The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Very interesting....and about time.  Hope to see it come to pass.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090505_298_0_Amilli86106

Kewl.

I've been waiting for this announcement for a while. I love it.

It combines a new higher end hotel, a large new downtown restaurant, loft housing and new retail right across the street from the biggest public investment we have made.

This guy is also the kind of builder who makes things happen.

Hooray!

(http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/7641/20090505oneplacea.jpg)

Looks awesome! We've needed something like this down there for a long time. Looks like they have a great team put together with all the right elements and someone who can actually get things done in the lead. Let's just hope TDA doesn't screw it up!

“Timing is everything with this project" ....that's an understatement.

Bet that our city real estate department is burning mid night oil to get this deal done.

oh boy oh boy oh boy!!!! This looks very awesome and I'm young enough to still be optimistic about the odds of it happening!!!

"One Development has offered the authority $1.5 million for its property. It proposes to pay 10 percent up front and the balance within 60 months of a deed transfer."

Does anybody else think 1.5 million seems a bit light for 3/4 of a leveled block next to and arguably on the only develop-able land adjacent to the BOK Center?

I'd love to see some mixed-use urban development happen, but it seems like TDA would be handing over this block to developers that are only fronting $150k.  Helluva deal for the developer - leveraging a pittance into controlling the entire block across the street from one of the hottest venues in the US.

Intriguing...

MG

Excellent!  How many residential units are included in this project?

This will instantly add a block of urban fabric back into our city and will go along way to connecting our arena to the core of downtown.  A consistent and active building wall also makes walking interesting so this project could also help quell some complaints about walking to/from parking for arena events as there will now actually be something to engage those individuals en route. 

I think the project, to some degree, helps make our arena/convention center a more attractive option for out-of-town event planners and for those considering attending an event at either place.  It might help answer the question 'what's there to do around the arena after the event?'. 

I'm personally intrigued by the bookstore mention!  The thought of having the ability to walk downtown from my hood to dinner and a bookstore makes me giddy.  RM, how about talking them into a Circle 2 Cinema?  Dinner and a movie downtown: yes!

I'm also glad there was no indication of some sort of sky bridge between the arena and the hotel. 

Also I know most people don't like chain restaurants on this message board, but there is one I would really like to see in this development and that is Buca di Beppo, I'm just hoping this happens and maybe someone connected will read the thread. It's worth a shot.

Yes.  Considering that the city is asking more than that, and the guy (in California) that owns a small piece of the pie is asking more that that just for his little chunk. 

I hope they succeed.  The plan seems similar to an older plan for the site that circulated for years.  I always liked the design.

+1 on the Buca di Beppo suggestion.

The TDA only controls a small L shaped corner of the block...1.29 acres that was valued at $1.6 million.

These investors already own the rest of the block.

I wonder if they were able to purchase the small chunk where the Towerview apartments were.  That guy wanted 2 million (or close to it) and was willing to hold out.

That "small L shaped corner of the block" is approximately 3/4ths of the block.  These investors control only about 1/8th of the block - the small parcel on the northeast(ish) corner.  The owner of the TowerView property owns the remaining 1/8th of the block.

FWIW, last October, the TDA was demanding $2.4 million for that "small L shaped corner of the block", and turned down an offer of $1.75 million.

This looks promising. I've got my fingers crossed...

I love the design.  I love the concept of having an "open black" to encourage people to move through the development.  Structure underground parking.  An urban feel without being cold.  Mixed use retail, office, hotel and living space.  An entire block.  $38,000,000 in private money downtown.  An impressive list of potential clients, names, investors, and developers involved.

I'm drooling over this development.

BUT, I refuse, REFUSE to get my hopes up.  Remember Gaspar's project? It was also $38,000,000 (exact same number), mixed use, and had structured parking.  It was scuttled for a Hampton Inn with surface parking.  Which also never happened:
http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=11644.0

I also remember some much hyped project that demanded we move the bus station and tear down Coney Islander.  Which walked away.  Not sure on the details on that one.

I like this one better than Gaspar's (sorry!) because it has a much more holistic feel to it.  Instead of just occupying the block it utilizes the space while leaving open spaces and inviting people to walk through.  I really like the idea presented.

I want to be excited, but I won't let myself.  75% of projects announced as being close to happening never do.  They just fade away.  So I'll be hopeful but just sit and wait on this one too.

---

As for the tract of land.  It was being offered for a similar price to previous developers.  The TDA's goal is to acquire land and dispose of it to facilitate development.   Not to land grab and hold it to make money.  Make a few bucks to aid in future TDA goals, but apparently they are not selling it for that much below market or someone would have grabbed it up already and started something.

FYI, a movie showing various renderings is posted online here:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/webextra/content/2009/one_place/regular.aspx

In the renderings the tallest building is 6 stories (don't care). 

And here's what we get from the local trolls;

http://www.kjrh.com/news/local/story/A-new-Downtown-Tulsa-development-proposal/1CvmRsU4T0q6KNbHxCLdVA.cspx?p=Comments

No one goes downtown.  So don't build anything downtown, because then they might have a reason to go downtown.  Therefor, no one will go downtown.

And the loss of a surface parking lot?  God forbid.  I hate people.  If you park there for work, you should know that there are THOUSANDS of parking spots within blocks which you could also park at for work.

AND... there is an updated World story on it:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090506_11_A1_Thisar949897

I think that when people complain about not having enough parking downtown they're really complaining about having to pay to park.

Looks fantastic!  For the first time in a long time, I'm feeling optimistic about the site and the proposed development.  I have faith in this developer, and like the idea of "keeping it local" with the proposed retail, etc.  I also appreciate the conceptual drawing, and how it shows a variety of facades, lots of windows and entrances, and it's built to the sidewalk...just like an urban street is supposed to be!  

The cut-through is intriguing, and might allow a fabulous courtyard space for outdoor dining. (Assuming it doesn't create a wind tunnel, like some downtown corridors.)

I'm excited!  (And I couldn't agree more about the timing issue.  It's long overdue, but I'm happy that the city waited for the right proposal.  And didn't just take the first hampton inn that came along.)

This is exactly what Jenks needs (- the hotel) and maybe even another block like this (- the hotel).  This is exactly the development I want (- the hotel and more shops/lofts, but I do see the need for the hotel)

If this could bridge over to Elgin in the future that would rock.

Lets pool our money together and buy it for 1.5 million.

Living caddy corner to a Jail and a hotspot for most of the crazy, homeless citizens of Tulsa.  I just don't know about that combo.  On the plus side, the post office is real close.

"If possible, an underground parking structure with 160-plus spaces will be provided."  

Any time I see something like that, it generally means that it isn't going to happen.  So these tenants will probably also get to fight for their parking all evening.  I see this going to section eight housing within a decade.

I'm starting to think it means: "I'm too fat to walk a block."  Just got back from Chicago, where people were noticably fit.  Then I realized how many people used transit, walked and biked around town.  And how many folks walked to work in suits and ties...and tennis shoes.  

You could distinguish between the locals and the tourists.  The tourists were the slow-moving blobs on the sidewalk who looked slightly ill from exertion.  The locals were zipping down the sidewalks at a good 4 mph.  Funny how if you walk a few blocks to work, and a few blocks to the grocery store, and a few blocks to dinner with friends...at the end of the day, you don't need a gym membership!

If Tulsa never paved another acre with surface parking lots, we'd still have an excess of parking for decades to come!

That was exactly my thought too.

I can't really be expected to waddle another 3 blocks to work!!!!

this is an OUTRAGE!

+++++++1

So very true.

I got up early this morning and walked around WalMart looking for a mother's day card.  I'm exhausted.  Should have gotten one of the electric carts.

Not to be discouraging but if you walked 4 blocks to your car or to work on a day like today in Tulsa, you might as well have taken a shower in your clothes.  Its not even raining out there, it is like walking into a wet sprinkler system head on.  I haven't been to Chicago since I was a kid though so maybe they have it the same.  Do all of those walkers bring a change of clothes to work or do they just have like a lax dress code or something?

I like it too and will be interested to see more detailed renderings.  Now we just need to get a new federal building on the BOK drive thru (or another downtown site) so we can get rid of Page Belcher.  Getting rid of this surface lot is a step in the right direction.

TDA should encourage this, even if it means lowering the price of the parcel. I'm with CF though, this is the fifth concept for this site and my hopes of fruition are low. In my mind this is the most important (empty) parcel in the CBD (along with the BOK drive through). The old city hall doesn't have a chance in heck of being developed unless this spot gets the ball rolling.

Message to the TDA: please make any concessions in your power to make this work. Lowering the price can give you leverage to ensure that the development is urban with the proposed underground parking.

A lot of us are suffering from the same Proposal Fatigue.

But this seems to have a different feel.  I don't have any specific knowledge, but I would bet Eggleston has some partners that may be better connected (and possibly funded) than past groups.

MG

Well I think the point was that people in Chicago are smaller and have less surface area to get wet.

if you are referring to the mist, bring an umbrella?

if you are referring to the "humidity" we have in Tulsa, sure....

if you get that wet from sweat after walking 4 blocks to work, then its doing you some good.  try parking 8 blocks away the next day.

Underground parking should be a requirement.

And I walked from the bus stop to work this morning, which is roughly 5 blocks (math says it's more, time and legs say it's less so splitting the differance), and arrived dry as a bone.  Haven't came in soaked yet and I've been ridding the bus for about two weeks now (and I bet it'll stop raining next week after I get the new car).  And for those days that it does rain, I'm sure I've got an umbrella somewhere.

Not to be captain obvious, but on a day like yesterday or the week before hand, a simple umbrella can solve most of the problems of getting wet.  I work at 1 w third and park at the structure at 2nd and Boulder.  I know there are still plenty of spaces remaining there and plenty at several other locations.

And judging by the rendering, this will be on the other side of the federal court house, correct? if so it is pretty far from being caddy corner to the jail.  

Pretty neat though.

Well, you know, you think ahead.  Bring an umbrella, bring a jacket, bring a hat.  Some people have boots.  It's part of the landscape and you learn to deal with it.  But here you're walking at most a couple hundred yards from your vehicle to the front door of the office/mall/your home, so there's virtually no reason to get suited up.  

I used to carry a pretty nice leather messenger bag to work, and it carried lots of important items for my commute, including, but not limited to:  my mp3 player, my umbrella, a cheapo rain pancho, CTA cards, a variety of newspapers and books and magazine.  The messenger bag was unremarkable and necessary in Chicago. I still carry it here, but I get lots of good natured ribbing about my "man bag" or "murse."  Tulsan's think it's an affectation because it's mostly unnecessary here; in Chicago, it used to be a necessity.

I was just agitated to get soaked today actually, so my post is a little biased.  I did bring an umbrella and the rain was going sideways because I have to walk down boulder, which has like a giant wind tunnel.  Mostly dry by now though.

It just occured to me that maybe some of the people downtown whom I had assumed were homeless may actually have been regular office workers that had to walk 10+ blocks in the rain to get to work. Hope they packed a razor in their travel bag for a shave once they get there.

A virtual nobody is putting up $150,000 to get this development going?

City better be careful here.....

I wouldn't say a virtual nobody, since the head of the group was the same gentleman who oversaw the construction process of the new arena.

In that case, the city better insist on underground parking. And no more complaining about walking!

That's the dumbest statement I've read on this board in a long time. The dumbest, in fact, since some doofus (who's no longer here, I think) said that Cesar Pelli was a "hack."

They have these wonderful things called 'hats' and 'overcoats' and 'umbrellas.' And when it's really bad, such that your face and hands get wet despite the aforementioned products, there are these great inventions called 'towels.'

As I said above, it was offered for $2.4 million to the previous developers.  I would not call that a "similar" price to $1.5 million.  Also, as I mentioned above, the TDA previously turned down an offer of $1.75 million.  Will they now accept an offer of $1.5 million?  (This is all according to the Tulsa World, so take it for what it's worth, but I've never seen or heard anyone quibble with it)

Quite possible they have learned their lesson about disposing of land. 

possible maybe, but that doesn't make it likely.

Well if they sell the lot for $250,000 less than a price they previously turned down, something has changed. 

but your also assuming that the reason is that the city has learned their lesson.  How often does that actually happen?  honestly lol

Depending on the funding source when TDA first purchased this property, TDA may be forced to sell it at it's "Fair Market Value" as deemed by a recent appraisal that would no doubt take into account its proximity to the BOKCenter. 

TDA can only lower the price from Fair Market Value if the development benefits low/moderate income housing and needs.  This is assuming they used CDBG funds to purchase.  If they used operational funds other than CDBG, TDA can sell at anything they want to, even taking a loss to encourage development.

Oil Capital is right though.  Prior to Jones Lang LaSalle's involvement in the process, the property had been offered at the $1.75 million.  JLL stepped in and marketed it at the $2.4.  TDA turned down 3 proposed projects including the one mentioned ealier that had all sorts of other requirements attached.

I will still stick by my original premise that if the CIty/TDA would "give" these properties to qualified, financially capable and proven developers as an incentive with contractural timelines, design criteria and specific use covered, it would go a long way to redeveloping this area of town.

What makes me skeptical is a development group that is wanting to spend $38 million but can't produce more than 10% or $150,000 of the proposed purchase price of $1.5 million.  I also doubt that this project will be done completely by private funds as it has been circulated recently that the City is about to provide more Vision2025 downtown housing funding that has been accumulated.  Mark my words, if this project moves forward, they will submit...be foolish not to.

Its also interesting to note that One Development, LLC is not currently listed/registered on the Oklahoma Secretary of State website.  The TW could have done a better job and given everyone a lil more piece of mind that this will happen by giving a bit more on One Development.

(http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/9959/oneplace2.jpg)

(http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/4373/oneplace4.jpg)

(http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/6293/oneplace5.jpg)

(http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/1103/oneplace1.jpg)

(http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/7641/20090505oneplacea.jpg)

(http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/6053/oneplace3.jpg)

(http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/5675/oneplace7.jpg)

(http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/9835/oneplace8.jpg)

You know... one thing I dont like about this website is all the empty space on the sides which scrunches the pics into the middle and cuts parts of them off. OTHER websites dont do this lol.  :P

I hope the TDA doesn't give another developer the middle finger here, this project is really good...they've gotta start letting people develop this land or we'll get to the point where developers are turned off and will no longer spend money researching/designing projects for the area.


I hope it doesn't turn into section 8 house I work a couple blocks from there, but Tulsa needs an increased police presence downtown...that is for sure

Parking shouldn't be a problem, more multi level garages will eventually be built and where I park now there is plenty of space.

I love the idea.  Love the look.  And, depending on timeframe, may even consider moving into one of the lofts, but......

This line in the Tulsa World article concerns me:

"One Development also wants the authority to have the property “developer-ready” within a mutually agreeable time frame."

Isn't this more city hand out?  Is the city going to, all of a sudden, find money?  Is not the TDA a city authority?

TDA is a state authority.

And they don't want TDA to just sit and think about it for months. The TDA property is just a surface parking lot so they don't have to improve it to sell it.

Perhaps they just got the name wrong?

ONE DEVELOPERS, LLC     Domestic Limited Liability Company      Legal
(RA) Registered Agent:    O''CONNOR JOHN M
15 W 6TH ST STE 2700
TULSA, OK 74119
(RA) Effective Date:    9/5/2008

Filing number: 3512202874   (if you want more information, I didn't want to bother paying the access fee)

also:
4712201034         ONE DEVELOPERS     Name Reservation      Legal

Those crayola drawings, renderings, can be deceptive. Hope so. Sitting next to that Silver spaceship with brown streaks, downtown is losing it's consistent look. And let's not lose unsightliness of the old city hall plaza....

I like the mixture of contemporary and classic brick. Though would like to see a bit more contemporary mixed in. I do, of course, like the deco touches on the hotel.

My one thought would be that the courtyard area looks heavy, monotonous and depressing, especially in that first rendering of it above. The other side of the inside courtyard may have more character and interest, but it would be quite boring sitting at a restaurant say, and looking out at that residential side. Change it up a bit, add an interesting detail or two.  make that middle section over the arch higher and or put a simple clock tower there,( classical or contemporary, they actually show 2 different designs, one has a classic roofline, the other there is an added/contemporary floor)  to give a neat focal point on that side. 

Cannon_fodder...you were correct, TW got the name wrong, went back to the TDA agendas and found it.  Thanks.

Grizzle...The City Attorney issued a press release sometime back that identified the TDA as a City created authority, with the City as its sole beneficiary BUT created under state laws...therefore they reasoned that only state laws should apply to it.  Not sure I agree with that reasoning since any municipality can create an urban renewal authority to address what the municipality itself determines to be blight.  If the municipality identifies a plan and charges the urban renewal authority with implenting that plan to the benefit of the municipality then the municipality should have some oversight that the urban renewal authority is doing what it is supposed to.

Or you have simply provided for the creation, funding and autonomy of a quasi-governmental authority beholden to no one that also has the right of eminent domain at their disposal.

Whats funny is, no one has ever asked the State's Attorney General the question whether the TDA, even though created under state law, is subject to rules, regulations, ordinances and such passed by a municipality that do not directly interfere with the performance of its duties under state law?

The way I have read the statute would indicate that a municipality can make certain laws and ordinances that the authority must adhere to unless those laws and ordinances directly impact the function and the way in which an urban renewal authority must operate to accomplish its goals.

yes, this is a side note...I hope TDA doesnt screw up development opportunities but this one needs to be scrutinized more IMO.

5th picture down, that little patio area several floors up in the hotel that has trees on it.  That would probably be a really popular area for parties downtown.

I knew I'd seen that rendering somewhere before. This is the Heavenly Hospitality project, recycled from 2006 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?no=subj&articleid=060820_To_A1_Devel41046&archive=yes). Which is not necessarily a bad thing. Anyone know how this group came into ownership of these plans/renderings? Bought the concept? This group is proposing a Hilton instead of a Westin.

Wow Average, you're right...good memory.  Minus a few floors on the hotel portion of the rendering, thats it exactly.

I noticed that too, except for the hotel being smaller. If you look at the birds eye view of the new one, you can see how the hotel slants too far down to the north, as if its leaning, from when they cropped off the top of the old version and moved it down without changing the perspective.  ;)

The images are the same, but details in the concept seem to be different.  But DAMN good catch.


So the price tag is back to where it was .

And I still like the project.

RecycleMichael will be extremely pleased!  Actually, he was the one telling us a nice big development plan was about to be put forth, so maybe he had a personal hand in making sure the project used recycled development plans instead of wasting the huge carbon footprint of developing a new one ;)

Only teasing..

But for real, as far as the price of the real estate, possibly selling for less than was offered a year ago, I don't really give a damn.  At this point, I'd rather just see the development actually start.   Take a loss, I don't care, just get something started.

Very impressive. 

$1.5 million offer in 2009 versus $1.6 million offer in 2006 from two different prospects.

Sounds like the fair market value to me.

Not to mention the economy has crashed since then.

looks like it's been approved
http://www.kjrh.com/news/local/story/TDA-approves-downtown-development-plan/Zc_gA88YIkCZo6TjCRKzog.cspx

I hope hope hope it turns out the way it sounds.

The "potentially an underground parking structure" sounds like more surface parking to me.   I'd love to be wrong.

Not completely approved. They have agreed to a 21 day negotiating period.

Sometimes things go bad with TDA. I don't expect this one to, but history says otherwise.

Please TDA...negotiate in good faith.

That square block is too small to make any kind of surface parking a viable alternative to the development.  As it stands right now there are barely two-hundred parking spaces in that lot, if that.

It will be interesting for sure.  The lot slopes downhill at what I would say is about a 6 percent grade from east to west (downhill toward the arena).  Will make for an interesting looking complex.

Don't want to get all tin-foil-hat here, but I'm concerned about pressure from the mayor's office re: stifling hotel competition adjacent to the Old City Hall site.  We all know that bringing in a hotel development to that block is a pet project of the mayor's office.  And we've seen them push TDA around before. 

 Naaa, imo I think she would want this to go through. It could actually only help get something on the old city hall site. This hotel is quite small and from what I recall, "statistically" we still need a lot more if we are going to be competitive in the convention market. We could still use that big, new, flashy, tall hotel type development. This is just another small one added to the Mayo and Atlas Life Hotel options. Plus this development upgrades the desirability of the entire area making it all the more attractive and marketable for whoever would consider the old city hall site. My theory anyway lol

The locals know where they're going... I noticed gaining a few pounds in the months after I moved back to T-town... do miss my place in Rogers Park from time to time... I hope somebody shows the foresight to use the Transit Station as a selling point for the development rather than the traditional drawback...... or would the developers/city try to bulldoze the transit station?

As for tourists, it was funny that the Chicago cab drivers were expecting a bonanza when the World Cup came to Soldier Field in '94.... problem was, the German and Spanish fans turned out to be willing to walk for blocks and/or take the "L"..... fun times, too many shots of Jager........

Now let me just get this straight, and I know its a different topic but,...RecycleMichael has maintained in other posts that new developments such as the new Drillers Ballpark Stadium will provide a benefit to all downtown property owners subject to the assessment in the form of increased property values (not a direct but a perceived and speculative at best kind of benefit, not likely allowed under the law but thats besides the point.) 

Here, however, Micahel states that new developments (in this case the BOKCenter) have provided no increase in property value in two years, and almost one year since its completion with the subject parcel in direct proximity to the new publicly financed Arena.  If this sounds like fair market value after two years, where is the increase in land value that is supposed to be the realized benefit of the BID Assessment property payers? 

If the subject parcel can not demonstrate the trumped up benefit to the IDL property owners and it's next door to the venue...how is a parcel on the other side of downtown from the ballpark supposed to benefit exactly?

And btw, the original RFP for that particular parcel was for $1.7 million by the TDA, it was increased to $2.4 million by Jones Lang LaSalle.

This is exciting news for Downtown.
I'd like to think it will spur additional development plans in the arena area.  Hopefully the cheap interest rates will attract more potential developers-- if they can obtain a loan.  Now is really a great time to be developing and managing property for the long haul, if you can afford to do it.

Maybe BOk will develop the land they use for their "autobank" adjacent to the arena.  The whole autobank concept is out of date now with internet banking and debit cards.  It seems like BOk could generate income from that property by contracting with a developer.  They could still put in a normal bank branch as part of a larger development.

They have two downtown branches within  few blocks. They're just waiting on someone to offer up some $$

Gee, downtownnow...your continual commenting and recall of what I write is an honor and a little scary...

I am glad to know that you are also a real estate expert. You would probably then know that the building of the BokCenter did increase the property value of the lot. It happened when they announced the plans, broke ground and started construction, not eight months after it opens.

Actually... the "fair market value" of land around the BOK should go up over the time since it opened.

If the BOK had opened and been a "flop" the value would have gone down.
But, since the BOK is enjoying something of a Nationwide recognition as a successful venue, the more desirable the property around it will become.

Therefore more "Pay$$$ to Play"

 

I really don't get the guff about the price on the lot.  It is worth what someone is willing to pay for it.  The last recognized offer for the land was $1.7 million.  They turned that down (this is from info posted on here, I have no knowledge of this). 

To me, it would be wise to maintain control of the strategic land at the cost of $100,000 to the taxpayers.   So if the sale price is $1.6 mil and we get the development we want, than the cost of controlling the land is really $100,000.  Which is probably worth it to direct the development.  Also, remember that the TDA is charged with unloading land - not holding out for a higher price because someone REALLY wants it and by controlling that land they can curtail development (capitalistic blackmail, essentially).

And good point about the value RM.  It would have increased when the plans were announced.   The value has been affirmed as expectations were met or it would have tanked.   I'm willing to be the Tower View Apartments guy would have taken $500,000 before the BOk center was announced, and the sale tag on the Vision Builders structure would have been far less.

So all the "ducks are in a row" here is some info regarding the first proposal received by the TDA for the land.


http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=4732.0

Thank God!! The downtown area needs to grow outside of the its current development projects. Otherwise we look like a bunch of copy-cats, compared to OKC.

Although, this appears to be very similar to the Heavenly Hospitality proposal of 2006, this fellow seems to be connected. In Tulsa that may be the most important thing. We will see.

---

Developer targets Tulsa arena traffic
by Kirby Lee Davis
The Journal Record May 8, 2009

TULSA – Bob Eggleston faces a race against time.The Tulsa Development Authority agreed Thursday to a 21-day negotiation period with Eggleston for his investor group to buy about 1.5 acres at Third Street and Denver Avenue, a prime spot facing the BOK Center arena entrance.
With that and other lands on the block at his disposal, Eggleston hopes to raise One Place, a projected $38 million to $44 million complex mixing retail, office, lofts and a hotel.
That multilevel project would mine commercial opportunities relatively untapped since the 18,000-seat arena opened in September.
But even if the partnership One Development LLC reaches an agreement with the TDA, that still puts the project three or more years away from opening – a long lag time when trying to change instilled consumer habits against shopping and dining downtown.
Some restaurant operators have grumbled about concert-goers spending little money during their downtown visits. One restaurant that opened last year, anticipating strong BOK Center business, has already closed.
“Sometimes they come here, sometimes it is not so good,” said Mariana Rojas, who with her husband, Guillermo, moved their Latin grill Casa Laredo to the Adams Hotel Building in September, just a block away from the Vision 2025 arena.
With a national recession slowly creeping into the Tulsa economy, some analysts fear the arena’s novelty and curiosity factors could fade within consumers over those three construction years, returning a sense of routine and indifference.
“Traditional retail doesn’t work there,” analyst Bob Parker said of modern downtown environments. “There’s too many alternatives closer to where they live. And you can’t just live off of the one or two events, that big concert every month.”
Eggleston understands the challenge. As the former construction director on the BOK Center, he often wondered why no developer moved on his targeted lot.
“You have to create a critical mass to keep people downtown,” Eggleston said. “One restaurant does not do that.”
By mixing residential with restaurants, retail, office and hospitality, Eggleston said One Place will create a self-sustaining synergy that may capitalize on potential arena business.
The project would benefit from several other downtown residential efforts coming online during his construction period, along with the renovated Tulsa Convention Center and the Oneok Field ballpark to debut next year.
Parker said those steps could sustain and build downtown momentum for a project like One Place.
“I don’t think it’s much of a risk at all,” said Ben Edwards, a consultant to Eggleston who also worked with him on the arena. “The Blue Dome District shows the market and the need. People are just a little bit hesitant to step out in a downtown that has been vacant for so long.”
After considering this development for months, Eggleston gathered support in January from a variety of financial and business leaders, including multifamily developer Leinbach Properties, Hilton Hotels, hotel financier American Liberty Hospitality, Miles Associates, Cooper Construction Estimating and D.P. Consultants. A PowerPoint presentation by Eggleston cited financial backing from a local development consortium and other team members.
“This is a local deal,” he said, explaining how he obtained financial commitments so rapidly. “This is not outside investors.”
Cheyenne Development, which Eggleston has a stake in, bought one of the two buildings on the targeted block, the two-story Tulsa Vision Builders site. Eggleston said Concorde Development of Oklahoma, which owns the former Towerview apartment property, has pledged to participate in One Place or sell that building.
Both existing structures would be torn down for One Place.
Eggleston made his first presentation to the Tulsa Development Authority two weeks ago, offering several letters of support to verify his financial backing.
One Development proposed a $1.5 million purchase price for the TDA property, with the authority making the site shovel-ready before transferal.
Eggleston projects it will take One Development a year or more before workers may break ground. He projected construction would take two more years after that.
The design remains fluid, with Eggleston offering only general outlines of what One Place could offer. His PowerPoint touted a development with a 120-room hotel, 40-plus lofts, 15,000 square feet of office and retail space. But as he discussed One Place, he mentioned how certain elements could change dramatically depending on market demand. With all the restaurant interest already drawn, he speculated Thursday that retail space could grow to 20,000 square feet or more.
“You can’t have a project until you own the land,” he said with a smile.
That’s where time factors in to Eggleston’s plan. Although construction inflation stabilized this year, Eggleston expects it to return with a fury, perhaps raising his budget $1 million annually.
“All of these things take a lot of time,” said Parker, vice president of retail for GBR Properties of Tulsa. “That two- to three-year time frame, while it takes long, is pretty realistic.”
While he understood the challenges seeking to arena customers, Parker suggested the consumer spending slowdown probably played a role in restaurant traffic concerns. With the ballpark coming online, he said downtown restaurants and retailers could garner more excitement.
Parker said the mix of residential, service retail and hospitality could make One Place a starting point for redeveloping the BOK Center district.
“If they can tie all that in, something like this could lead to something real finally getting done,” he said.
“Just the fact that someone can announce this, this year, in this economy, is pretty optimistic,” said Parker. “There’s not a lot of communities that could even try to pull off something like this right now.”

Stepping aside on this one

With her son-in-law involved in Cheyenne Development, Tulsa Mayor Kathy Taylor has formally notified the city of Tulsa city clerk of a potential conflict of interest with anything involving Cheyenne and the One Development proposal across the street from the BOK Center. Taylor said she would refer any issues involving the project to Amy Polonchek, her chief of staff.

"That multilevel project would mine commercial opportunities relatively untapped since the 18,000-seat arena opened in September.
But even if the partnership One Development LLC reaches an agreement with the TDA, that still puts the project three or more years away from opening – a long lag time when trying to change instilled consumer habits against shopping and dining downtown.
Some restaurant operators have grumbled about concert-goers spending little money during their downtown visits. One restaurant that opened last year, anticipating strong BOK Center business, has already closed.
“Sometimes they come here, sometimes it is not so good,” said Mariana Rojas, who with her husband, Guillermo, moved their Latin grill Casa Laredo to the Adams Hotel Building in September, just a block away from the Vision 2025 arena.
With a national recession slowly creeping into the Tulsa economy, some analysts fear the arena’s novelty and curiosity factors could fade within consumers over those three construction years, returning a sense of routine and indifference.
“Traditional retail doesn’t work there,” analyst Bob Parker said of modern downtown environments. “There’s too many alternatives closer to where they live. And you can’t just live off of the one or two events, that big concert every month.”
Eggleston understands the challenge. As the former construction director on the BOK Center, he often wondered why no developer moved on his targeted lot."




I don't get why everyone is so afraid of downtown. To me Utica Ave does not seem much different in the amount of traffic than Denver Ave, but Utica (between 11th and 25th) has changed dramatically in the last 10 years. Why wouldn't a developer expect the same or better in downtown?

Perceptions are changing about downtown and will continue to change for the better.  I think small-scale retail, mostly restaurants, would work the best by the arena just because that is a rather awkward area of downtown, at least right now.  I think if you put a hotel in like is proposed with the 'urban Hilton' and then another larger 'convention hotel' on the city hall/library site in the future you all of a sudden have lots of people in that area and not just for events.  Build a new federal building/post office (maybe on the BOK drivethru site?) and turn the Page Belcher into a city park that doubles as an outdoor stage/festival space in between the hotel, convention center, and arena.  That of course is getting way ahead of ourseleves but getting this huge surface lot developed, especially if it includes restaurants/retail along Denver, 3rd, Cheyenne, AND a medium-sized hotel AND apartments would be a big step in the right direction. 

I do hope whatever goes in there is fairly modern but with traditional form.  I've posted about it before but there is a great full block mixed-use development in Seattle that I saw on my trip there last September that would be a good model to follow, it includes residential, a hotel, some stores, a few restaurants, and a Whole Foods:
(http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PR2006_1st/westlakeSeattlerendering.jpeg)

I bet that section of Utica gets 5 times the traffic. Denver isnt really a through street to anywhere so to speak. I go down Utica to get to Utica Square or Cherry Street and downtown, 21st, etc. all the time. There are lots of reasons to go down that street and lots of times I would do so. Only time I go down that section of Denver is when I miss a turn or forget about a one way street on another street and I am downtown trying to get somewhere there lol. Downtown, and its streets in general, is a destination, not a through street.  

As for the restaurant in the Adams Hotel. I have driven right by that building several times in the last week. I never once noticed there was a restaurant in that building. On the one hand I have heard there is a restaurant there, I know there is supposed to be one there. But if I drive by and dont notice it... its not there. I am fairly familiar with downtown and if I dont catch it, I know danged well that most suburbanites or people visiting downtown are not going to catch that there is a restaurant there. There are/were several restaurants in the area like that, which unless your in the know, or are specifically looking for it, the average person isnt going to notice at all.

These places have GOT to make themselves more noticeable if they want people to notice them. Put out a couple of chairs and a small table out front to let people know they exist and are open. A sign painted on a window, which may look dark from the outside... there are hundreds of signs on hundreds of windows downtown and people arent going to bother in the least, reading all of them,,, doctors office, dentist, law office, printer, bar, company x y z, etc. etc. You got to catch peoples eye in one instance and let them know your a restaurant and your open.

I have not noticed an open restaurant in that building, not once in the many times I have been by there. If I havent, I guarantee you most of the people going to the arena will not either.  

To me Denver is basically an extension of Riverside which is one of the busiest streets in the city and the street many use to access downtown.  Denver, Main, Boston, and Elgin (IMO) should be the main N-S streets for new development of retail, along with 3rd, 5th, and 6th (also 1st and 2nd in Blue Dome) 

Artist, the problem that restaurant faces is not due to visibility or people's perceptions of downtown. Their problem is terrible food. Mr. Rojas has mentioned that the restaurant is only busy on event days. Well, it's likely that a different set of 18,000 BOKC-goers, some out-of-towners, see the restaurant and decide to try it. It only makes sense that this set of people, having received terrible service and worse food, will NOT go back during the week. People will continue to only go there when desperate because it's awful. When other restaurants open in the area, Casa Laredo won't even be busy during peak times.

Other restaurants in downtown don't have this problem, so one has to wonder why this one keeps popping up on the news, declaring again, "Woe is me". Please. Get better food and better staff and people will go there. Until then, shut up about your slow business.

//end vent

Denver does link Riverside to Gilcrease Hills (at Edison by the Voter Board).  I use that route quite often; I have a Grandmother that lives in Skyline Ridge at Union and Edison.

Well most of us are eager to see development but I would like to add a couple of notes:

This structure would be more attractive if it incorporated a step-back design.  And parking is a problem downtown. 

I know there is an entrenched believe that we have too much parking downtown but other areas of Tulsa that offer alternatives to downtown have a large amount of dedicated parking close in to business.  The truth is that Tulsans don’t want to take a chance on finding convenient parking and if downtown wants to capture their business it should strive to be as convenient.

Parking and good urban design are not mutually exclusive.

San Francisco is famous for being a walkable town but you may not know that there is a large amount of parking available in Downtown San Francisco.  Moscone Center has large dedicated parking lots.  Their ballpark has a large dedicated parking lot.  There are many municipal and private garages located at strategic points throughout the downtown area.  Many of the residential buildings have parking.

There are really only a handful of truly walkable cities in the U.S.  Tulsa is a lot closer to the Los Angeles model. 

For the one-thousandth time, it is not. If anything, there is an overabundance of parking.

Two recent situations come to mind.
 
--We were looking for a retail space in the Brady District.  We found a couple of decent spaces but they did not have ample close by parking.  There was a lot of parking nearby but it was dedicated to other facilities.  We didn't want to count on our potential customers having to hunt for parking and then walking X number of blocks.

--I was considering working at 320 S. Boston but the parking situation was definitely a draw back.  We figured it would cost me at least $75 a month compared to the my current situation where I have free parking.

I have heard the arguments about parking and I respectfully disagree with those that believe current parking is adequate.  A large number of empty lots downtown does not mean that there is a great deal of convenient parking close to the business you might wish to patronize.

Time, convenience and cost are decisive factors when you are deciding where to shop or work or play.

I can't speak to the quality of that particular restaurant, as I've never been there.

But that place is located on the corner of two of our famous downtown speedways, aka one-way streets. All these four-lane one-way streets do nothing to enhance downtown. Take away two lanes, add some streetscaping, wide sidewalks with outdoor dining and you've got a downtown that is designed for something more than just people racing out of downtown after work or after a concert.

None of these streets have even been beyond 50% capacity for DECADES (except maybe Cheyenne after a sold-out BOK event), as far as I can tell. So we have streets built for downtown 50 years ago.

I was in Dallas recently at their downtown bar area. The street was packed with cars, and there was a bit of a traffic backup. But the street was a two-lane, two-way street. So it felt alive. Second street felt alive last summer on a Saturday night when it was a little backed up after a PAC event, when only one lane was open due to construction.

Our four-lane one-way speedways will never feel busy. They will never slow people down enough to even take in their surroundings. First Street in front of McNellies will likely be the site of some auto-ped tragedy soon enough. People just come off the IDL driving 40 or 50 mph, barely stopping at the light at Elgin, if they stop at all.

Exactly. We have walked there for lunch twice. Terrible food, even worse service.

Never again.

Have you seen the new shopping center over in NW Arkansas that has a fake street like an old fashioned downtown with angled parking on that street and then lots of parking on the back side of all the stores, that is what a downtown used to look like.  If you want to walk from Dillard's, which is a standalone store, to Penny's, which is also a standalone store, it is about a 3 block walk.  It makes one want to stroll along and see what is in the store windows like the old days of vibrant downtowns.   Here is a link - http://pinnaclehillspromenade.com/html/storedirectory.asp (http://pinnaclehillspromenade.com/html/storedirectory.asp).  And the movie theater is not attached to anything either. 

This is rethinking the strip mall, enclosed mall concept.  When I was a kid, we went downtown and parked in a lot or a garage and then walked all over downtown.  It was no big deal.  A two or three block stroll is good exercise. 

If convenience in parking is mandatory then a person will be better off staying the the suburbs where that type of development is the normal.

When I have business downtown I don't look for the closest in parking space to my destination, I just find one and then enjoy the walk.  I might even see something I would of missed.  Like a detail on one of our architectural masterpieces that I had never noticed before.   I understand that that is not for everyone.  And I am fine with that.

I wish we did have more shopping in downtown.  I haven't been to Woodland hills Mall in over 4 years now.  There is nothing there for me.  Personally, I enjoy strolling around Utica Square.  At Centennial Center or whatever it is called I park out on purpose, the exercise is good for me.  But that is just me.  I am just saying.   I do understand priorities of others can be way different than mine and that is no biggie to me.  A person has to be comfortable with their environment. 

And what restaurants anywhere near the BOKCenter would you be talking about that have all this tremendous business on non-event nights?  SoChey's is struggling, and as a result the planned Brickhugger's has been put on the backburner so the owners can make ends meet there. 

Casa Laredo has always had evening hours.  Meanwhile, other restaurant businesses on that side of downtown shut their doors early knowing they cant make it during evening hours.  That includes everything along Main between 3rd and 5th. 

The fact of the matter is that during event nights, yes, you can expect business to be good due to the limited availability and variety of restaurants within close proximity to the BOK, but on any other night, the business simply isnt there.

The Blue Dome and Brady District areas get a little bit better support due to the close proximity of other venues that provide an attractive draw for a variety of things to do and ample nearby parking.  But then again, we're not talking those areas.

Every restaurant and bar in the Blue Dome is regularly packed on weekend nights. This is due to critical mass, and amplified when there is a PAC or Jazz Hall event (not because of the PAC or Jazz Hall). If there were a dearth of eating and drinking places in the CBD then those places would feed off of each other and would see a bump on arena nights.

I hate to say it, but if we could get a big chain or two (Fridays, Chillis, CCF) to build or occupy space in the CBD then we would see an increase in new local places or dinner offerings from the existing local spots because they would provide alternative dining for the crowds coming to the chains that they are familliar with.

McNellies for one.  Have you ever tried to get in there on a Wednesday?

That is a ridiculous point. There hasn't been a successful restaurant open at night within 5 blocks of the BokCenter for well over a decade, long before the BokCenter was even planned. The only restaurant I can think of that was open at nights and was osmewhat successful was the old Denver Grill. It was the nastiest restaurant in town. The floor always looked like someone had just puked and the bathrooms were detached.

Now...in the last year...downtown restaurants are opening at night. Elote has a good crowd every Wednesday for puffy taco night...Joe Momma's has good crowds most nights, even Baxter's business has dramatically improved. My friends say the Cellar Dwellar is back to good business and the Daily Grill has great business every tme I stop by.  
 

I was downtown Tuesday, Friday and Saturday for entertainment: 

Tuesday my family went downtown for the 5x5 sale at the TAC.  It was absolutely packed.  I ducked into Caz's for a bathroom break and at 6pm there were 10-15 people in there (pretty good for a straight up bar at 6pm).  Around 7:30 we headed over to the Blue Dome for some food but there was an insane wait to get a seat (Cinco de Mayo) and the tents that were setup were beer tents (no kids).

On Friday I went to Joe Momma's around 11pm and there was a decent crowd (1/3 full, good for a pizza place at 11pm) and when we left the "bar crowd" was filtering in (so my waitress lamented).  From there we went to Arnies for a beer and had to stand.  We ended up at The Colony in their new outdoor area.

Saturday night we went to the Tallons game (does that count as an event?  I don't think the crowd i saw in the Blue Dome or Brady was the same crowd I saw at the Tallons game.  I really don't think it was the same crowd).  Before the game we ate at Mexicali which was bumpin'.   After the game we went to meet a guy at McNellies and it was packed, stayed for a few beers and went to the Sound Pony, which was crowded and spilling onto the street and into their back lot  (again, I doubt many people at the Sound Pony went to the Tallons game).  We ended up at the Mercury Lounge which was also busy and spilling into the back lot.
- - -

I will not argue that the BOk center spawned any of this or that 7 nights a week they are packed.  But I would argue that the bars in the Blue Dome and Brady District are as busy as other areas (Cherry/Brookside).  The restaurants I frequent in the area seem steady on non-event nights and impossibly busy when something is going on. 

Room for improvement?  Absolutely.    But I think they are feeding off of each other and growing.  And to argue that downtown is not more alive now than it was 5 years ago is simply crazy.

Get it right.....

Elote on Boston between 5th and 6th (old Nelson's Buffeteria) has been busy every night I have eaten there.  All non-event nights.  Great food using lots of organic and local ingredients.  Check it out if you have not done so already.

I am exactly the same way, and I would bet there are many more people just like us.  There are also those that want no part of an urban experience and I respect that.  Yet the people Tulsa is trying to attract (and keep) for the most part desire an urban walkable city with retail/restaurants that might not have easy parking if they have parking at all.  Do I think we should have parking downtown?  Of course, until the transit system gets better.  But do we need MORE parking when there is plenty?  I really don't think so, and if anything a lot of those surface lots could be consolidated into garages allowing for more development..

On the parking thing:

You park about a block away in a vast parking lot at Woodland Hills.  You then go inside and walk blocks and blocks around in circles.  Generally to go to just a couple of stores.

I'm not arguing the parking is perfect downtown, but there is walking involved at malls too.  Hell, some people go to malls TO walk.  But for some reason, it isn't a problem at some locations but is at others.

If/when there is a mass of stores downtown it won't be as much of an issue.  But so long as retail downtown is sporadic it seems like a chore to walk a couple blocks to get to a store.  I hope that changes . . .

I will be happy to see these types of developments and more in Downtown. I can't stress enough the importance of mixed development being vital to any downtown's core. Tulsa, in general could use more mid-to upscale Hotels, especially in the downtown hub, along with retail, and restaurants, entertainment, etc... It's slowly getting there, but it would be nice to see some of these side projects actually come to fruition. I have to say as an outsider, looking in, Tulsa could be a little more progressive when it comes to making these things happen-it's a tad disappointing, how slowly things move in the local government.

Does anyone have any idea what they mean by an "urban Hilton Hotel"?

Oil Capital....it means they have not yet secured a Hilton flag for this development.  Several things will have to be put into place before they can establish which brand or flag it will be.  I'm assuming once the land is purchased or contracted, they will move to forward with due diligence which will also include a hotel market study that will help identify the actual flag or level or serivce and brand.

This development is a long way off from start of construction and not all the pieces are in line yet.

If you knew what it was like to find a quaility suite in Tulsa, especially in downtown,  there wouldn't even be a need to do a hotel study. Surely, these contractors have done their due diligence before commiting themselves to spend close to $2 mil on the parcel, alone.

 What's the hold-up? Sounds more like the city is moving at a snail's pace again.

Do you have information no one else has?

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090506_11_A1_Thisar949897

Hilton already owns (manages, brands) the Doubetree downtown and many other hotels in Tulsa.  They know the market.  Wouldn't Hilton be pissed if they were to be listed as part of a development team and they were not really involved?  

If someone knows the market and wants to risk millions betting on our city, why are you against that?

In fact, why are you against pretty much everything that happens in Downtown Tulsa?  It has no nightlife.  No development.  No one should build anything.  There aren't people there.  No where to park.  Seriously, I don't get it.

Maybe I am misunderstanding your pessimism for hostility.  I have my doubts that this fantastic project will be resurrected and completed, but why crap all over it?  Same for the rest of downtown.  It isn't perfect, but it is better than it was and I enjoy going down there.  

Same here.

Sometimes I wonder if DTN shouldn't change that screenname to DowntownNever.

Kansas City has already voted in, built the Sprint Center, has it operational BEFORE the BOK. Revamped Kaufman Stadium, revamping Arrowhead, built the Power and Light District, built an 18 story HQ building for H&R Block, improved roads,etc in the same time frame that Tulsa has been dragging their feet on that parcel of land.


Where is the LEADERSHIP?

Power & Light District is awesome

I think so. It certainly helped make KC's downtown more vibrant and more enjoyable. It definitely has an urban vibe and I wish the leaders in Tulsa would take notice of what makes a vibrant downtown and move to make that happen.

He puts the Down in Downtown.

He must be a miserable person.

Oh good try Michael.  'E' for effort I suppose, but rather than just blather meaningless dribble and live in imagination land, I take a practical approach to development matters.  I have always supported Tulsa area development, particularly downtown development, but facts are facts and assumption and innuendo are just that.

As a matter of fact, I am familiar with some of the players involved and other hotel developers in the area.  It just takes asking the right people the right question.  I never said this group has not had discussions with Hilton.  Hilton has been in discussions with the group but no flag/brand has been determined. 

Hotel companies such as Hilton, Marriott and IHG (InterConinential Hotels Group - i.e. Holiday Inn brands) often require project specific market studies in order to identify brand/flag.  It's what helps differentiate between the nine different brands/flags (in Hilton's case) of hotel within their portfolio.  It's what helps determine if a market is supportive of a full-service Hilton, a limited service Hilton Garden Inn or an Embassy Suites.  It is also a tool used to determine if a company even wants to offer a brand to a developer.

While the City and Chamber have produced their own hotel studies within the last few years, this is usually not good enough for major brand hotel companies.  Might be if you want a Value-Inn and Suites, but not a major flag/brand.  These studies will require a developer investment sometimes between $10,000-30,000.  Only logical that a developer would want to secure the land first, and that in this case, requires some time.

It's never as easy as most of you seem to believe...not always "build it and they will come."  This is the short-sightedness of most that have recently posted in here.  There are far greater decisions to be made behind the scenes that require time, effort and feasibility. 

Furthermore, I dare Connon-fodder, Hoss or RecycleMichael to find one posting where I have stated there is no nightlife, no development, no people, nowhere to park...please, be just as insightful and informed in your remarks are you are in your own beliefs.  In the meantime, if any of three have some factual basis or knowledge of how these things work that contradicts what I have said, pipe up and let's hear it. 

As for not supporting this endeavour, I am in full support of it and hope it does get realized.  Again, never siad I wasnt...it would be huge for downtown development.  In the meantime, it does not stop anyone from asking questions, helping people understand the process involved or commenting on the goings-on.  Some people may want more information than you so they might be informed before running off and assuming all is golden and dandy.

Oh and Cannon-fodder, just because Hilton owns, manages or flags a hotel in South Tulsa, that doesnt mean it or any other hotel company will support one in downtown necessarily.  Hotel markets are comprised of smaller markets within one city.  Feasibility is determined by many factors and is based more on immediate surroundings to its proposed location than the city as a whole.  In fact, a Hilton placed in one area of the city may prevent the development of another Hilton brand within a particular radius to prevent direct competition.  These are regarded as protected territories.  In fact, just because Hilton owns, manages or brands a hotel in downtown is not reason enough to them to support another.  It is all based on the market study to be created for the new location.

In the industry today, it is more common for the larger hotel companies to franchise their brands out to proven management companies and developers than to build and manage it themselves.   That is most typically reserved for the largest markets.

Interesting.  According to the Hilton website, there're 13 different Hilton brand properties within 15 miles of DT Tulsa.  One of those is the Doubletree, whose business would be cannibalized by a new full service Hilton concept literally just blocks away.  The Doubletree has been on the market off and on for awhile now, so there's nothing keeping it from becoming another brand entirely. Still, that has to be consideration for the developers.

DoubleTree is a Hilton brand.  Pretty sure there is one of those in downtown Tulsa.  But since you are (now) the resident hotel expert you knew that. 

My guess is the negative impression results from the fact that I do not recall you being positive on any proposal, development, or initiative for downtown.  The ballpark is bad.  The downtown tax for the stadium and improvements is bad.  The BOk Center will fail.  A new hotel is a bad idea.  The lofts being put in are in the wrong price range.  The sister for the Tribune Lofts is a bad project.  Mayor Taylor is scamming the citizens by giving the BOk Center to her Daughters wedding.  Moving City Hall was a bad idea.  The KOTV building won't happen.  HUD funding problems. The mayor sucks. The roads are horrible. And of course this latest proposal won't ever happen (on which your first thought was that it was a scam and the company doesn't really exist).

You are correct, I attributed comments to you that you did not make.  But when you hate everything going on or think everything will fail, it's easy to attribute common negative comments to you even if you specifically didn't say it.  I don't think it is intentional, but you have become the poster child for hating on all downtown projects.  I agree with many of your perspectives and would like to see other things done differently, but you are consistently negative about anything going on downtown.

I guess it is our problem for perceiving you as being negative towards downtown.  But since several people seem to have that impression there is a probably a reason for it.  I don't want blind faith or hollow excitement, but not everything is bad. 

I have scanned your last 60 posts (going back to March), and they were all negative.  Again, I agree with many of them and others raise fair points, but there was nothing positive to interject anywhere in there?  Hence, people just assume all your comments are negative.

I vote for a name change to "DowntownNever" with "Kathy Taylor Hater" under that.

drivel

You make the hotel companies sound so rational about it. Obviously you don't know that much about the industry. They're about as rational as the big breweries. (Which is to say, not much)

And this is one case where negativity towards the project serves no purpose whatsoever. Save the negativity until there's something to be negative about beyond "it hasn't happened yet, it's never going to happen, woe is us."

Cannon-fodder, yes I knew that, stayed many a night in that hotel years ago, lived next door to it in Central Park for 6 years later.

There have in fact been proposals I have been positive about:  The new crossing gates to reduce train noise, the ONG Building Project by ZigZag and the Hiley Foundation, the Mayor Hotel Development, the Atlas Life Courtyard Marriott (huge proponent of that one), relocation of Casa Laredo to downtown since I know Guillermo Rojas, any development within the Blue Dome District, etc etc.

You say I'm against the ballpark but in fact, I have stated on here before that I am in favor of a philanthropically funded ballpark that could have been built with the $30 million in donations for the stated purpose of local philanthropists wanting to encourage positive growth and redevelopment without creating a burden on downtown property owners.

You say I think the downtown tax for the stadium is bad and you are right, I do believe it is a very bad idea, a position that seemed to have gained favor in this forum when more information was presented.  Also a position that the County and State have taken up as well as other downtown property owners that oppose this financial burden and are pursuing it in court, at what future cost to all Tulsa taxpayers?

Never said BOKCenter will fail.  I have suggested it was located in the wrong spot that did not easily allow immediate and further development and growth, that also happens to be a position Mayor Kathy Taylor took up when she pitched the ballpark idea and location - the need not to repeat the past mistakes that were made known from the construction of the BOKCenter in its present location.  I have also said that the BOKCenter will never make money, but that was the point if to only encourage further economic growth and redevelopment in the downtown area which it has not done on its own accord.

Never said a new hotel is bad.  As stated above, I fully support the addition of the Atlas Life Marriott and would look forward to a hotel in the vicinity of the arena as well as perhaps one or two more in the downtown area to support the expected convention business once the Convention Center improvements are complete.  I supported the Hawthorne Suites development proposal for the 3rd & Denver site, and to some degree Howard Raskin's proposed mixed-use development, though I did question the high-end hotel branding he was suggesting.  

As for lofts and their price ranges, I have made comments that there is a huge pipeline of high-end residential units either currently under construction or in the pipeline (that include the First Street Lofts, Micha Alexander's development, Mayo Hotel lofts, Mayo Building Lofts and Tribune II) and that there is no consideration being given to low and mid level price ranges.  A recent survey conducted using participants at a Young Porfessionals of Tulsa gathering at the Crowne Plaze a couple months agao also highlighted this fact and a stated need for more affordable housing to attract a younger set of residents to the downtown area.  

I never said Tribune II was a bad project, I did however question the manner in which it is being financed utilizing $4 million dollars of taxpayer funds in an interest free loan for 10 years from TDA and that there was no public offering or Request For Proposal for these funds.  My question had more to do with the fairness issue to other developers that could have benefitted from some monies and its use to incentivize additional projects instead of just one.  I, however, never said the project was a bad one.  

I, like others, did question the Mayor's use of the BOKCenter for her daughters wedding..without a signed contract or deposit in place like any other individual would have been required to do.  The BOKCenter is a publicly funded, taxpayer owned facility...not someone of influences personal playground.  Every person, organization, sport, band, etc should be treated the same and not left to give the impression of impropriety.  At the very least, I questioned the scheduling of a non-contracted event that effected another.

I dont think I have ever said that moving City hall was a bad idea.  I do question the logic in such a move when it was to have reduced expenditures by moving all City affiliated offices into the building yet not all offices have been moved and the City continues to pay for, maintain and hold off the market other potential properties for redevelopment to promote ad valorem and sales tax revenues.  

I never said the KOTV building wont happen.  I pointed out that with the economy and advertising the way it is, the recent layoffs of staff and consolidation of operations of both its OKC and Tulsa divisions, how would it effect the start of construction.  I also pointed out that recently it was said they are re-bidding construction contract in the hopes of realizing a $3 million savings from original bids.  I did question why it has not started, why the TDA continues to allow it to sit without a start of construction as is detailed in their TDA contract for the land purchase and why TDA is not moving to cancel the contract to comply with the contract.

HUD funding problems - sorry to break it to you, but that was a doozy.  TDA allowed the City to misappropriate $1.5 million in CDBG funds.  As a result, the City (though it was the TDA) was forced to pay back the $1.5 million...that could have just as easily been every taxpayers responsibility if TDA had the gumption to refuse and make the City pay since they misallocated.  As the recently released TW article stated, those funding problems have now put a total of $4.5 million in CDBG funding from 2007 & 2008 programs in jeopardy because of the City's failure to create a plan and allocate the funds to already approved projects.  So yes, I have a fundamental concern about that issue.  It could now cost us the opportunity to further encourage other economic and redevelopment efforts.

The mayor sucks...yes, in my personal opinion she does.  We each have our own opinion on that and there's mine.  

The roads are horrible.  Is there anyone in here that doesnt think the roads are horrible...wow, am I the only one?  Amazing...I just happend to call attention to issues concerning the packages for repair and provide a specific example to support my stance.  If you think Tulsa roads are in good shape...well you must not drive.  

And as for the latest proposal...never said it wont happen.  I never said it was a scam, I did though question the development LLC's original existence since it was mis-reported and there was no record of it on the Sec of State website.  

Im not here to satisfy people's feelings about me or appease their sense of what is worthy of support or not, each person makes that choice for themselves based on the information presented.  If this were a forum to do nothing but post an upcoming project, and this organization feels that project should be supported no matter what, then why have a forum at all?  Just create a web page that lists positive articles, upcoming projects and leave it at that I suppose...with the occasional "you must support this" banner.

I am here to debate topics, support projects where I see merit, and attempt to shed light on questionable events, practices and processes that might get some to think and comment about them so that they arent doomed to be repeated, all in the hope of making a difference if on some small way by utilizing this forum.  The great thing about good, honest and meaningful developments, groups, events, etc is that they dont need morale boosters.  It is typically the ones we find fault in that require examination and skepticism until we either rpove or believe that they are in the best interest of the public they are deemed to serve.

Regarding perception, Rachel Carson once wrote:

"If facts are the seeds that later produce knowledge and wisdom, then the emotions and the impressions of the senses are the fertile soil in which the seeds must grow."

Bloviating again...

And nathanm, your background or experience in hotels is what?  

I had the opportunity to meet a gentleman by the name of Tye Turman at the Atlas Life announcement.  He provided some terrific insight in addition to what I have gathered in my years working in the marketing field, talking to other hotel developers and managers...and also likely because he is the Area Vice President of Lodging Development at Marriott International.

Since you have offered nothing concrete to contradict my hotel industry statements, I'll leave it at that...but like Michael, 'E' for effort.

His drivel is causing his credibility to dribble away.

That's readily apparent.

But there's a point where you go from being a constructive critic to an obnoxious crank like guido or FOTD. And you're dangerously close to being the latter, if you aren't there already.

You think I actually care if you believe me? If you want to think that the franchisers act rationally, you're more than welcome to continue engaging in such magical thinking. The ease of getting a particular brand depends more on the developer's/manager's relationship with the company (more to the point, certain people at the company) than any concrete requirements.

This is how you have Days Inns turn into Doubletrees or Hiltons and properties linger with a brand for 10 years past when they should have been dropped.

Anyone know what, if anything, is going on with this?  According to RM's post from May 7, they agreed to a 21-day negotiating period.  That, of course would have expired roughly 1 1/2 months ago.  Did this project just quietly die?

Well said.

You are right to question whether the ends justify the means and to point it out when they so clearly don't. Questioning the process does not equate to codemning a project. The wisdom of an honest "naysayer" like yourself is music to my ears, compared to the chants of the cerebrally impaired cheerleaders on the B.S. bandwagon. 

Too bad your keystrokes are wasted on most of these brainwashed kool aid drinkers. 

I drink iced tea from QT (enjoying the 49 cent special even as we speak).  Also Warsteiner Dunkels at McNellies, Marshalls at Joe Mommas, and Negra Modelos & Diet Coke with Splenda at home.

I would have read DTN's post, but I was busy with Tolstoy's "War and Peace."  (I picked the shorter of the two...)  ;)

Directly under that property running South to North is a huge PSO feeder line.  The developer will need to build a tunnel (or move the line).  This makes underground parking difficult, or at least dissects it into two separate small underground lots.  Each time this is discovered by a new "group" and the engineering cost calculated it may sour the deal or makes investors squeamish.  The existence of this line sucks a lot of profit out of the model.

PSO should pay to move it with all that additional revenue they get from downtown.

Changing the subject, rumor has it all the Bill White land transfered to an OKC investor who plans to retrofit the existing property.....

And they are not putting that information on the very first disclosure/rfp/plat/survey shared with potential purchasers/developers?   :o

I suppose they run under what used to be the alley?  I have to say I am pretty skeptical of that story.  Do you have a source?   Why would a huge electrical feeder line run through the middle of that block?  Where does it come from and go from there?  Under the bus station and under the BOK drive-through?  That would be odd, to say the least. 

If you look on Google earth there is a PSO substation at the corner of 1st & Denver. If you go along the corridor of Denver to Cheyenne from 1st down to 12th street between Cheyenne and Carson ther is another sub station. That station appears to be fed by the overhead lines that run west along 12th to the river and east to Detroit and then north to 11th street and then east along 11th street. It appears that there could be a major feeder along that corridor that feeds the undergound service for those buildings.

Form 1st and Denver it goes north to Archer along Denver and then spreads out from there. I'm not an expert but it would make sense to take the high tension lines running east and west along the 11th & 12th street corridor, run it though the sub to step the power down for service downtown and then bring it through another sub step it up and go back overhead.

(http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p309/kallsop2/UtilityPath.jpg)

Very interesting.  But what wouldn't make much sense is running it through the middle of blocks, underneath buildings.  Perhaps the line pre-exists the buildings on top of it, but surely they would have an easement on the whole line...  Seems more likely that the line would run under Cheyenne.

I tend to think that they went down the alley between Denver and Cheyenne since most of the buildings along that path have their utility entrance in the alley for gas and electric. I remember this from my days of delivering freight downtown in the 80's. I could be wrong, but I remember almost taking the electric meter off with my truck one time since you had to leave the alley passable and park as close to the build as you could.

Gaspar has never been wrong on a development issue that I recall, so I'll trust him on this one.

My question then becomes:  why not some below ground parking (as the line allows) and some above ground parking?  Below grade parking is more expensive anyway.  It's pretty common in downtown areas to have the ground floor and 2nd floor of a hotel be the entrance/restaurant or whatever, and then floors 3-8 be a parking garage with a ramp just off the drop-off area.  The ramp is basically hidden on the side of the building and the facade blends in with the hotel.  Thus making the hotel look bigger than it is.

At least, that's how the Adams Mark in KC is.  A Ramada in downtown Minneapolis.  And plenty of others I haven't ever stayed at.

Nobody likes my garage elevator stacking suggestion?

Those same development issues regarding utility lines came up during the Heavenly Hospitality negotiations back in 2006 as well.  They had asked TDA to incur the expense in moving all the lines that would hamper development as well as prepare the site for construction. 

Be surprised if that knowledge from then was not made a part of the subsequent RFP and later the Jones Lang LaSalle efforts.

Interestingly enough however, much of downtown that was previously razed and later made surface parking created areas of significant fill underneath those areas.  In some case as much as 10-12 feet of fill where basements used to be.  Its conceivable that since that fill would have to be removed anyway for new structures, you could do some form of underground parking. 

If the plan calls for the type of development highlighted in the article for One Development, I would think all the parking they could get would not only provide for what they need but also become a revenue generator, leasing space for public events at the BOK that are closer in proximity than the City's claimed 'plenty of parking within a 10 minute walk.'

That makes complete sense for the distribution line, but we are talking here about a "huge electrical feeder line".

Perhaps he's right.  Crazier things have been done in Tulsa.  If so, that means we have a bus station built over a utility easement (and BOK has a drive-through bank facility built over a utility easement). 

But back to the real point.  I guess nobody has heard anything about this project; the 21-day negotiation period with the TDA?  Any extension of the 21-day period?  If there has been no extension, I guess we can presume it's dead?

Is this project still alive?  It does not seem like they have done anything yet.

The same people are also developing the Village on Main in Jenks.

Jenks seems easier to work with.

Therefore the aquarium, therefore Riverwalk Crossing, therefore the other large M.U.D. planned south of the turnpike, therefore the Creeks probably developing everything south of 71st on the east side of the river, etc.

Yup, much easier to work with than our "visionary" elected officials and bureaucrats in downtown Tulsa. No Kirby, that was not a slap on V-2025 or anything related to it- I'm referring to the close-minded mentality which has continually sent things like the aquarium to Jenks. 

Just wanted to note that many of these hard to work with complaints are about non-elected officials. Especially in the Aquarium fiasco. It is often defensive behaviours by Authority board members who have totally non public concerns and very little oversight. I am not so sure Jenks has the ability to avoid the same process.

Sorry, but a good friend of mine worked on the Aquarium for years trying to get it into Tulsa, and the problem was elected officials in Tulsa.  It was all set to go into 71st and the river when a meeting was called hastily to "discuss finances".  All of a sudden, a certain Mayor puts out a motion to kill the entire program, with absolutely no warning to the Aquarium folks, and the project gets nixed.

Tulsa never wanted the Aquarium, now look what it's done for Jenks.

^^^Who needs an aquarium when you can build a natatorium?.... oh, wait.

Call TDA and tell them to get off their ____es

Why not create a plan for the block and break it up?  Why can't the City address development issues ahead of time and create a development scheme to fit - break up the block in to bite size chunks to sell to individuals/groups to develop piece by piece.  So long as each piece fits the puzzle.

It seems like this game of waiting for the big developer with mounds of resources is not turning a positive outcome.  I bet there are quite many more developers with resources to pull off a corner piece than the whole block.

Maybe allowing one corner to develop would give confidence to another developer to do the other corner or end of the block.  Of course, make sure each piece fits the desired outcome illustrated in the plan.

Sell the first piece for next to nothing...build confidence in the market and adjust the price accordingly.  Is the City in the game to make an immediate ROI or should we be looking at the long term return of a healthier downtown?

I met with OC Walker of the TDA, about the Art Deco Museum we are wanting to get started. I know its early in the game for us, but wanted to get a feel for what they are looking for, what we would need to do to be considered, whats available, etc.  Basically start a relationship and see if there can be any possibilities here. My goal at this point is to check out any and all possibile options.

I had read this article in the Urban Tulsa Weekly,  http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A28117  and it sounded like they might be willing to work with a group like us. I would think we could be a great fit in helping to revitalize some part of the city.  If we got a chunk of property say, we could make benchmarks like,,, we will break ground and start building within x amount of time. Or if its and old warehouse we could make such and such improvements by this benchmark, and so fourth to show that we are in earnest and making progress to do what they want for the city,,, revitalizing blighted areas, and thus earn some claim to the property. And if we don't meet those goals, they have the right to take the property back and let someone else have a try. Just thinking out loud there but never got to that point with them.

He said it sounded like a great project, shook my hand, said he would get an email out to me showing the properties they have available, and then we could talk about the different restrictions on any of the properties our group might find interesting "apparently some properties were donated for instance and have different goals/restrictions attached".   But,,, no email.  I emailed him back a couple days later thanking him for his time, enjoyed meeting with him, etc.,,,, still no email back.

I am starting to feel like we are being blown off.  But why say it sounds like an exciting project, smile, shake my hand, and then not at least tell us later "Well, after thinking about it, I don't think your a fit for us,,," or "Perhaps when you get further along and do this, this, and this,,"?  I went there to explore options, see if we could figure out a way to possibly work together and be a part of something that could help the city in some area, and to learn. I am gonna keep exploring all potential options and may just end up having to be a pest and go back over there lol.  I am not gonna give up so easily on any potential front,,, but ya know, unless they are really busy and just cant be bothered, I would hope that they would want to reach out and encourage groups like ours and want to work with us to make a go of something? But, I know I am still new at this game and have a lot to learn. 

The Aquarium was set to be built on the West Bank in Tulsa at 23rd. It only lacked a vote by the River Parks Authority who, under pressure from another local board representing another local attraction, killed it by a single vote. Neither board was pressured by elected officials. Tulsa wanted it. The Zoo board did not.

If what your friend says is true, I would look to jealousy and defensiveness from other conflicting board interests or the casino interests before assuming a mayor personally killed the process.

The Aquarium was set to go in on the north-west corner of the 71st Street bridge.  Those involved in trying to get the project open are now actually glad it never went in there, since the area around the Aquarium has taken off at its current location.

Susan Savage was the one at the meeting who made the motion to kill the project.  That info comes straight from a meeting attendee.  I agree the zoo never wanted that project in Tulsa and perhaps Savage was killing the project on behalf of the zoo.

Back to the topic...

I am excited that something will go in the block to the east of the new BOKcenter.

I am guessing that the TDA will approve the negotiated terms with the builder at their meeting this Thursday.

Wilbur, the mayor is not a member of the River Parks Authority, though the city does have an appointed member. The RPA board does not follow the commands of the mayor. Though they may have responded to her wishes, she has no authority to direct them to do anything. They are quite proud of that. My information came from two members of the RPA staff around 2002 (they were at the meeting) who relayed that they were all surprised at the vote of a particular board member whose wife was a member of the Zoo board and applied last minute pressure to have him change his vote. Perhaps you are referring to another board or a different time period. Or perhaps our second hand sources are not correct.

I talked to a lot of aquarium staff as I volunteered there both before and after opening. They said they were happy the city thing didn't work out as they were being offered only like 6 acres as opposed to the Jenks 65 acres. Also, they were being told they had to focus on outdoor exhibits.

The land at 71st is city park land, not Riverparks

Then we are obviously talking about two different episodes and two different locations. There was no reason for administrators at RPA to have shared the story if it was not true.

Huhhh?   which "land at 71st" are you talking about?  The land between Riverside Drive and the river is Riverparks land, not city park, as is the land west of the river.  At least they claim it on their website (and the city does not claim it on theirs.)

Hopefully they will get things rolling.  Please let us know.  The TDA website is pretty worthless for up to date information.  The website has a form to take complaints but it does not work.  I read somewhere that TDA recently got new leadership so maybe things will get better.

There's a Tulsa Parks sign on the land, not RPA. I think it's called Helmerich park.

This location Wilbur and I have been referencing was in the early 1990's, I was still at UTW.  Though I remember it as being south of the 71st St. bridge, not north, I'm thinking now Wilbur is right on the original site.  In any case, it didn't get built in Tulsa.

That would be at 73rd and Riverside, EAST of Riverside Drive.  I thought we were speaking of 71st and Riverside, and actually adjacent to the river.

So, is something happening across from the BOK?

Different locations, different time periods.

Lost in all this discussion is the point I wanted to make (which is topic related) that it is not necessarily elected city or county politicians or functionaries who make it difficult to do business in Tulsa. Its usually unelected members of boards and authorities who have little oversight but tremendous decisionmaking power. If you don't know these folks or have something they want, you'll likely have difficulty getting things done. Artist may be finding that out.

Everyone wants development, but no one wants responsibility.
Round and round we go.

Responsibility? Like building future budget busters like entertainment centers? Development best happen soon before the BOK becomes the Pelli elephant. Window of opportunity closes quicker with the coming commercial property financing debacle. The world changed.

Considering the location, this is not is not a speculative strip mall in Outer Glenpool...

So, it's a dead cinch?

I've always envisioned that lot as a residential complex with ample retail/restaurant space along Denver and 3rd streets.  Something like this full-block loft development in downtown Dallas, where the parking is in an interior garage (could also include public parking) and there are 3-4 floors of apartments above the retail:
(http://www.dallasarchitecture.info/1001ross.jpg)

Instead of CVS at the corner of 3rd & Denver though you have a local restaurant where you can go have dinner/drinks before or after the game or concert at BOK across the street.  I would think the apartments would be in high demand because of their location within the CBD and views of the BOK to the west and skyline to the east and south.  Build the new convention hotel where the library sits now and move the library over to the east end/Blue Dome.

I'm not an advocate of surrounding the BOK with chain restaurants and would want the restaurant in whatever development occurs at the northeast corner of 3rd & Denver to be local but a Rock Bottom Brewery would be a good fit on that parking lot at the southeast corner sandwiched between the cool old building at 3rd & Cheyenne and the bus depot.  Then you would have two restaurants right there at 3rd & Denver creating a more welcoming gateway eastward into downtown than the two parking lots currently..

Urban Rock Bottom in Minneapolis
(http://media.decider.com/assets/images/venues/venue/30502/1_RockBottom_EXT_jpg_595x325_crop_upscale_q85.jpg)

SXSW,

I believe anything brewed on site for sale would be limited to 3.2% by weight or less.

Any one remember the actual law?  Gotta love Oklahoma alcohol laws.

That is correct.  The bill is from 1992 (House Bill 2196) and was initially defeated, but reintroduced and passed.  The intent of the law is buried in the permitting law here:
http://www.oscn.net/applications/OCISWeb/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=438387

It crushes my soul every time I read an article about beer and Oklahoma is mentioned, because it is always in a laughing manner.  The 3.2 laws in general are stupid.  Add the no alcohol sales on Sundays.  Then, just for fun . . . when someone asks why we have so many liquor stores answer it's because that's the only place we can buy real beer, wine, or liquor and hear them chuckle. 


Poor, poor me.
- - -

Back on topic:

My hope is for a development like SXSW pictures with the addition of a tower of some kind for a hotel (if only marginally taller than the rest).  But, I'm afraid, my hopes of any development in the near future are fading quickly.  If the initial excitement of the center didn't work, and the success in the first year didn't prove the concept, and it appears the City/TDA isn't particularly motivated to get the ball rolling:  I have to wonder if it will happen.

I just really hope nothing half assed goes in.  I'd LOVE to see mixed use residential/retail/hotel.   It would help create a self feeding loop downtown.  There is more stuff, so more people want to live there, so there can be more stuff.  At the moment, retail seems to be the major holdup.

Love the picture with the urban CVS in it.  I'm not a fan of chains of any sort, but an urban CVS (or the like) somewhere downtown would be great for Tulsa.  It would not ony serve the thousands of downtown workers (who could conveniently get their prescriptions filled), it could serve as a "stepping stone" grocery store for downtown residents.

I've always felt that you don't have a healthy downtown unless you have some practical stores: grocery, hardware, pharmacy, shoes, clothing, etc.  They don't have to be huge chains...just useful to the people who live nearby. 

Signs of an unhealthy downtown: only 8-5 businesses, antique stores, or using storefront property for storage.  (Like our "Renburgs Parking Garage" on Main!)  (At least they don't store hay in it... like in some small towns!)

What can we do to motivate things?  There needs to be some kind of incentive to get developers interested in downtown.  Maybe a tax credit or Vision 2025 part 2.  We have a lot of people here in Tulsa that have the capital to invest in putting businesses downtown but they are mostly waiting for someone else to make a move and sitting on the land or property.  They don't want to deal with the risk and they are not motivated.   The Mayo Hotel would not be reborn without the incentives of Vision 2025.

Apparently I am not as full of despair as many on here seem to be about downtowns prospects. I think we have crossed over to the point where downtown is going to continue to improve.  There are several projects still underway that will add to the "critical mass" , a number that will start within the next year or two, and surely more to come. I am willing to bet we will continue to see more small businesses move in, and a smattering of smaller residential projects come into downtown next year as well.  Downtown is no longer getting worse, or even holding steady. Its definitely on the upswing, though not at the speed we would like. But we are in a recession right now and downtown is still coasting upward, and once things get better with the economy, I am sure the rate of growth/improvements downtown will get better as well.

OH MY! With Suzanne Stewie gone after inflating her bureaucracy at the  Chamber (and herself) after all these years how will we ever fill her void? Watch, she'll re erupt as lead pr person for this corner development...

He may not discriminate by the hue, but he sure does by the pound.

You need to eat more, here's a dog.  Mustard is over there.

so... anything?

I believe it was approved today by the TDA. The agenda does not reflect the action, but I heard it was passed.

Can they legally approve something like that if it's not on the agenda?

I have no idea what the TDA does that is legal or helpful.

Quip of the day!

It has to be on the agenda.  Does he mean it wasn't on the agenda, or the agenda item doesn't indicate the final action taken?

from the TulsaWorld online...

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20091016_11_0_hrimgs447975&rss_lnk=11

Tulsa downtown One Place project progressing
 
By BRIAN BARBER World Staff Writer
Published: 10/16/2009 

A $38 million mixed-use project called One Place featuring a hotel, residences, retail space and entertainment venues across the street from the BOK Center is finally moving forward.

The Tulsa Development Authority this week accepted a $1.5 million offer from One Development LLC for the prime piece of property at Third Street and Denver Avenue downtown.

TDA member Carl Bracy said that although the land was recently appraised at $2.4 million, the authority decided to accept the offer because it is a cash deal and because of the project’s ability to move forward. “We’ve been looking for the right fit for that land for some time,” he said. 'I really think this is going to be something special.”

The principal of One Development is Bob Eggleston and Hank Pellegrini has a financial interest in the project. Pellegrini is the son-in-law of Bill Lobeck, the husband of Mayor Kathy Taylor.

Check back at tulsaworld.com for updates on this story.

Holy crap! +1 to the TDA. 

They are apparently doing their job. Woot!

(http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1150/888407438_aa91fae95a.jpg)

Kewl, good news for that area and the arena.  I wanna see new renderings  :).  And whats their projected timelines for the project now?

Wasn't Eggleston the Vision Builder's project manager for the BOK Center? 

Too bad we banned Friendly Bear.  I'd love to hear his pedantic take on the mayor's son-in-law getting this property for $900K back of appraisal.  Personally, I don't have a problem with it if they have the grip to get something built and generating revenue and sales taxes and the property isn't going to sit fallow for years and years.

Yes, Ben Edwards (who was #2 on the BOK center) is also part of that group.

FOTD will pick up for FB....
The oligarchy at work. Bet these "developers" got a free look see, screening off of other buyers, and a loan from BOK when they refuse to loan on real estate development at this time.



Perhaps, the old YMCA building will be their competition. Who will step forward to redevelop that Y site?

And then there's old city hall....Move the Feds, the county courts and the library to the YMCA site. They would make a good GSA structured lease and make the financing easy for a developer based on the credit worthiness of the guarantor. Then shove the post office over to outside 244 somewhere west. Another decent build to suit for a private developer. That would free up all the land between BOK and the civic center.

This first piece now under contract relieves this land locked situation.

Do they have the Towerview property too or is that the next thing?

The private properties were already under contract.

You can read his comments (every day on almost every story) on the TulsaWorld.com website. He posts under the name "Webmeister".

They tolerate his anti-semitic sentiments?

Sorry for jumping in late...but I thought this quote in the TW article http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20091016_11_0_hrimgs447975&archive=yes (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20091016_11_0_hrimgs447975&archive=yes) was unintentionally ironic:

“That location is going to be a happening place,” he said. “When you have thousands of people right there for an event, it’s really a captive audience.

And the time is right for the TDA to play a role in the revitalization of downtown.”

What role were they playing before? Why is now suddenly the right time?

Jeez, the time for empire building and monopoly board games ended a long time ago.

oh, and huzzah for something maybe probably finally happening on this parcel. This development has the potential to snowball into a lot of movement in the CBD, and it is certainly exciting...as soon as they break ground.

As soon as they are far enough along they can't call the project off.   ;)

Any updates to give on this project?  I know it's only been a couple of months.  I was just bumping around on Google maps and noticed the absolute BARREN land sitting directly east of the BOK Center.  Between the "Towerview" block and the BOK Autobank, that's pretty damned disgusting. 

Bueller?

They are still trying to get through all of TDA's processes and approvals. Another poster can tell you, there is no limit to the amount of paperwork they want.

Is the TDA having seller's remorse?

I have a meeting with the developers on Friday. I will ask and post what I hear.

Would the TDA move faster if the development was shouted from the rooftops?  Why can't someone with recognized power lean on these folk?

Edited to say: I'd try my powers but my nifty red tights have been deemed too revealing.

By who? 

I super tried to come up with a super funny answer but without my nifty red tights...nothing super.  sad faced icon

EDIT:

picture deleted...too gross

You have to complete a sale before you can have seller's remorse.

Well then they've had very few opportunities.

Looking forward to any new info, thanks Michael.

How was the meeting?

The silence on this project continues to worry me.  Should I not be worried?

Banks aren't lending.

Project needs a Daddy.

Last I heard, TDA was still dragging its feet. Someone light a fire under them!

I've heard that as well.  They are also causing problems for two other projects I know of.

Edited to add that they may not be the only thing holding up the projects but they're not helping.  This information is also second hand.

It seems to be moving ahead:

Tulsa downtown development contract on agenda
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100304_11_0_Itappe699753 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100304_11_0_Itappe699753)



Updated Today:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=334&articleid=20100305_11_A11_Thisar87512 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=334&articleid=20100305_11_A11_Thisar87512)

Woohoo!

Most notable quote of the story:
The project was first unveiled to the authority nearly a year ago.

Has anyone ever worked with the tda and said they encouraged, aided, or did aqnything to help development?  All I've ever heard is how they hinder, complicate, and discourage development.

Also, 1/3 of the world comments are clamoring for more surface parking,  where would one park during events to get a ticket?  Walkable and "parking parking parking" do not go together.  Dolts.

But I am nearing my stage of tulsa development where I really hope I don't get let down.

There must be an adequate amount of time to allow for graft.

I believe it is in the "Mission Statement, and the "Bylaws" of the TDA.

Or............ just possibly the the "true citizens" of Tulsa would benefit by taking the bite at the apple from the Development group. and yes... I do realize that is highly unlikely in the Town of Tulsa.

http://www.kjrh.com/news/local/story/Downtown-Tulsa-mixed-use-development-confirmed/4EWQBkkvnk6QWJgMyLliOA.cspx (http://www.kjrh.com/news/local/story/Downtown-Tulsa-mixed-use-development-confirmed/4EWQBkkvnk6QWJgMyLliOA.cspx)

It even still says "underground parking".

Does anyone know who the architect is for this project?

I haven't seen anything on the architect yet.  But three different pictures so far..

(http://www.kjrh.com/media/lib/95/5/e/e/5ee6b34d-514b-48cb-93d5-47309c3f72ae/Original.jpg)
From KJRH

(http://www.gtrnews.com/images/3883.jpg)
From GTRNEWS

(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2010/20100305_OnePlaceoverall.jpg)
From TulsaWorld

All from different architects/planners.  It will look nothing like the above.  Haven't heard anything about moving the PSO lines from beneath the development, without that agreement there will be no underground parking.  There is a 12' change in grade so it may be possible to have an above/below ground parking structure, but some mighty power lines dissect this thing, and it would take millions of dollars to move them. 

I'd like this thing to work, but none of the plans seem realistic yet.  There will be surface parking and it will need to be significant to support the offering.  With the struggle of the current restaurant and commercial offerings surrounding the BOK, I would assume the investors may be getting cold feet.

So are the power lines currently underground at least when I look at google maps (certainly out of date) it looks like there is only lines above for lighting.   

Directly below, running N-S down the existing alley.  Large PSO feeder line.  I understand that it's the backbone of the DT grid.

Just put up a sign.. Free Copper...  Someone will help take the lines out.  :P

They don't need to be removed, they need to be moved.  An engineering challenge.  They could build a tunnel and encapsulate them, but that would mean no underground parking.  Wherever they go is going to limit what is built over them. 

Chances are they will stay right where they are and the alley will remain an alley somehow. I anticipate this property being cut up and repackaged.  Small hotel on one quarter, Restaurant on another corner with a few stories of office above, and the remaining 1/4th to 1/2 fee parking. I give that scenario an 80% chance.  Any residential component is problematic. 

How big is this bundle of wires?  It can't be piped through?  (Forgive the term, not my forte.  It's a visual I have of a pipe with a large bundle of wires going along the ceiling of underground parking)

What firms did the sketched renderings?  It would be great to see one of the stronger design firms in Tulsa like Selser Schaefer or Beck get this project. 

The origional design was done by Miles/Zabrowski.  I would anticipate it going out of town.  The hotel has its own architecture team and that will dictate the design.  There was several opportunities for this to be a Tulsa project, but that wasn't meant to be.

I'd like to see it fall into the lap of a good Tulsa firm like Selser too, but most likely it will boil down to the hotel and some parking.

It's staying with Miles & Associates. Design work forthcoming.

Just saw these are some of the same people who did Castle Bumgarner.

Sweet! Downtown Tulsa is sorely lacking in faux tile roof buildings with faux yellow stucco. All of the Deco down there was making my stomach churn.

Miles has done a few nice contemporary designs like the OU Children's Hospital in OKC,
(http://www.milesassociates.com/projectImages/22-ouchild1.jpg)

the Stephenson Research Center at OU-Norman
(http://www.milesassociates.com/images/bg2.jpg)

and the OSU forensics science and biomedical research facility in Tulsa (looks better in person, IMO)
(http://www.milesassociates.com/projectImages/20-forensic1.jpg)

I'd like to see something design-wise like this full-block project in Milwaukee:
(http://www.thenorthend.com/images/condos/pic3_big.jpg)

One part of moving is removing....

Just kidding.  I know it's not an easy task.

My guess is the parking garage is going to be under the east half, making the utility move unnecessary. Coupld of levels of parking for a half block is a good # of spots.

Hmmm.... very... whatsthewordwhatstheword.... Reichish?

And sadly, probably the most architecturally pleasing aspect of any of these geometric atrocities.

(Bump)

Was this killed?

No, it's active. Probably no major construction until closer to the end of the year.

Thanks