A grassroots organization focused on the intelligent and sustainable development, preservation and revitalization of Tulsa.
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 14, 2018, 11:17:59 am
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: OKC stuff (formerly IKEA rumor)  (Read 4639 times)
Laramie
Civic Leader
***
Online Online

Posts: 333



« Reply #105 on: October 28, 2018, 05:42:01 pm »

Definitely a huge gamble; not to mention the $40 million 865 space parking garage & 500 slots allotted for surface parking will provide 1,365 parking spaces.   Someone forgot to include parking for the convention center & Omni hotel. There will be projected contingency fund money left over from MAP III imitative since sales tax collections are up.

OKC will pay $85 million & Omni will provide $157 million on the hotel.  Omni will have 605 rooms and Tulsa developer Andy Pratel's 133 room Fairfield Inn & Suites (under construction) will account for 735 rooms for the new convention center.   Omni did receive some perks; the Cox Convention Center can't be used as the city's primary convention center.

They did plan for expansion of the new convention center & hotel.   Omni will have 1st rights if a hotel is built on the current 4-square block Cox Convention Center (Old Myriad) site.  The Chesapeake Energy Arena can't expand its premium suites & seating; therefore MAP 4 initiative may include a new NBA arena once the Cox CC arena is demolished.

You could see $500 million to $700 million on a new NBA arena; not to mention the $100 million to $300 million the Thunder would be asked to partner with the city for a new venue.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2018, 05:49:46 pm by Laramie » Logged

“Think for yourself and let others enjoy the privilege of doing so too.” ― Voltaire
swake
T-Town Elder
******
Online Online

Posts: 7659



« Reply #106 on: October 28, 2018, 06:22:34 pm »

You could see $500 million to $700 million on a new NBA arena; not to mention the $100 million to $300 million the Thunder would be asked to partner with the city for a new venue.

Why? What possible benefit could there be to the city to replace the perfectly serviceable and in very good condition newish current arena? I don't buy that idea that you can't add suites and do the Thunder actually make much money on the cheap seats? the only seats that a new arena could give you would be the cheapest ones at the very top, so who cares? For $500 million?

I get the 'Peake isn't the most attractive building, but it's certainly not ugly and it's in good shape and plenty large. Didn't OKC just spend $100 million or something to redo it and make it more attractive? It's ended up kind of an architectural hodgepodge but it's fine, it's quite nice on the inside, isn't that what matters? Madison Square Garden is downright ugly and I don't hear anyone wanting to replace it. I wouldn't think that the best use of that kind of money would be a new arena.

OKC just needs to take the lesson that aesthetics matter, so for the next project stop building cheap and utilitarian the first time. $500 million is an amount that do great things for OKC to make the city better for its residents. Replacing the arena with a showplace so it looks slightly better on a couple of exterior shots during games on TNT moves that needle very little.
Logged
dbacksfan 2.0
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1454


« Reply #107 on: October 28, 2018, 06:48:46 pm »

Why? What possible benefit could there be to the city to replace the perfectly serviceable and in very good condition newish current arena? I don't buy that idea that you can't add suites and do the Thunder actually make much money on the cheap seats? the only seats that a new arena could give you would be the cheapest ones at the very top, so who cares? For $500 million?

I get the 'Peake isn't the most attractive building, but it's certainly not ugly and it's in good shape and plenty large. Didn't OKC just spend $100 million or something to redo it and make it more attractive? It's ended up kind of an architectural hodgepodge but it's fine, it's quite nice on the inside, isn't that what matters? Madison Square Garden is downright ugly and I don't hear anyone wanting to replace it. I wouldn't think that the best use of that kind of money would be a new arena.

OKC just needs to take the lesson that aesthetics matter, so for the next project stop building cheap and utilitarian the first time. $500 million is an amount that do great things for OKC to make the city better for its residents. Replacing the arena with a showplace so it looks slightly better on a couple of exterior shots during games on TNT moves that needle very little.

Oklahoma Thunder: "We need a new arena, the facilities inside do not meet the standard of other newer arenas. Build it or we will leave."

This is typical with pro sports. The Arizona Diamondbacks threatened to leave if improvements were not made to their now 20 year old stadium.

Quote
he Arizona Diamondbacks can leave Chase Field and end the team's 20-year residence at the downtown Phoenix stadium as early as 2022, Maricopa County leaders decided Wednesday.

The county Board of Supervisors passed the agreement 4-1 a week after making the deal public, ending a longstanding lawsuit. It allows the team to immediately start looking for another home in exchange for dropping its demand for the county to pay up to $187 million in stadium upgrades.

Under the agreement, if the Diamondbacks found a new location in Maricopa County, the team could leave Chase Field without penalty in 2022, five years earlier than the team's current contract.

A new stadium built on tribal land, an idea that has been rumored, would have to charge the same taxes as currently charged at Chase Field, according to the agreement.

If the Diamondbacks left Arizona after 2022, the team would have to pay penalties of between $5 million and $25 million.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2018/05/09/diamondbacks-allowed-seek-alternatives-chase-field/597057002/
Logged
TheArtist
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6640



WWW
« Reply #108 on: October 28, 2018, 08:05:13 pm »

Per the streetcar and such. 

I think the most important thing is creating pedestrian lively, transit/cycle friendly areas.   You could create a super wonderful core without any streetcars.  You can create some wonderfully attractive, lively and walkable areas that would allow you to have everything you need within easy walking/biking distance.  Throw in some busses and you can be great.  Throw in Uber and cycling and you got it.  I have been to other cities around the world that have areas larger than our downtown and mid-town that don't have streetcars or subways in them but (have them nearby to other parts of the city or to other cities) are fantastic, classic pedestrian and transit centric cities/areas. 

We either need to focus on zoning and or educating (educating our population/developers, architects, people at city hall, etc.) on good urban design and make that our development religion.
I think this is already an area where we are doing better than OKC (mostly because we have a decent amount of people that "get it") and if we keep up heading in that direction, someday all those little "small pieces" will mesh together into something really great.

I used to love the idea of a streetcar or trolley but now I have gotten to the point where I can see we don't really need that. From one end of downtown to another is an easy walk (or scooter lol) so no need for a trolley there really.  We get people all the time into DECOPOLIS in the heart of downtown from Europe and when I tell them about Cherry Street for instance and how far it is they are like "Oh, no problem, we will just walk there."  And like I said, I have now traveled enough to see that from Downtown to Brookside to Cherry Street and Utica Square, TU, etc. all of that is so close together and if developed right we can really connect them better as well. 
Logged

"When you only have two pennies left in the world, buy a loaf of bread with one, and a lily with the other."-Chinese proverb. "Arts a staple. Like bread or wine or a warm coat in winter. Those who think it is a luxury have only a fragment of a mind. Mans spirit grows hungry for art in the same way h
swake
T-Town Elder
******
Online Online

Posts: 7659



« Reply #109 on: October 28, 2018, 09:06:29 pm »

Per the streetcar and such. 

I think the most important thing is creating pedestrian lively, transit/cycle friendly areas.   You could create a super wonderful core without any streetcars.  You can create some wonderfully attractive, lively and walkable areas that would allow you to have everything you need within easy walking/biking distance.  Throw in some busses and you can be great.  Throw in Uber and cycling and you got it.  I have been to other cities around the world that have areas larger than our downtown and mid-town that don't have streetcars or subways in them but (have them nearby to other parts of the city or to other cities) are fantastic, classic pedestrian and transit centric cities/areas. 

We either need to focus on zoning and or educating (educating our population/developers, architects, people at city hall, etc.) on good urban design and make that our development religion.
I think this is already an area where we are doing better than OKC (mostly because we have a decent amount of people that "get it") and if we keep up heading in that direction, someday all those little "small pieces" will mesh together into something really great.

I used to love the idea of a streetcar or trolley but now I have gotten to the point where I can see we don't really need that. From one end of downtown to another is an easy walk (or scooter lol) so no need for a trolley there really.  We get people all the time into DECOPOLIS in the heart of downtown from Europe and when I tell them about Cherry Street for instance and how far it is they are like "Oh, no problem, we will just walk there."  And like I said, I have now traveled enough to see that from Downtown to Brookside to Cherry Street and Utica Square, TU, etc. all of that is so close together and if developed right we can really connect them better as well. 

The thing about rail is it creates denser development. When planning a new rail system you need to mix between connecting existing places to create demand and then traveling past empty land for development. Rail through its very presence encourages dense infill. Oklahoma City is doing a good job of this. I would traffic calm Cheyenne and 4th, remove three lanes of car traffic from each for dedicated rail and run it north to Pine, south to 15th and east to TU and west across the river to the OSU Health Sciences Center.
Logged
Tulsasooner78
Citizen
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 23


« Reply #110 on: October 28, 2018, 09:50:08 pm »

SXSW - OKC has planned the park since the 2005 “Core to Shore” feasibility study.  The park was fully conceptulized in 2007 and placed on the Maps 3 ballot in fall of 2009.  The Gathering Place had  ABSOLUTELY ZERO to do with the planning of this park.  The MAPS process dictates the money must be collected prior to the project starting and the park was always intended to start in 2018 with completion of phase 1 in 2019 and phase 2 in 2020.  The Gathering Place was announced in 2012.

https://okcommerce.gov/newpioneer/oklahomas-metro-areas-adding-quality-of-life-amenities/

Lots of misinformation on this forum.
Logged
Tulsasooner78
Citizen
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 23


« Reply #111 on: October 28, 2018, 09:59:02 pm »

Laramie-  You should know better as you frequent OKC Talk.  There is absolutely zero chance of a arena for the Thunder being included in the MAPS 4 initiative.  The Peake is very nice on the interior.  Also,  the Thunder, Chamber and Council have not even mentioned it. 

Expect MAPS 4 to include a new arena in the fair grounds to replace the existing arena and extensions for the street car, regional transit and public education.

More misinformation
Logged
SXSW
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3735


WWW
« Reply #112 on: October 28, 2018, 10:22:28 pm »

SXSW - OKC has planned the park since the 2005 “Core to Shore” feasibility study.  The park was fully conceptulized in 2007 and placed on the Maps 3 ballot in fall of 2009.  The Gathering Place had  ABSOLUTELY ZERO to do with the planning of this park.  The MAPS process dictates the money must be collected prior to the project starting and the park was always intended to start in 2018 with completion of phase 1 in 2019 and phase 2 in 2020.  The Gathering Place was announced in 2012.

https://okcommerce.gov/newpioneer/oklahomas-metro-areas-adding-quality-of-life-amenities/

Lots of misinformation on this forum.

Maybe not but the design for Scissortail Park wasn’t finalized until 2013.  And there was this article in the Daily Oklahoman lamenting how OKC’s park would be nowhere near as nice as the Gathering Place: https://newsok.com/article/3924209/who-is-excited-about-the-future-core-to-shore-park
Logged

 
Tulsasooner78
Citizen
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 23


« Reply #113 on: October 28, 2018, 10:31:12 pm »

Again, the park was being planned and conceptualized as early as 2005.  OKC can lament all they want but that is what you get when you spend 132 million versus 465 million.  The Gathering Place had absolutely ZERO to do with Scissortail Parks design or planning.
Logged
Tulsasooner78
Citizen
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 23


« Reply #114 on: October 28, 2018, 10:42:08 pm »

I believe the MAPS park serves a completely different purpose than the Gathering Place.  The MAPS park will not be as highly programmed as The Gathering Place.   The MAPS park is intended to spur more development around the park ala Central Park in NYC.  The key will be the “Strawberry Fields” development to the west of the park and future development in and around the lower section of the park.  Strawberry Fields has already accumulated over 50 million worth of property to the west of the park and are planning a massive mixed use development.  Which is where IKEA was originally sniffing around.  Also, there has been a substantial amount of land acquisition around the lower section of the park.  Expect a lot of infill with dense development in the next 10-15 years.
Logged
Red Arrow
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 10317


WWW
« Reply #115 on: October 28, 2018, 10:52:13 pm »

Per the streetcar and such. 
We get people all the time into DECOPOLIS in the heart of downtown from Europe and when I tell them about Cherry Street for instance and how far it is they are like "Oh, no problem, we will just walk there."  

Americans don't walk.  I think a downtown circulator will be necessary for OKC to Tulsa rail success regardless of whether the circulator is rail or rubber tires. I would like (real) trolleys or light rail to connect the various hot spots in Tulsa but it's beyond my capability to predict if it would be a financial success. Maybe we just need to to it as a social service.

Logged

 
Tulsasooner78
Citizen
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 23


« Reply #116 on: October 28, 2018, 10:55:11 pm »

The MAPS park is intended to attract and spur more development that will ultimately add more residents to the core.  OKC has a lot of neglected property in the core ripe for redevelopment.  They are doing a good job with redevelopment and infill but the market has to catch up to accelerate the growth.  Inner city schools are still a huge impediment for many to relocate in the core and that fact has kept for sale residential development from exploding.  However, this park and additional public investment will soon accelerate the pace of redevelopment.
Logged
Laramie
Civic Leader
***
Online Online

Posts: 333



« Reply #117 on: October 29, 2018, 09:31:07 am »

The streetcars were among our visions with MAPS I; we didn't get the federal grant needed to help plan the 1st streetcar; Salt Lake City got that money for their streetcar roll out for their winter Olympic games.

We went with the Vintage Rubber bus tire trolleys for downtown.  They were unpopular; we were hyped for the streetcar which had we gotten--expansion talk would be the topic of conversation now.  Also who knows, maybe we weren't ready for the streetcar and it would have failed.  Will admit that OKC officials have learned from early MAPS 1, 2 and Hoops initiatives.

OKC is a victim of its own success.  The popularity of future MAPS initiatives are being questioned.  Instead of having multiple projects on MAPS for which the initiative became so popular because most voted yes because they had a project they liked on the ballot, we are now IMHO seeing people who don't want certain items on there--they are threatening to vote no.  Might be just a few disgruntled voters.

IMO, I still say Tulsa is ripe for a streetcar.  Light rail tracks now run $13 million or more per linear mile--it's not going to get any cheaper in price.  I sense some posters don't want a streetcar because OKC has one.  The streetcar will be a great item for downtown transit.  Everyone knows how difficult it is to get around downtown once you park.  Tulsa could use a streetcar; build one for Tulsa--not because you want OKC to be envious.   OKC didn't have Tulsa in mind when we voted for MAPS in the 90s.  We saw a big old raggedy, ugly town getting uglier by the degrees--losing tons of young professionals to Texas along with Fortune 500/1000 companies.  We have a lot to do in OKC. It's a balancing act between needs & some wants like the streetcar which many here consider more of a novelty item.

Logged

“Think for yourself and let others enjoy the privilege of doing so too.” ― Voltaire
SXSW
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3735


WWW
« Reply #118 on: October 29, 2018, 10:09:00 am »

The streetcars were among our visions with MAPS I; we didn't get the federal grant needed to help plan the 1st streetcar; Salt Lake City got that money for their streetcar roll out for their winter Olympic games.

We went with the Vintage Rubber bus tire trolleys for downtown.  They were unpopular; we were hyped for the streetcar which had we gotten--expansion talk would be the topic of conversation now.  Also who knows, maybe we weren't ready for the streetcar and it would have failed.  Will admit that OKC officials have learned from early MAPS 1, 2 and Hoops initiatives.

OKC is a victim of its own success.  The popularity of future MAPS initiatives are being questioned.  Instead of having multiple projects on MAPS for which the initiative became so popular because most voted yes because they had a project they liked on the ballot, we are now IMHO seeing people who don't want certain items on there--they are threatening to vote no.  Might be just a few disgruntled voters.

IMO, I still say Tulsa is ripe for a streetcar.  Light rail tracks now run $13 million or more per linear mile--it's not going to get any cheaper in price.  I sense some posters don't want a streetcar because OKC has one.  The streetcar will be a great item for downtown transit.  Everyone knows how difficult it is to get around downtown once you park.  Tulsa could use a streetcar; build one for Tulsa--not because you want OKC to be envious.   OKC didn't have Tulsa in mind when we voted for MAPS in the 90s.  We saw a big old raggedy, ugly town getting uglier by the degrees--losing tons of young professionals to Texas along with Fortune 500/1000 companies.  We have a lot to do in OKC. It's a balancing act between needs & some wants like the streetcar which many here consider more of a novelty item.

When the Boulder Ave. bridge was rebuilt in 2013 it was designed for future fixed-rail streetcars which would be a major additional cost after-the-fact.  I imagine city leaders want to see how the OKC streetcar does and use that as a case study to plan a  downtown Tulsa circulator.  If you connected the Arts District to Blue Dome to the Arena District (Brady/Archer couplet, Detroit/Cincinnati couplet, 3rd/4th couplet and Boulder) you would have about a 2 mile system so ~$30 million for what would could eventually be extended south to Riverview/Cherry Street/Gathering Place and east to TU along a revitalized 11th St/Rt 66.
Logged

 
Laramie
Civic Leader
***
Online Online

Posts: 333



« Reply #119 on: October 29, 2018, 01:54:05 pm »

OKC streetcars cost $5 million each, our contractor was Brookville, PA.  Think we have six streetcars (2 each, Redbud, Bermuda Green & Clear Sky Blue) for a 6 plus miles of track that covers Downtown-Midtown 4.9 miles and the 2 mile Bricktown loop.  Expensive and risky investment for a streetcar system in the core.

Oklahoma City Streetcar:  https://www.okc.gov/government/maps-3/projects/modern-streetcar-transit

We anticipate a successful a rollout. Tentative costs to ride the cars will be  Measures will address concerns to deal with vagrants who board the streetcars as with the buses who use them as an all day ride & shelter.

Budget: $131 million
     
     Maintenance & storage facility:  $5.4 million
     6.9 miles tracks $57.2 million
     6 streetcars $30 million

IIRC the OKC streetcar system can be converted to run off-wire.

Tulsa could probably start up with a system that covers 4 plus miles; your districts are more closer than OKC's.  Would estimate initial cost to be $80 million - $100 million.
Logged

“Think for yourself and let others enjoy the privilege of doing so too.” ― Voltaire
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

 
  Hosted by TulsaConnect and Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
 

Mission

 

"TulsaNow's Mission is to help Tulsa become the most vibrant, diverse, sustainable and prosperous city of our size. We achieve this by focusing on the development of Tulsa's distinctive identity and economic growth around a dynamic, urban core, complemented by a constellation of livable, thriving communities."
more...

 

Contact

 

2210 S Main St.
Tulsa, OK 74114
(918) 409-2669
info@tulsanow.org