REI

[heironymouspasparagus]

I am shocked and angry.  Did I just gauge the public sentiment totally wrong on this? I would say 90% of the people  I know are against this development going in that park.  This travesty has made me more angry than anything in recent memory.

How long have you lived here??   We go for the lowest common denominator WAY too often...  I am not shocked at all.  Angry, yes!

GT is just another sellout - like I was afraid of in earlier posts.  And Anna voted yes on this??  Geez...that does surprise me, I think.

[sgrizzle]

How long have you lived here??   We go for the lowest common denominator WAY too often...  I am not shocked at all.  Angry, yes!

GT is just another sellout - like I was afraid of in earlier posts.  And Anna voted yes on this??  Geez...that does surprise me, I think.

GT isn't a sellout. He was handed a turd by Porcelain Pigeon and Company. Deal was 90% done when he came into office. It's a bit late to talk about protection nine months down the road and you shouldn't be surprised when a baby comes out.

This is a result of YEARS of work by various city agencies, and in the end GT got the various stakeholders to agree to a compromise. If you don't want the city selling park land for retail or financing an airline, then maybe the various city authorities shouldn't have control over City assets.

[SXSW]

GT isn't a sellout. He was handed a turd by Porcelain Pigeon and Company. Deal was 90% done when he came into office. It's a bit late to talk about protection nine months down the road and you shouldn't be surprised when a baby comes out.

This is a result of YEARS of work by various city agencies, and in the end GT got the various stakeholders to agree to a compromise. If you don't want the city selling park land for retail or financing an airline, then maybe the various city authorities shouldn't have control over City assets.

GT could've came out and not supported it like Blake Ewing publicly did.  I don't like that he changed his stance after being against this before he was mayor.  He also went against the will of the people of Tulsa, who overwhelmingly spoke out against this.  From a 6/1/16 TW article:

As far as proposed development along 71st Street and Riverside Drive at Helmerich Park that would conceivably have Recreational Equipment Inc. as its anchor tenant, Bynum said the citizens of Tulsa, who have made a large investment over the years in maintaining that land, should play a larger role in what happens.

"I'm not going to say today what I think about it one way or the other because I want to hear what the citizens of Tulsa have to say about it," Bynum said. "People have spent a whole lot more time than I have studying this and looking at it."

[sgrizzle]

GT could've came out and not supported it like Blake Ewing publicly did.  I don't like that he changed his stance after being against this before he was mayor.  He also went against the will of the people of Tulsa, who overwhelmingly spoke out against this.  From a 6/1/16 TW article:

The vast majority of the City was "Meh" to "Uninterested"

Those speaking for it were less vocal than those opposed, but those who don't care far outweighed either.

This was not a black and white issue, and the Mayor and Council were each highly conflicted on the subject.

Frankly, when the City is broke they can't afford to turn down new money and opt for being sued for at least a million instead to please a few angry people.

[SXSW]

Frankly, when the City is broke they can't afford to turn down new money and opt for being sued for at least a million instead to please a few angry people.

Then why get such a rotten deal?  This site is worth 3x what this developer is paying for it.  It's ridiculous.  If we absolutely had to sell park land then at least get the best deal or propose a ground lease instead of a sale which is permanent.

Sorry but GT has lost my support over this.  He may be young with some good ideas, and is light years better than Dewey, but he's still part of the same tired establishment that's run Tulsa (into the ground).

[sgrizzle]

If we absolutely had to sell park land then at least get the best deal

The park land has been for sale for years. this was literally the only offer.

The capitalist view would be that it is worth exactly what was paid for it, $1.6M plus a bunch of City-imposed concessions like extra parking.

[TulsaGoldenHurriCAN]

The park land has been for sale for years. this was literally the only offer.

The capitalist view would be that it is worth exactly what was paid for it, $1.6M plus a bunch of City-imposed concessions like extra parking.

Supposedly the RFP was not advertised well when it was put out in 2013. During the townhall meetings about this, a local business owner said he inquired about the land in 2013 and was told it wasn't for sale. We have no idea what the market value is because it was never on the market, but based on nearby land, it should be several million. Certainly it should be more than "virtually free" which is what this developer is getting it when you include what the city is putting into infrastructure.

Any business person with the resources would buy that lot for the price they're getting it for. It is cheaper than an auction price. Even considering the concessions, it is a ridiculous bargain and sets a terrible precedent.

The counsel and GT should've listened to the citizens of Tulsa and dealt with the lawsuits and then found a developer willing to pay more OR with a much better plan (could have ended up with far more money, even minus the lawsuit cost).

[Conan71]

Supposedly the RFP was not advertised well when it was put out in 2013. During the townhall meetings about this, a local business owner said he inquired about the land in 2013 and was told it wasn't for sale. We have no idea what the market value is because it was never on the market, but based on nearby land, it should be several million. Certainly it should be more than "virtually free" which is what this developer is getting it when you include what the city is putting into infrastructure.

Any business person with the resources would buy that lot for the price they're getting it for. It is cheaper than an auction price. Even considering the concessions, it is a ridiculous bargain and sets a terrible precedent.

The counsel and GT should've listened to the citizens of Tulsa and dealt with the lawsuits and then found a developer willing to pay more OR with a much better plan (could have ended up with far more money, even minus the lawsuit cost).

I will agree that this turd was waiting for GT and he was trying to make the best of a bad situation. I do find it odd the council approved this when public sentiment seemed overwhelmingly against the development or at the least, the nature of the development (i.e. Sub-par price for the land or the monolithic appearing renderings which did not please most anyone).

Perhaps this was a well-orchestrated plan by the city for cover so they can say they approved the plan and they are assuming the Immel, et. al. suit will shut it down.  With the narrow margin this passed the council, that's my conspiracy theory anyhow.

Somehow it was apparently better known when RPA put the RFP out on site which became the Blue Rose.  It's not like there's not been a lot of local interest in developing along the river in the past.

I think someone had mentioned on this thread in the past that land was selling in the immediate area for about $600K/acre (perhaps it was more) and I would imagine that was land on the opposite side of Riverside.  Clay Bird's vocation is as an appraiser.  He damn well knew that land was worth far more than the sweetheart deal that developer got.  I wouldn't be surprised to find out later on he's gotten a cushy job in the private sector for cozying up to dreck developers.

[heironymouspasparagus]

The park land has been for sale for years. this was literally the only offer.

The capitalist view would be that it is worth exactly what was paid for it, $1.6M plus a bunch of City-imposed concessions like extra parking.

That is exactly why government should NOT be "capitalist".  Nor run like a "business".  If there are no other bids, and the one is unsatisfactory - not even close to 'comparables' - then don't do the deal.  Simple.

[cannon_fodder]

I had a thought yesterday - as I was shopping at the going out of business sale at Gordmans, right next to the going out of business Sears near 21st and Yale and down the street from where construction is starting on the BMX USA headquarters. You know, right behind the acres of soon to be un-utilized surface parking and a couple of miles from  the nearest sporting goods store. Come on, the place that's a few miles away from the nearest bike shop.  You know the place I'm talking about?

Now, I know nothing about the site or lease options, but here's my thought:  that location would be awesome for an REI.  I'm guessing they could negotiate a sweet lease now that the landlord suddenly has a glut of open space.  There is enough space inside and out that you could put in demonstration areas of whatever kind, a small bike track or mountain bike trail in the sea of parking lots even.  Or a creative developer could land the REI and then put indoor Tennis Courts and/or racquetball courts in the upper level of the old Sears or whatever other services might compliment an REI.

There isn't a direct connection to the trail system, but a concerted effort could remedy that fairly easily given that there are bike "share the roads" nearby that could be (and should be) converted to bike lanes - those get you to the University of Tulsa and 3rd street to downtown (to the Katy Trail and Sand Springs), or to 36th Street, Brookside and the river trails (and on to Jenks, the Creek Trail and Broken Arrow...).

Tons of parking.  Quick access from the BA or from 244.  BMX HQ across the street.  Utilizing what looks like it will be empty big box spaces.  And a chance to do something really cool while avoiding the current controversy.

[sgrizzle]

Now, I know nothing about the site or lease options, but here's my thought:  that location would be awesome for an REI.  I'm guessing they could negotiate a sweet lease now that the landlord suddenly has a glut of open space.  There is enough space inside and out that you could put in demonstration areas of whatever kind, a small bike track or mountain bike trail in the sea of parking lots even.  Or a creative developer could land the REI and then put indoor Tennis Courts and/or racquetball courts in the upper level of the old Sears or whatever other services might compliment an REI.

Thats Sears isn't closing because it got too many customers.

[BKDotCom]

Thats Sears isn't closing because it got too many customers.

Relevance?

[dbacksfan 2.0]

I had a thought yesterday - as I was shopping at the going out of business sale at Gordmans, right next to the going out of business Sears near 21st and Yale and down the street from where construction is starting on the BMX USA headquarters. You know, right behind the acres of soon to be un-utilized surface parking and a couple of miles from  the nearest sporting goods store. Come on, the place that's a few miles away from the nearest bike shop.  You know the place I'm talking about?

Now, I know nothing about the site or lease options, but here's my thought:  that location would be awesome for an REI.  I'm guessing they could negotiate a sweet lease now that the landlord suddenly has a glut of open space.  There is enough space inside and out that you could put in demonstration areas of whatever kind, a small bike track or mountain bike trail in the sea of parking lots even.  Or a creative developer could land the REI and then put indoor Tennis Courts and/or racquetball courts in the upper level of the old Sears or whatever other services might compliment an REI.

There isn't a direct connection to the trail system, but a concerted effort could remedy that fairly easily given that there are bike "share the roads" nearby that could be (and should be) converted to bike lanes - those get you to the University of Tulsa and 3rd street to downtown (to the Katy Trail and Sand Springs), or to 36th Street, Brookside and the river trails (and on to Jenks, the Creek Trail and Broken Arrow...).

Tons of parking.  Quick access from the BA or from 244.  BMX HQ across the street.  Utilizing what looks like it will be empty big box spaces.  And a chance to do something really cool while avoiding the current controversy.

The thing is REI  has nothing to do with tennis or BMX. They sell helmets, but that's  it that can be used for BMX. They are mountain bike and road bike people and don't deal in any stick and ball sports, shooting/fishing/hunting, so they won't have beach volley ball, tennis or fly casting classes or demos.

[sgrizzle]

Relevance?

No corporation goes "there are two failing stores there, very little successful retail and a lower-income area of town, I think that is the best place to put our only location within 200 miles."

[Conan71]

Thats Sears isn't closing because it got too many customers.

Sears is closing 150 units between their Sears and K-Mart brands.  I'm surprised Sears has made it as long as they have.  They just suck.  Gordman's filed for bankruptcy.  These two coming vacancies have nothing to do with the location but rather they are more victims of the retail apocalypse of 2017. 

If REI is supposedly such a destination retailer, it shouldn't matter where in Tulsa it is located.  In fact, the Fairgrounds is one of Tulsa's leading tourist attractions.  It would actually be somewhat intuitive to put the REI in close proximity to a tourist destination.  As an aside, REI has literally no need to locate along the Arkansas river.  I seriously doubt many of their existing stores are located adjacent to a trail system.  I am aware of them having some short trails for demos at some stores, but that is about it.