been anything undertaken in this town you actually liked? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: booWorld on June 28, 2008, 02:54:01 pm As you may recall, you and I argued a bit (in 2005, I think) about the merits of this site versus the Nordam site. Do you remember what you wrote to me about the Archer & Elgin site? Do I need to refresh your memory?
Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: booWorld on June 28, 2008, 03:01:53 pm quote: I'm not certain, but I don't think Lola's, The Sound Pony, and Mexicali are less than one quarter mile from the proposed ballpark. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: booWorld on June 28, 2008, 03:33:33 pm quote: I don't go to that part of town much. Does the Ritz still have that gushing water display in full view along Yale Avenue? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: joiei on June 28, 2008, 03:56:28 pm quote:umm, HELLLOOOOO! your forgot the ritz cabaret and CAFE [/quote] I thought the Ritz was just a titty bar, I didn't know they served food. Still wouldn't go there. Can you take the family in for a quick dinner? Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: RecycleMichael on June 28, 2008, 04:32:49 pm quote: I measured the distance from the edge of Mexicali Border building to the edge of the proposed ballpark. It appears to be approximately 1500 feet, Lola's is around 1400 feet and Sound Pony halfway between the two. A quarter mile is only 1320 feet. I stand corrected. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: booWorld on June 28, 2008, 09:21:17 pm quote: Yes, there has been. I think I posted under the user name "booWorld" yesterday or the day before about a bungalow being moved a few blocks rather than being demolished. I like seeing the re-use of old buildings when it's feasible. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: JoeMommaBlake on July 01, 2008, 08:51:14 am I like the idea of not having a restaurant in the ballpark....
Sell all the hotdogs and nachos you want in that thing, but for the love of all things pure, don't put a sports bar in the ballpark....If you do, you might as well also include a giant moving statue of a middle finger on top of the stadium that is at some point during each game aimed at the blue dome and brady districts. Ask the downtown businesses to pay for something with the understanding that it will generate customers and then create a competition for those customers right there in the ballpark...not cool. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Chicken Little on July 01, 2008, 08:55:42 am quote:I'm inferring that you may post under multiple handles. If so, please stop. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Gold on July 01, 2008, 10:47:20 am quote: Doesn't the Bricktown ballpark have a Coach's? Seems like Bricktown has done just fine with it. I'd sure like some sort of bar, in the event my party is in the mood for a bit more serious drinking with our baseball. For example, I went to opening night for the Drillers in '07 and it started snowing and then sleeting. It was like 35 degrees. That was a great night for whiskey with my baseball. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Chicken Little on July 01, 2008, 11:44:33 am quote:Fair enough...you "might be" posting under multiple handles. You also "might be" a creep, but the forum rules are mute on this subject. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Chicken Little on July 01, 2008, 01:15:51 pm quote: When you use multiple handles, you cheat us all...we can't get to know the REAL you.[:(] [sarcasm off] Seriously, dude, it's a creep move. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: TheArtist on July 01, 2008, 05:16:22 pm quote: Quit arguing with yourself, it sounds ridiculous. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: Admin on July 01, 2008, 08:18:11 pm Booworld only has one account.
Move along. Title: Downtown Stadium Plan by May 30th Post by: carltonplace on July 03, 2008, 12:35:36 pm I think its important that the new stadium should fill up the block all the way to each side walk and curb. I don't like that big empty uninviting space in front of the Bricktown ball park, the architect might have envisioned a gathering area there to be used before events, but it has never been utilized for that.
|