Thought this was veeeery interesting from Steve's article today about the location of the proposed convention center and possible extension of the canal:

Article

This is a very interesting idea that warrants more discussion.

But it doesn't match the Core to Shore master plan. Oh no!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I always thought the Producer Co-op would be the perfect location for a football stadium.

I wonder if OKC / Urban Renewal is taking a hard look at the co-op.

I had no idea it was up for sale... Didn't we hear just a year or two ago they just sunk a bunch of money into the facilities there?

^
i was under the impression that the co-op had purchased the former dayton tire facility and had long-term plans to move there.

-M

I've always thought the producers co-op was a bit of an eyesore. I know some people have stated different opinions on the structures there and I can understand their feelings of nostalgia or historic meaning but that could have been said for the belle isle power plant as well. Which I also thought was an eyesore, and btw that area seems to be doing much better without it.

A couple of questions I want to ask.

Is the co-op still producing a product?
Are they still planning on moving their operation to the plant on south council?
What do they produce?

Sorry if they seem like ignorant questions, maybe they are but I havent done a lot of research on the subject.

Also, I saw a map of possible canal extensions (shown on the video in Petes link) recently and now I can't find it to post. Anyone have a link or pic they could post of the proposal? It would be great to have the convention center with canal access next to the land run monument. Might clear up some of those beefs about canal front surface parking lots as well. I have to admit that I almost always park in the lot south of Bass pro when attending an event in Brickwotn or the ford center. I love walking the canal to my destination!!! But I'm sure I could find another place to park if that was ever replaced with canal side/convention center front retail or resteraunts.

Why not demolish the arena at the Cox Center and build the new convention center there?

Having two arenas is nice for the Big XII tournaments but keeping it for one week every 3-5 years hardly makes sense.

The location is perfect as it would draw much more traffic to an existing, woefully under-utilized park (Myriad Gardens) rather than building a huge new one in the middle of nothing. And of course, it's just steps away from Bricktown and all the hotels. We could even extend the canal in that direction.

I'm really starting to think Core to Shore is something better left for 10-20 years down the line. We need to better develop the CBD, Bricktown, The Triangle and Midtown before we go running off to vast new urban frontiers.

The Cox Center and arena are used for many events, not just the Big 12 Tournament.

But what is it used for that couldn't be moved to the Ford Center?

The Blazers (now defunct) were in the process of negotiating to move to the Ford... Arena football? High school sports? Those could go to the Ford or to the Fairground arena.

I've been google earthing the area this morning.

I wouldnt consider the co-op area to be in the middle of nothing. Its just as close to Bricktown (at least lower and east side) within walking distance to the river, the boathouses, the land run monument and the ford center, and would be 2 blocks from the c2s park if built. Not to mention if the boulevard were built it (the convention center) would fit nicely between the boulevard and the new I-40. Also I dont think the Myriad Gardens is terribly under-utilized. Maybe somewhat but I'd imagine that will change with the building of the Devon tower.

I have been down there (before the move to Austin) when there have been events going on at the same time in both buildings and even multiple different events in the different halls and the arenas at the same time. It is much like Fair park, there seems to be something going on there most of the time. The Fairgrounds arena also seems to busy much of the time as well. It is a unique situation and seems to be one that SMG and the city are using to their advantage. I also don't think the Myriad space is large enough for the convention center they are talking about.

I understand Kirk Humphrey's perspective on the COOP location. I think however the wheels are in motion for Core to Shore most notably due to the acquisition of property for the park and convention center area.

I think the mayor will make a big push for the Streetcar and new Boulevard, expressing that they will be the major interfaces to Bricktown and the CBD. However, the COOP may actually be a cheaper alternative as all of the property has not been purchased and the relocation of the electrical transformer yard owned by OG+E will be a significant expense.

Either way, the Boulevard and streetcar will be an important interface to the Center whether it is on one side or another. I do think the Chamber and consultants are salivating over the prospect of a "Convention District" created by the alignment of the Cox, Ford, and new.

Tearing down the Cox is not practical as it is a building that is structurally sound, updated with tax payer money, and would require creating another "super block" to handle the mixed use convention/hotel that is proposed. God only knows we need another "super block" disrupting the remnants of the grid downtown. If it is on the COOP site or the Core to Shore at least the super block will be bordered by the railroad tracks or the Shields Ave and not cause significant disruption to existing alignments.

You know, when you think about it, when the existing I-40 is gone and the new Boulevard is installed (at grade), those huge empty parking lots of Hogan's "that everybody complains about" will become to valuable to remain surface parking. Especially if there is a Convention Center across the street. Just sayin. Makes you wonder what backroom wars are waging.

Totally agree.

I do wonder where any future multi-level parking garage could be built thats close enough to serve the new convention center and replace the current surface parking. I'm sure theres several possibilities.

Surprised nobody has mentioned that Humphreys idea would put the arena in a perfect place for Grant's riverfront project.

B/c it wouldn't... Grant's project is about a mile southwest of this location.

Let's correct some bad information posted here:
- NO land has been purchased for a convention center site. The land purchased to date would be for a central park, part of the I-40 mitigation plan.
- Grant and Kirk Humphreys do not own any land anywhere close to the Producer's Cooperative. They are at the River and Western Avenue; this is at the river and Sheilds Boulevard. They are on the south shore, the coop is on the north shore.
- To date the only reasoning I've heard for placing the convention center south of Ford Center is that it's a way to use up currently blighted land and that something "must" be done to clean up the area around the future boulevard. So is this a case of letting a road dictate planning and land use? Is this good planning?

"most notably due to the acquisition of property for the park and convention center area."

Just to clarify- I do not put out BAD information thus the word "area". A great deal has been purchased and the regular spiel is that the convention center will frame the park. The land, buildings, etc. that has been actively purchased is substantial.

It is? I thought the City had only purchased two buildings... what else has been purchased?

Urban Pioneer, don't take it personally. But there has been NO land purchased for a convention center. They've bought the Goodwill building and the former postal distribution center. These would both be well within the park area.
I also know of NO council resolution declaring the land south of Ford Center a site for a new convention center.

I just now got back to this thread and realized I had made a big mistake on the locations involved. My apologies for insinuating something that was based on the faulty map in my brain. I'm glad a couple of you straightened me out and I'm sorry it took me so long to sign back on to realize my errors.

Interesting note: a group of architects and historians several years back voted this as one of the city's most significant buildings.

Eww.

I vote for Convention Center to take place of Co-op. I like the idea a lot. It seems like a good fit.

Oh, and why do the parking lots become valuable? Since when did the Cox Center make parking lots valuable? They are still a waste of space. Whatever is built there, especially if it was the Convention Center, those parking lots need to be built up into mix-used.

Unless of course you mean they become more infill appealing. By those means, I can agree. They will become more valuable to an eyeing developer.

^He said they become too valuable to remain parking lots.

Ugh. Leave it to me.

I quit.