I think that Houston is a fabulous model of urban growth that is completely irrelevant to OKC, and it won’t work for us. People complain about Houston’s sprawl and blame the no zoning regulations, but what people don’t realize (because people never go inside the loop, shame on them) is that the Inner Loop is gentrifying and being built up faster than the suburbs are sprawling. Inside the loop is an incredibly urban, sustainable community where people know each other.

The model just doesn’t apply to OKC. We’re not a metro area with 6 million residents, a downtown that rivals downtown Chicago, an inner city that rivals LA’s entire west side, and so on. We don’t have incredible growth and market demand out the roof that could even make the no zoning regulations work. Instead what we have are zoning regulations that prevent urban development (in Houston you can develop a real loft, you don’t have to have a setback in the burbs, and there is no parking requirement to my knowledge).

Ew. If they think by copying what Houston has done, they are solidifying their position on the Convention Center issue, then they are dead wrong.

Well it is pretty clear from reading this that the Chamber wants the Convention Center south of the Ford Center because they believe it will bring life to the park. Maybe they can use pictures of the Park instead of Bricktown when they are campaigning for MAPS 4…
So, basically, the emphasis is on what’s best for the Park, even if hurts parts of downtown that we already have. This seems incredibly short sited.

So how long before we read a story that the City is going to hire ANOTHER consultant to study the site selection for the CC. Any chance that this consultant will come up with reasons why the “Chamber and City’s site” is the best one???

One last thing, Cynthia Reed is quoted as saying that they kept the HOK study secrect because it was too “more detail is needed”, yet was there ANY detail in the MAPS 3 vote?
Come on Chamber, this whole deal is a joke!
Hey Mayor, nice consensus building…

I can see where they’re thinking (and lack of urban understanding) is on what’s best for the park, thinking that the convention center will be a “good” thing for the park?

Reality is that the convention center will be a negative impact as a superblock structure wherever it goes. That’s why I’ve been arguing against putting it next to the park, because it will have a bad impact on the park. It also has an economic opportunity cost because the convention center is a public facility that hogs prime park frontage. Otherwise there would be million-dollar condos that could be developed along the east edge of the park. I’d take that over a convention center any day.

Captcha: familiar newsman

Is it even the Chamber’s job to advocate a convention center site? If so, with 2 studies that show it’s the wrong site, are they qualified experts to argue they are right?

They “intentionally” withheld the HOK report, but yet they promoted their CC site in all the MAPS 3 commercials.

Have they lost their focus on what they are suppose to do for our great City?

With all the positive things being said around the Country right now about Okc( which is what I think their mission should be), it would be a shame if their arrogance and lack of willing to listen to the business community put a black eye on our City!!!!

People need to live near or around the park with small retail and entertainment. People who go to conventions need to be near local businesses like in Bricktown so they can spend money. Short walking distance from convention center to local business will allow the guests more time to spend money.

Hey Steve, you ask “At what point did Houston become a model for good development and zoning?”

A solid case can be made that Houston regulates land use almost as much as cities with zoning laws, albeit through other means. I found this academic paper that explores these issues that relate to Houston specifically – it’s a really good read, and counter-intuitive at times:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=837244

captcha: evidence borrow (nice!)

I think our original convention center is next to our existing park…and the convention center is like a vast wasteland that causes the park to be disconnected from city life. Those who attend conventions leave the building in search of food and/or shopping. The park should be geared to downtown employees, residents and special events.

This is off the subject, but I’m wondering how the existing railroad will factor in to the plans.