Brickopolis

[king183]

Are there publicly available email addresses or phone numbers for the design review board? If they allow this to go forward, I'll have officially given up on Bricktown. It shows an inexcusable lack of seriousness about the future of the district.

[wschnitt]

Sadly, it sounds like it is 99% approved, subj. only to very minimal modifications.

Not necessarily true. They said they did not feel comfortable voting without the 3 things I mentioned making the application incomplete.

There was a lot of hesitation.

[Skyline]

I think if the BUD were going to decline this development they would have done so today, with or without the 3 items listed. Bringing him back next month with the 3 additional requests only to deny his proposed development doesn't seem right.

Why waste everyone's time and energy only to drag this out another month for rejection?

I asked this earlier and nobody seemed to know the answer ......

Has a developer ever had their project rejected twice by the BUD committee?

I ask because it seems like most developers comes back with a design that does receive the approval. I have been through this process myself and after the initial proposal was rejected, the city was very helpful with the second proposal in order to receive their approval. Meaning most often the second proposal is being seen a few times before hand and altered with the necessary recommendations by the city as to what exactly is needed to receive the approval.

Get ready for ..... "House of Bedlam!!"

[Steve]

They didn't approve anything today - they continued it.

[BDP]

Hey, Oklahoma City will have the best publicly enhanced surface lots in the country for sure. MAPS for Parking Lots is working out great! ; )

[mcca7596]

Not to derail the thread, but does anyone know if they have approved the Meineke Building apartments on Main?

[Just the facts]

Sadly, the City set the standard - Bass Pro parking, Lower Bricktown parking, North Bricktown lots, Bricktown Ballpark parking, etc...

Stuff like this is how I know future generations will never invent a time machine. Lower Bricktown needs to be scraped clear and done again.

[wschnitt]

How would you have wanted the parking to be at bass pro?

[mcca7596]

Well, the city should have had higher goals for downtown retail in the first place and not allowed it. I suppose it brings in a lot of people who would never come downtown otherwise though. Of course... they are mostly the ones who cry out about the parking problem.

[Just the facts]

How would you have wanted the parking to be at bass pro?

I would have preferred the parking at Bass Pro to be under the building. I don't have any pictures but both the Target and IKEA at Atlantic Station are built on top of their parking. The Target store is actually elevated over the parking that is at ground level, while the IKEA is built on top of a 2 story underground garage. Even a traditional above ground parking garage would have been preferable to acres of surface parking. Look at an aerial photo of Lower Bricktown and imagine if all the structures were pushed together. There is a lot of wasted space (it actually depresses me).

[Skyline]

Not to derail the thread, but does anyone know if they have approved the Meineke Building apartments on Main?

It was denied! There wasn't enough parking included with this project. (This is only a joke and internet sarcasm.)

[Rover]

Economics determine this. As long as there is plenty of CHEAP open land, or land with dilapidated buildings, around the projects, there will be huge resistance to building costlier parking garages. Adding costs to projects limits the number of economically viable projects and development will come much slower. The best thing that can happen in the area is to fill it up with projects like Level which add people to the area and increases demand for goods and services. The higher the revenue potential per square foot the more investors are willing to spend. Right now, unfortunately the highest revenue per foot is often parking, and that is sad. When parking generates more revenue than sales or rent payments then we will continually struggle with this issue.

[Just the facts]

Economics determine this. As long as there is plenty of CHEAP open land, or land with dilapidated buildings, around the projects, there will be huge resistance to building costlier parking garages. Adding costs to projects limits the number of economically viable projects and development will come much slower. The best thing that can happen in the area is to fill it up with projects like Level which add people to the area and increases demand for goods and services. The higher the revenue potential per square foot the more investors are willing to spend. Right now, unfortunately the highest revenue per foot is often parking, and that is sad. When parking generates more revenue than sales or rent payments then we will continually struggle with this issue.

I don't think it is that complicated Rover. I think it is people building what they are used to seeing. How many parking spaces is "House of Bedlam" going to provide, 15 to 20? Do you think that parking will generate more profit per sq foot than a 10 story hotel? The difference is 'effort'. We need developers and land owners willing to put forth more effort. Building a parking lot is easy - the hardest part about the whole business is painting the lines straight.

Many times it is the City's own policies being counter-productive. Take the just mentioned Meineke Building apartments being denied because of a lack of parking. The last reason a project should be denied in Bricktown is because of a lack of parking. We are trying to build a walkable community and the City keeps making requirements for cars. They need to let pioneers take the arrows and try to make a go of it without cars. We might find out the pioneers are able to do it and blaze a trail for the rest of us.

[BDP]

How would you have wanted the parking to be at bass pro?

Just not against the canal. The store should have faced north, with the west side abutting the Residence Inn and the canal spur that goes to the shop should have wrapped around the front of it. This could have even allowed for some fill in retail development to the east. Not much, but at least something that would have had the potential to capitalize a little bit on the idea that Bass Pro was supposed to be an anchor and deserved public assistance because of it. As it is now, it just creates a barrier to the east, requires any Bass Pro visitor to cross a major parking lot to access the rest of bricktown, and is a significant reason why there is more surface parking within 100 yards of the canal than there is actual development. It's placement on the lot and the creation of a large surface lot that separates it from the rest of lower bricktown severely hindered its ability to be any sort of real retail anchor for the rest of area.

It's actually a good example of how this USA Screenprinting guy's idea is not good for retail in the area, just on a smaller scale. His lot, no matter how purdied up it is, will just create another permanent division in the district. For retail to thrive, there has to be a flow. The next store can not be far from the store you are in. Otherwise, it begins to feel like too much of an effort for people. Now, you have to walk by nothing TWICE just to visit one more store.

The real downside to this is that this specific lot actually has the best opportunity to tie lower bricktown to bricktown proper. With a real attraction there, be it retail or otherwise, suddenly the two would right next to each other. It wouldn't seem so much like the two are completely different districts as it does now. What USA Screenprinting is proposing to do is permanently solidify that division, which will only hurt the future of both districts. That lot needs something that will help traffic from the theater venture into bricktown and vice versa. The bricktown area as a whole needs more density of attractions once you've left the parking lot rather than more parking lots that will never be an attraction to the area. People will walk father (and pay more) if, once they have the the parking complex, they can do a lot more things.

Traffic counts is what matters when trying to lease this stuff to retail and this lot actually holds the key to significantly increasing the traffic counts in front of each storefront in both districts without having to increase the number of visitors to either districts. This guy's idea is to prevent that from happening.

[Steve]

It was denied! There wasn't enough parking included with this project.

Say what? That's not true at all.

[Skyline]

Opps, I thought I clicked on the only a joke laughing icon.

Thanks for pointing that out.

Does everyone feel like this postponed decision today is a Win for the House of Belam developer? I know I do.

[kevinpate]

Sarcasm meters might need to be adjusted. Just saying.

[Steve]

Sorry ... didn't pick up on that!

[BDP]

Does everyone feel like this postponed decision today is a Win for the House of Belam developer? I know I do.

It most definitely was. They basically said "no problem, as long as you polish your turd a little bit more".

[mcca7596]

Maybe they're just seeing if he will finally get the drift, I won't be surprised either way though.

[Architect2010]

How can we send this entire thread and all the names associated with it to the Bricktown Urban Design Committee? There are a quite a few people on here that do no agree with this proposal. Simple email address information and we can all mass-bomb the committee with "eloquently" written emails that rationally explain why this SHOULD NOT be passed; something I bet those committee members already know.

[mcca7596]

I'd certainly sign it.

[Spartan]

They didn't approve anything today - they continued it.

When was it continued until? I must agree that it doesn't make much sense to continue something if you are pretty certain you're going to deny it anyway. It doesn't look like any of the three things they requested change the fact at all that what we're talking about is putting surface parking lots along the Canal for lack of any real development happening. If that is acceptable to BUDC, then they have completely lost their authority on urban design, which is the very point of the committee to begin with.

Why can't they just put Johnson on the spot and ask him point-blank: "Do you realize where you are? This is Bricktown Urban Design. Do you know what urban design is? How do you expect us to justify us approving a parking lot right on the canal?"

By the way, what was this hotel group that approached Johnson? Was this a legitimate offer, proposing a real partnership in which they would have contributed their resources as well? It sounds to me like Johnson is not interested in any of the goals of Bricktown development, and the best thing the BUDC can do right now is just make him sell as fast as possible. Don't allow him to do anything with the land unless he's actually serious about developing it. His parking lot proposal shows that he is not a serious developer.

This site has a very tragic recent history.

[Steve]

I can tell you it was a very legitimate group with deep pockets. He just didn't want to partnership (as Marsh Pitman did w/ Raymond Management Group on the Hampton Inn)

[Skyline]

Is the BUD committee aware of this rejected hotel proposal? (they should be, but I have to ask that question, well because it is what it is...)

If this hotel partnership is legit, this tells me that Bricktown is really really close to making that next step that has alluded this area every since Bass Pro. Imagine landing a real canal side hotel along with the new Hilton Garden Inn and this could happen in a year or two.