120 new Brady District Lofts + retail

[dsjeffries]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

I'm with Artist on this one.  120 had already started moving on the deal with a great idea.  Now it will fit in nicely with the ballpark and really jump start development around it.

It seems like poor dealing to attempt to screw someone who was willing to gamble on the area without the stadium.  It seems they want control for financial reasons.  The rent from the properties they control will help fund the venture and now that the stadium is going in they can command more rent.

Just doesn't seem right to me.

It doesn't seem right because it isn't right.  Why would the city try to curtail efforts already underway to build something that is highly desirable? By trying to squash out Will, they're sending a big message to anyone else who might have considered developments around the ballpark: stay away.

I really don't understand why they're making it difficult (by whatever means they're using) for someone to put in the very thing they WANT to go in the area...  It's a really self-defeating process. Do you WANT the area to succeed?

Someone already showed the imagination and willingness to take a risk, BEFORE the ballpark deal, and you're trying to stop that? WHY?

Sans details, though, it's hard to tell what's going on.

I hope Will succeeds--I think he's got the full support of everyone on this forum.

[SXSW]

Why can't they control all the OTHER properties around 120 Brady?  Having 120 Brady actually get built within the next 1-2 years, even without the ballpark finished, can really jumpstart other "city-controlled" developments.  If this was some suburban-style apt. complex with a big parking lot at Brady & Elgin I could understand but it's EXACTLY what the City (and most Tulsans) want for the ballpark neighborhood...

[TheArtist]

The more I learn about the way it appears the city is treating these developers, the worse it sounds. Though I havent heard all sides of the story, it sounds like TDA "those who are supposed to be helping and making it easier" Is now coming up with new requests, asking these developers to do things differently than other developers have had to do in the past. And from what it sounds like, has made it next to impossible for anyone that isnt super wealthy to ever develop in downtown. If they are going to require, from now on, what they are suddenly asking these developers to now do,,, it will kill downtown. Only big money mega projects could ever get built. But we all know we need the small and average developments to make this a real downtown. It seems as though TDA has changed the rules in order to thwart this development. I think these developers only have until early Sept, to get things done before their agreement with TDA runs out, which would be no problem under the usual circumstances, the way its always worked before,,,, but it looks like they are throwing up roadblocks in order to make it difficult or next to impossible for them to be able to get what they "now" need to get done in time.

Again, dont know the whole story, but its really sounding bad. If its true, its probably the worst abuse of power in this city that I have ever heard of. Just has me floored.

[sgrizzle]

Ironically TDA spends decades trying to get people to buy some of their property and when someone finally wants to, They suddlnly want take-back privileges. I haven't heard the whole story but I think it would be a big boon to get "cranes in the air" on a private development ASAP. If you want them to meet certain height/aesthetic requirements, fine, but let them build.

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

Ironically TDA spends decades trying to get people to buy some of their property and when someone finally wants to, They suddlnly want take-back privileges. I haven't heard the whole story but I think it would be a big boon to get "cranes in the air" on a private development ASAP. If you want them to meet certain height/aesthetic requirements, fine, but let them build.

That makes perfect sense. Therefore it can't possibly happen.[]

[PonderInc]

This sounds like exactly the sort of project that is needed!  And I love the idea of a local developer (known for quality infill projects that are senstive to the character of a neighborhood) being the one to break ground first.  Tulsans building Tulsa is the way to go!  Not sure what is going on with the TDA, but they're going to lose all credibility if they act with prejudice against the good faith efforts of a developer with a strong track record of smart development in Tulsa...and a sound plan for success.

Currently, people in Tulsa worry (as shown in the recent PLANiTULSA survey of over 1,000 residents) that the comp plan will be "too influenced by people who have a lot of money." (70% of respondents agreed with this statement.)  I certainly hope and believe that this concern proves to be FALSE.  However, if certain members of the TDA are stonewalling this project, it only reinforces this belief.  It adds to the sense of fatalism that hurts Tulsa, by killing off the "can do" attitude of local people who care...and, given the chance, will work to be part of the solution.

I am certain that all parties involved only want what's best for Tulsa.  I hope that everyone will be able to look at the bigger picture and work collaboratively.  It's short-sighted not to.  

The worst possible outcome would be to discourage local Tulsans--people with great ideas and the means and passion to get them done--from getting involved and being part of the solution.  (I've seen enough of what out-of-state investors do for downtown Tulsa.  I like what the "little guys" are doing. And I want to see more!)

I liked a quote from John Fregonese at the TulsaNow/PLANiTULSA event: "You should make it easy for people to do the right thing; and make it hard for people to do the wrong thing."

Another great concept I like is from Alan Hart, who said "Don't think in terms of 'either/or'...think in terms of 'both/and'..."  This sort of project would only contribute to downtown, the community, the ballpark...and any future developments that would occur nearby.  

TDA...are you listening?

[OurTulsa]

This so totally sucks for Will.  I understand the land across the street has become much more valuable to the City with the announcement of the ballpark but a deal is a deal.

http://cfc.ktul.com/videoondemand.cfm?id=19586

[TheLofts@120]

Good afternoon everyone.  It's been a while since I've posted on our project and felt it was time to fill you in on the goings on that has come to afflict our proposed development.

As many of you know, after announcing our project and our effort to work with the TDA; the Mayor, her staff and the 'donors' to the new Driller Ballpark announced they were moving the ballpark site across the street from us on what was contracted through the TDA to be the Greenwood Chamber development.

Since that announcement, our efforts have been met with every possible opposition from not only the Mayor and her staff but by the TDA themselves.  On April 17, the TDA Board of commissioners created Resolution #5443 that granted us additional time to perform due diligence and also directed TDA staff to enter into contract negotiations.  Every attempt to contact the TDA attorney through staff as directed was met with no answer by that attorney.  We were removed from the agenda at June's TDA meeting without so much as a phone call to inform us as to such.  We did make it onto the July agenda only to be told by the TDA attorney that he would not enter into negotiations as he was lacking sufficient information...information that had already been provided to TDA staff well prior to this meeting. We agreed to provide one additional piece of information that was requested at that meeting so we could move forward with negotiations.  

To that end, our attorney drafted a contract using TDA's format and presented it for review and comment.  We received no answer until yesterday when our attorney received an email from TDA Chairman Carl Bracy.

July 29, 2008



Stephen A. Schuller, Esq.
GABLE & GOTWALS
1100 ONEOK Plaza
One West Fifth Street
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103-4217

Re: Tulsa Development Authority Resolution 5423

Dear Mr. Schuller:

   We are in receipt of your correspondence dated July 18, 2008.  As you know, the City of Tulsa, and several private donors contributing more than $30 million to a public trust, are developing a master plan for a national class Double A baseball park and associated amenities in the Greenwood and Brady Districts.  This master plan incorporates the property in which your clients have expressed an interest.  The city believes that the development of a coordinated high-quality, arts, entertainment, educational, and mixed-use development surrounding the ballpark is vital.

   At the present time, the land under contract with the Greenwood Community Development Corporation has been set aside as a prospective site of the ball park.  We have not seen any plans yet that specify the precise limits and any data concerning the proposals comprising the Master Plan.  We therefore have no knowledge of what other properties may be affected or included in the Plan.  The ball park may require a larger site or a complete change of land use may be recommended.

   After further review and conferring with our attorney, Darven Brown, it is my personal feeling that the Tulsa Development Authority should proceed no further in connection with the marketing activities of any of the property in the vicinity of the baseball site location until we have full information concerning the finalized plans adopted by the city.  While the Tulsa Development Authority is a separate entity from the city we have always conducted our business in a manner that we consider to be in the city's best interest.  That being the case, it would seem to be unwise for the Tulsa Development Authority to proceed further with any negotiations with your client at this time.  After all, the city has the right of eminent domain and can take whatever properties become necessary for its municipal purposes.  

   Because of the foregoing, I feel that it would be in the best interest of the public and the City of Tulsa to terminate any negotiations and cancel the Resolution now in place.  I have asked that this item be placed on the agenda for the regular meeting of the Tulsa Development Authority to be held at 8:30 o'clock a.m., on August 7, at which time you may wish to appear.

               Yours truly,

               S/Carl Bracy, Chairman

xc:   Mr. Leon Davis
   Mr. Hurst Swiggart
   Mr. George Shahadi
   Mr. John D. Clayman
   Mr. Melvin R. Gilliam
   Ms. Paula Bryant-Ellis


It has always been our intention to create a high quality mixed-use development that would benefit this area of downtown and encourage additional economic growth and development in the area, something we thought the TDA was created to help do by "promoting the revitalization of declining areas and encouraging private reinvestment and economic growth through rehabilitation and redevelopment."

With the proposed ballpark, of which we are an avid supporter (going so far as to be the last speaker in favor of carrying our share of the burden of an assessment to bring the stadium downtown at the city council meeting), we then looked at our project scope in the hopes of maximizing the economic impact we could have in the area.  To that end, we brought in a 120-room hotel development that would compliment our building's structure and overall look while still providing space for off street parking for the 42 loft residential tenants as well as the hotel.  Further plans then called for a rooftop pool to support the limited service national flag hotel brand as well as supply 6,000 sf for a new national food/entertainment concept that would be new to the market.  

Our goal is to bring a high density, high quality mixed use development that would offer several things Tulsa has never seen before in terms of amenities, services, and branding.  We feel this is the proper economic engine that can jump start other private development in and around the area and help grow our downtown.  

Today it would seem that the 'donors' want control of this surrounding area to benefit not just any developer but only those developers they see as benefiting their own goals and agendas and quite honestly, as a citizen, a businessman and a developer interested in helping this city grow, I find that incredibly bothersome and arrogant on the part of these wealthy donors.  

The TDA is an authority that was created to perform its goals and do so in keeping with what is in the best interest of the public and the citizens of Tulsa.  I ask you as interested citizens that want to see downtown grow, what is in the best interest of a city demanding growth and encouraging development than a proposal to develop what we have identified and will add to the employment numbers, the sales tax revenues, ad-valorem base and diversity within the area that is so desperately needed?

We will be pursuing all available options at our disposal to encourage the TDA to do the right thing here.  Embrace the individual developer that is trying to do the right thing and not allow us to be pushed out by the special interests behind the ballpark trust's plan for surrouding mixed use development.  

There are many variables to this story, which I am more than happy to share in more detail should you be interested.  I would like to close by encouraging anyone that believes we are on the right path and supports the individual developer to email the TDA and the Mayor in support of our development.  

Beyond what is happening to our project potential, make your voices heard so that this doesnt happen to the next developer that wants to help this city grow.  

Thank you, I will keep you posted on any additional developments.  You can reach me at 902-0760 if you have any questions.

Will Wilkins
120 Development Group, LLC/Novus Homes LLC


Maoyr Kathy Taylor - mayor@cityoftulsa.org

Carl Bracy - carl.bracy.acfx@statefarm.com

George Shahadi - george.shahadi@williams.com

John Clayman - jclayman@fdlaw.com

Melvin Gilliam  - mgil070995@aol.com

Darven Brown - dbrown1925@sbcglobal.net

[SXSW]

The City wants the land to line the pockets of its selected developers, while those not "in the circle" cannot proceed?  Wow.  I will email the mayor and Carl Bracy and express my discontent with their decision.  If I were you I would go to the local TV stations with your story.  I would say the TW but they're part of the "circle"...

[Townsend]

quote:Originally posted by OurTulsa

This so totally sucks for Will.  I understand the land across the street has become much more valuable to the City with the announcement of the ballpark but a deal is a deal.

http://cfc.ktul.com/videoondemand.cfm?id=19586

If the TDA F's him it will be interesting to see who gets the land and their relation to the "powers that be".

I'm hoping the local news coverage will help him.

[Renaissance]

This is pretty damned outrageous behavior by the City.  This is the crap that chases away well-intentioned developers and keeps them from ever coming back.

[dsjeffries]

This is a perfect example of why people in Tulsa have expressed discontent with those who have all the money.  This is outrageous, and I hope that Fregonese & Associates takes notice of this.

It's absolutely disgusting, and I'll be crafting some letters to the Mayor, TDA et al tonight.

I'm appalled.

[cannon_fodder]

Well said all.

A developer was willing to move forward on an uncertain project in HOPES of the area picking up.  The area looks like it will pick up, so the city shuts down the projects - it makes no sense at all.  I thought we WANTED dense high quality and mixed use development in that area and in that area fast.

It would seem this project could begin construction before the stadium opens.  Nothing else will even be proposed until construction is underway... if then.  I imagine such behavior will scare away many developers with the feeling that they have to be "in" TO do business in Tulsa.

So the city enters yet ANOTHER real estate market.  Quick City Hall, go market the area for developers.  Hopefully with better success than the Tower Apartment site, the old city hall, or the other city properties abandoned for the WilTel building.  You know, the ones that are sitting empty.

I will be sending my letter.  This is not only bad for the developer in this instance, by for any future development in the city.  The ONLY reason to deny this project at this point is for others to profit by it. Otherwise, it makes no sense to summarily reject it.

[Renaissance]

Just realized what may be going on here.  120 Development saw an opportunity to beef up their development by adding a small, nationally-flagged hotel to their project.

quote:Originally posted by TheLofts@120


With the proposed ballpark, of which we are an avid supporter (going so far as to be the last speaker in favor of carrying our share of the burden of an assessment to bring the stadium downtown at the city council meeting), we then looked at our project scope in the hopes of maximizing the economic impact we could have in the area.  To that end, we brought in a 120-room hotel development that would compliment our building's structure and overall look while still providing space for off street parking for the 42 loft residential tenants as well as the hotel.  Further plans then called for a rooftop pool to support the limited service national flag hotel brand as well as supply 6,000 sf for a new national food/entertainment concept that would be new to the market.  

My guess is there's some other development group out there with closer TDA ties already planning to bring in a larger hotel but on a later timeframe.  This "somebody" was depending on also getting a national flag for their development, but whatever hotel chain they were talking to probably preconditioned their participation on exclusive association with the ballpark.  Another national hotel brand opening catty-corner to the stadium was going to submarine this idea.  So TDA is now blocking it.

Just a theory.  There are a million and one possibilities.  But 120 Lofts is getting railroaded, and we need to find out why.  This may be how the town has done business in the past, but that way sucks, and it has to change.

[Rico]

^
Hmmmm... Nice lawsuit material.
 

The ins and outs of the Mayor's office business dealings have always been far less than transparent..

Put the questions to several of the folks that wear two hats..

You know.... The folks that are on say... the Economic Development Team with the City of Tulsa.... and also are connected to TulsaNow.

Folks that are part of the PlaniTulsa venture and also connected to TulsaNow.


They might be able to shed some light on the actions taken so far.

My guess... this will be blamed on lack of communication, and understanding the authority of; the various panels and boards....
None of which will be connected too high up the chain of command.
[}:)]