Showing posts with label Lower Bricktown. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lower Bricktown. Show all posts

Monday, December 19, 2011

Scara-development

I wasn't really planning on extrapolating on my previous criticism of Avis Scaramucci and her leadership in Bricktown, but after seeing Steve's reference to my blog last week, now I suppose I am compelled to keep it going. Instead of going as far out there to say something wildly critical of Avis, let's just pretend that I did. "There, I said it."

But in all seriousness, maybe Avis is the leader of the Bricktown Association (or emeritus?) and Bricktown Suburban Design Commission because nobody else wants these positions? That would be sad, because here you have a district that is in dire need of leadership. There is such a multitude of issues that they could be addressing, or could have already addressed. But as it stands, Bricktown stays still. For its entire life, the Bricktown Association's response to the Bricktown parking problem has been to promote the rationalization that there isn't really a parking problem. Weak on leadership.

The Suburban Design Commission, which is tasked with maintaining urban design standards for the district, could have taken proactive action on targeting abandoned buildings, attracting new developments, assisting proposed developments, and so on. Instead of proactively making a difference in building a better Bricktown, they have been consistently contributing to the wrong direction for the district. The House of Bedlam vote was just the icing on the cake. Let's talk about building demolitions, giant inflatable dragons, and more.

So, the problem isn't anything personal I have against Avis. It's that I am disappointed that this district has had bad leadership. I don't know what it's like behind the scenes in Bricktown. I don't know if there's a power struggle. I don't know if nobody wants to lead. Maybe everyone is real chummy and pleased with Avis' leadership and sees no problem with the district's stunted progress (I'd put my money on that). Either way, it doesn't matter. What matters are the results. And they just aren't there.

So make a list of Bricktown goals. You won't get to cross very many of them off, and probably not for a while, either (all the while surrounding districts are crossing off goals like they're on sale). Then make a list of Bricktown's known problems. Parking crunch. Too many surface parking lots for pay. Losing density. Slow day-time traffic. Slum lords who sit on buildings waiting for values to rise. Lack of mixed-use. And so on.

All of those problem, except lack of mixed-use (her one development really was as outstanding as it gets, to give credit where credit IS due), Avis Scaramucci has directly (through her business interests) or indirectly (through her votes) contributed to. It turns out that she exemplifies one of them. If she's not a slumlord, then I'm not a blogger.

They have no plans to renovate the Rock Island Plow Building. In fact, as Steve informed us last week, they are boarding up even more windows THIS WEEK as I am typing this out. Furthermore, they have no plans to sell--essentially they make no bones about the fact that they're waiting for "the right time to sell," as they say. This is the ultimate indictment in my opinion.

How important is this building to Bricktown? Well, how important is wood to a woodchuck? Talk about a "Bricktown Gateway" in terms of the entrance on Reno. Furthermore, this is one of the most prominent buildings that OKC Arena crowds see as they're walking between the arena and the accompanying entertainment district that is aggressively promoted to those event crowds. When we have bball tourneys, fanbases will have a HQ bar in Bricktown. And with the planned transit hub, this location is set to become even more high-profile.

Something needs to be done. But it's not going to be done any time soon. Just accept it. What can people do? Well, I hear complaining doesn't hurt. According to my poll, almost 2/3rds of observers disapprove, most vehemently, of the B(s)UDC. This is even after absorbing a flurry of pro-Bricktown votes lately, I assume a small group of people heard about this discussion on the blogs. But what else can you do?

Not a lot. This is because when the bad interests get involved in the decision-making process, effectively preempting urban planning in a district that is little more than a massive public interest (WE built that canal, not Lower Bricktown developers, not Avis Scaramucci, not the Brewers, and NOT Chris Johnson, that is OUR canal god dammit), then the system is rigged. A rigged system is a broken system.

So one thing you can NOT count on is a rigged, broken system producing solutions that will get Bricktown back on track for where it needs to be in terms of its urban development.

Sunday, February 21, 2010

OCURA: What a stellar track record

Gotta love gub'ment interference in downtown development, Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority (OCURA) especially, the folks who brought you Lower Bricktown, Bass Pro, The Hill at Bricktown, Overholser Green, and countless other downtown success stories. Pat yourself on the back, OCURA, because if not for you and your contributions toward expediting quality private development, OKC would still be a vibrant downtown. Wait, I meant a dead downtown.

So in this post we'll examine OCURA's stellar track record in advancing "quality" urban development in OKC.

I think we can all appreciate the corrupt bidding process in which we ended up with Bass Pro, over other potentially more urban projects that had been pitched. The good news is that Bass Pro is virtually the extent of retail in Bricktown, and the rest of downtown. It also added something Bricktown was in desperate need of: surface parking. So all in all, a win-win. Plus the adjacent Lower Bricktown development was absolutely fool-proof. Even though The Centennial is the only remotely urban component of Lower Bricktown, even it is loosing retail tenants. (LiT went out of business.) LB's other clothing retailer, Firefly Clothing, also closed recently. So one bright spot for Lower Bricktown, the fact that it did at least have leasing, is now just one of many sore spots for the much-maligned project. Add to the fact that LB has never been finished, and likely won't ever be finished until the Crosstown comes tumbling down and replaced by an at-grade boulevard behind Lower Bricktown. As it happens, developers Stonegate Hogan were given a TIMELINE on the project, and the TIMELINE has since lapsed. Will OCURA ever close on the remaining canal-front land and take it back, and try and get some other developers to bid on it? Nah, never. This is not about good development, the City of OKC, protecting a public investment like the canal, or ANYTHING like that. This is about the good ol' boy system and pushing the interests of the developer, Stonegate Hogan.

One of the few bright spots, if you're one of them out-of-touch urban advocates, is the Deep Deuce Apartments--but even Deep Deuce has one glaring downfall: it was NEVER completed, and won't EVER be completed as planned. So it's another example of where a developer proposes one thing, gets the bid, then does the ole switcharoo or doesn't even come close to finishing the development that they said they would do. Never mind the fact that the reason they were given the bid was to do the development they proposed, and nothing else. Integrity is not an important factor here, because OCURA doesn't actually care about "urban renewal."

Funny thing about the Overholser Green project is that I actually defended OCURA here. I supported the Overholser Green project because it was a good project, and at the time, I didn't realize how it was financially unfeasible. The high-end nature of the project, especially the condominium aspect. In contract to Marva Ellard's competing proposal, a mixed-use project with rental residential and financing in place. Well it's obvious that OCURA couldn't have picked that project, because it actually had a relatively good chance of success. That would just completely throw OCURA's track record all out of whack. Now where we are is (3/4 years or so after the bid was awarded) Chuck Wiggin has stalled on the project. In fact he scaled it way down so that it was a much less significant project, and he still couldn't get it off. So basically after he was awarded the contract, he pulled the old switcharoo as so many of them do, and instead of pulling the contract AS OCURA SHOULD HAVE DONE, OCURA approved it again because they already awarded the contract. At that point and thereafter Wiggin could have done whatever the hell he wants, or doesn't want; he could have put a 7/11 on that land for all OCURA cared. The story more or less has been marked by what he doesn't want to do, and that is develop the land which has absolutely sat there and won't be developed any time soon. Thanks to everyone's favorite gub'ment agency.

No downtown project exemplifies "FAILURE" like The Hill does, and that's bragging rights nobody can even come close to. This is the kind of project that OCURA really hangs its hat on, the bread and butter of what OCURA is all about as a corrupt government agency. I guess first you gotta begin with the corrupt bidding process, against two other more financially feasible projects, including a great mixed-use proposal from Anthony McDermid. Within the last 12 hours before the bid was awarded, Bill Canfield and Marva Ellard (developers of The Hill) notify OCURA that they're dropping their request for a TIF district as a part of the development. OCURA was legally required to notify McDermid and others of the change in the competing proposal, but failed to do so because it was late at night. McDermid later said that had he been notified, he also would have dropped his request for the TIF--but never got such a notice. Now that The Hill is what we're stuck with, as it's already under construction, it's become even more of a quagmire. The suburban design of the over-priced units have scared away any potential buyers, so the project has sold only 2 or 3 units, total. Without selling ANY units, Canfield couldn't pay contractors, so they stopped construction and probably hold liens on the project. The project can't even be closed on and reclaimed by OCURA at this point, because the few dozen townhomes that were built (out of 160 or so proposed) use up ALL of the street frontage that this project has. The only way thing that could be put on that site now is a big box retailer that needs highway visibility more than frontage (like BASS PRO, hint hint), or a commuter parking lot. That's it.

We got LUCKY with this project. Here's another one where a developer (Mike Henderson) gets awarded a bid, based on a great proposal with snazzy architectural elevations..then he pulls the old switcharoo and we get Plainville. This project in no way resembles the high-design development that was anticipated during the bidding process. But the bright side is this: the project actually is URBAN, it's not necessarily UGLY, and it works. It also has 300 or so upscale rental units, and that's GREAT for downtown. OCURA accidentally stumbled upon a success here..but they should have held Henderson to his original design proposal, especially considering he got TIF funding for this. That's a public investment that OCURA should have been looking out for.

I could go on. The funny thing, as you read through the annals of downtown history and come across a chapter on Sycamore Square, is how we have literally repeated the Sycamore Square fiasco over and over and over and over in the last 5 years. Yes, it's true that downtown development has been booming, very successfully, in the last 5 years. There is a HUGE exception to that however, and that is any time OCURA is involved. OCURA stands for Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority, but I would seriously question, based on their track record, what the hell their problem is. I think here is a great example of where a government agency with a long acronym no longer comes even close to representing what its acronym stands for. So next time someone asks, "What does OCURA stand for?" The answer of course must be, "OCURA stands for O-C-U-R-A," not anything relating to urban or downtown or the community or anything like that.

Sadly, I think I could raise some very critical questions of Downtown Design Review these days, as well.