Convention Center

[ljbab728]

Wow! $35 million. There goes the $30 million in reserve for the entire MAPS program.

Maybe, maybe not. Depends on what the revenues are.

[Urbanized]

Wow! $35 million. There goes the $30 million in reserve for the entire MAPS program.

...that was originally taken from the convention center budget...

[Urbanized]

Maybe, maybe not. Depends on what the revenues are.

Exactly.

[warreng88]

Maybe Mick is backing off the $30 million to move the substation?

[Bellaboo]

Maybe Mick is backing off the $30 million to move the substation?

I seem to remember reading something in the past 2 weeks where OGE was modernizing 2 substations and it would not be funded with the allocated MAPS money....IIRC
I've been off a bit before though.

[ljbab728]

This gives more detailed information about the expansion approval.

http://www.oklahoman.com/article/5345672?embargo=1

The MAPS 3 Citizens Advisory Board recommended the city council approve the conceptual design for a 550,000-square-foot complex of underground exhibit space, ground-level meeting rooms and an upstairs ballroom.

The board agreed on voice votes against recommending a smaller building and instead to go with a plan including 25 percent more exhibit space. In the expanded design, the underground exhibit hall would extend beneath Hudson Avenue

[Plutonic Panda]

This gives more detailed information about the expansion approval.

http://www.oklahoman.com/article/5345672?embargo=1

Sounds good to me.

[kevinpate]

Is it really impossible, given this is meant to be phase 1 of the cc complex, not the entire cc complex, to just stay on budget? At least that's the pitch I remember being made.

[warreng88]

Is it really impossible, given this is meant to be phase 1 of the cc complex, not the entire cc complex, to just stay on budget? At least that's the pitch I remember being made.

Maybe there is a push to do this because they know phase II will be such a rough sell and might not pass at all?

[ChrisHayes]

When exactly are we going to see a conceptual plan, a finally site location, and a start date for construction?

[Spartan]

The problem that we have is these decisions aren't being made by professionals looking at the entire city. A committee tasked to create the best convention center is going to do that, even at the expense of the rest of the city. Maps 3's palpable success is shaky and fragile with the way it is being managed.

[Laramie]

We should give 'serious consideration' which concerns the recommendation for the new convention center by the MAPS 3 Citizens Advisory Board.

OKC's MAPS 3 board favors plans for larger convention center: http://www.oklahoman.com/article/5345672?embargo=1

The MAPS 3 Citizens Advisory Board recommended the city council approve the conceptual design for a 550,000-square-foot complex of underground exhibit space, ground-level meeting rooms and an upstairs ballroom.

The current budget for the MAPS 3 convention center is $252 million, including about $190 million for construction. Construction costs for the expanded design favored by the 11-member advisory group are projected at $221 to $227 million.

The board agreed on voice votes against recommending a smaller building and instead to go with a plan including 25 percent more exhibit space. In the expanded design, the underground exhibit hall would extend beneath Hudson Avenue. Both proposals include the option of future expansion to the west.

The convention center hotel which is not apart of the MAPS III projects will include space; however until we get that private sector phase of the convention center complex developed, we should study the feasibility of the recommended expansion.

We need to be in a position to bid for more Tier II type conventions. A good 700-900 room anchor convention center hotel with meeting room space could ensure that our facility would be in a position to accommodate some of the more elite gatherings that the industry has to offer on that level.

Our facility needs to able to compete with those venues in cities like Austin, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Kansas City, Minneapolis & Nashville.

Defining First, Second and Third Tier Meeting Destinations | Blog.empowerMINT.com | blog.empowerMINT.com

Where are we now (?): Oklahoma City is probably considered a Tier III (Leisure) market or below at best. Our current Cox Convention Center does not make the grade...

[warreng88]

Maybe Mick is backing off the $30 million to move the substation?

From the Convention Hotel article in the Oklahoman:

"Ryan said the city could close the gap by drawing on $30 million originally assigned to the convention center.

That money was to be spent relocating an electrical substation on a proposed convention center site south of Chesapeake Energy Arena."

[Laramie]

I get the feeling that they may already have an anchor hotel chain or two lined up with some serious inquiries. Hope they can build it along with the timed construction of the convention center.

The MAPS 3 Citizens Advisory Board favors a 550,000-square-foot convention center that would include a 200,000-square-foot underground exhibit hall.

Glass-enclosed upper floors in a 360-degree design would contain meeting rooms and a ballroom.

A 500- to 800-room hotel with meeting space would extend the convention center's footprint and increase flexibility for groups planning conventions.

Oklahoma City will study subsidy, developers for MAPS center hotel
http://oklahoman.com/oklahoma-city-c...rticle/5348411

Let's hope we can get closer or exceed the 800 room hotel.

[ljbab728]

An update from Tuesday's city council meeting.

Oklahoma City Council gets on track to vote on 'expanded' convention center | NewsOK.com

The city council appeared Tuesday to be on a path toward approving an “expanded” downtown convention center that leaders think would give Oklahoma City an edge in a competitive business.

Council members were briefed for a vote Nov. 4 on a 550,000-square-foot complex of underground exhibit space, ground-level meeting rooms and an upstairs ballroom south of Myriad Botanical Gardens.

The “expanded” design would drive overall costs up about $35 million. The money likely would be drawn from contingency funds once earmarked — and now unneeded — to move an electrical substation. The substation is situated on a site formerly considered for the convention center.

[Plutonic Panda]

An update from Tuesday's city council meeting.

Oklahoma City Council gets on track to vote on 'expanded' convention center | NewsOK.com

naaaaa

[PhiAlpha]

naaaaa

Cue a comment from LarryOKC in 3....2....1....

[Bellaboo]

Cue a comment from LarryOKC in 3....2....1....

Yep Larry, they lied to you.

[Pete]

The “expanded” design would drive overall costs up about $35 million. The money likely would be drawn from contingency funds once earmarked — and now unneeded — to move an electrical substation. The substation is situated on a site formerly considered for the convention center.

That $35 million was to be taken out of the general contingency fund for all projects; the substation was never part of the original MAPS 3 plan.

It would also mean we would have $35 million less to cover cost overruns (which always happen and we are barely out of the gate) on the projects that come later in the timeline.

And remember, the convention center was moved up in the timeline at the insistence of Larry Nichols, among others. AND we still haven't figured out how to pay the $50 to $100 million that will likely be needed for the convention hotel.


Bottom line is this $35 million never had anything to do with the convention center and now the council is looking to apply it for that purpose.

I really, really don't like the way this entire thing has been handled.

[DoctorTaco]

That $35 million was to be taken out of the general contingency fund for all projects; the substation was never part of the original MAPS 3 plan.

It would also mean we would have $35 million less to cover cost overruns (which always happen and we are barely out of the gate) on the projects that come later in the timeline.

And remember, the convention center was moved up in the timeline at the insistence of Larry Nichols, among others. AND we still haven't figured out how to pay the $50 to $100 million that will likely be needed for the convention hotel.


Bottom line is this $35 million never had anything to do with the convention center and now the council is looking to apply it for that purpose.

I really, really don't like the way this entire thing has been handled.

Yes. When the sidewalk SNAFU was revealed, members of the MAPS3 sidewalks committee suggested making up the difference out of the contigency fund. They were loudly scolded that, "it was way too early in the MAPS3 process to start spending contigency money because you never know what might happen with all the projects." Similar thing happened when the Whitewater facility came in over budget. Contigency funds were completely off the table as soon as someone on that committee suggested it.

But the Convention Center... That is a different deal.

[Pete]

Right! The sidewalk project, the whitewater facility and the fairgrounds Expo building -- the first three projects actually under construction -- have all been scaled back pretty significantly due to cost overruns. We all know about the whitewater problems but don't forget they cut about half the sidewalks due to real-world construction costs and then radically changed the design for the fairgrounds building, making a huge impact on the final design.

We don't even have a design for the convention center and thus don't even know the construction costs, and we are already looking to give them another $35 millions out of MAPS -- and who knows how much more for the cc hotel?? And by the way, there is no parking included in this project and there has not been a plan put forth on how that will be paid for either.

All of this was exactly what worried people when this project was moved up; that later projects -- like the streetcar and central park -- would suffer as a result.

[Plutonic Panda]

That $35 million was to be taken out of the general contingency fund for all projects; the substation was never part of the original MAPS 3 plan.

It would also mean we would have $35 million less to cover cost overruns (which always happen and we are barely out of the gate) on the projects that come later in the timeline.

And remember, the convention center was moved up in the timeline at the insistence of Larry Nichols, among others. AND we still haven't figured out how to pay the $50 to $100 million that will likely be needed for the convention hotel.


Bottom line is this $35 million never had anything to do with the convention center and now the council is looking to apply it for that purpose.

I really, really don't like the way this entire thing has been handled.

I don't either, but this needs to happen. They need to pass an extension for MAPS3 and do the damn thing right.

[betts]

That $35 million was to be taken out of the general contingency fund for all projects; the substation was never part of the original MAPS 3 plan.

It would also mean we would have $35 million less to cover cost overruns (which always happen and we are barely out of the gate) on the projects that come later in the timeline.

And remember, the convention center was moved up in the timeline at the insistence of Larry Nichols, among others. AND we still haven't figured out how to pay the $50 to $100 million that will likely be needed for the convention hotel.


Bottom line is this $35 million never had anything to do with the convention center and now the council is looking to apply it for that purpose.

I really, really don't like the way this entire thing has been handled.

But are you surprised?

[Pete]

But are you surprised?

Actually, I am. This latest move is pretty darn brazen.


Let's take stock of where we are with this project: 1) the property has yet to be acquired; don't know the final cost; 2) there isn't even a design yet; and 3) actual construction costs have yet to be determined.

In every other MAPS 3 project that has reached the firm construction cost phase, each were way over budget. And each were scaled way back.

So now we have by far the most expensive project of them all (almost 1/3 of the total MAPS 3 budget) and we are looking to give them 75% of the contingency budget ($35 million out of $47 allocated) for something that has yet to go to bid??

What happens when those bids come back way over the mark? Thus, far the estimates provided in the MAPS 3 budgets have been way off. For example, they promised 70 miles of sidewalks then cut that back to 26! The whitewater facility was way, way over. The fairgrounds building was so far off they completely changed the design to accommodate. And the promised senior centers have gone from 4 to perhaps only 2.

We still have the park and streetcar to send out to bid, and those are #'s 2 & 3 on the budget allocation, $132 and $129 million respectively. But we are now talking about giving up 75% of the contingency budget before 66% of the MAPS 3 projects are even bid (cumulative amount for the CC, park and streetcar)??

MAPS 3 Budget in millions; * indicates yet to bid:
*Convention Center $252 (32.4%)
*Central Park $132 (17.0%)
*Streetcar $129 ($16.6%)
Whitewater $57 (7.3%)
Fairgrounds $58 (7.5%
Trails $39 (5.0%)
Sidewalks $9 (1.2%)
Senior Centers $50 (6.4%)
Contingency $47 (6%)

I've never seen a 6% contingency on projects this size. 10% is considered the bare minimum and 20% is common; and even then, it is often exceeded.

[Tier2City]

Why stop at the $35 Million? You think that's brazen? Why not go after the $80 Million in MAPS tax collections that is currently over target?