Riverwalk Phase II

[sgrizzle]

quote:
Waterfront property: Jenks project part 2


It took two years of delays and extra planning, but work on the second phase of RiverWalk Crossing is set to begin within days.

Lots of construction is involved -- not only for the planned 125,000 square feet of retail and office space to complement the existing 110,000 square feet, but developer Jerry Gordon said he's also building a 207-unit luxury apartment complex and a 50-unit, six-story condominium building in the same area.

Gordon said the multiple living options aren't a gamble for the area. Instead, they're in demand.

"We've had a lot of requests from people wanting to live here," he said.

Earth-moving for the $50 million project begins next week, with construction to follow in six weeks. The retail space and apartment complex, dubbed RiverWalk Village, should be ready for its first tenants by June. Construction on the condos, called RiverWalk Lofts, should begin in three months.

Much of the delay arose from funding issues, as original financier Stillwater National Bank dropped out of the project, only to be replaced in February by American National
Bank of Texas.

After that, Gordon decided to refine the plans. Though he initially intended to almost exclusively seek new retail tenants for phase two, many calls from interested restaurants changed his mind.

"RiverWalk really became known as an entertainment venue, so we've been seeking the same mix of restaurants and retail we've had in the first phase," he said.

Gordon said he has signed multiple letters of intent but hasn't finalized any leases yet. Though he said he could not name specific tenants, he said he's courting smaller stores, a nightclub, a sporting goods store and a candy store, among others. The national restaurants include a steakhouse, a barbecue place and a sandwich shop.

The area will feature an additional amphitheater, allowing multiple events simultaneously, Gordon said. But unlike the existing amphitheater, the new one has a theatrical design with a backdrop and dressing rooms.

Though some loft apartments were originally planned above the new retail buildings, the plans have now shifted back to upstairs offices, much like phase one.

The original offices did take longer to fill than the retail space, but Gordon said demand continued to build even after they were full.

"It was a show-and-tell deal," he said. "People didn't want to come in until they could see what it could do."

The retail and office buildings in phase two will share the same look as the existing space, but they'll consist of five smaller buildings. Gordon said he heard many complaints from people having to walk to reach the entrances of the long buildings in phase one.

Gordon has contracted the Oklahoma City office of Sperry Van Ness for retail and office leasing, and the company has moved a full-time associate to the RiverWalk Crossing offices.

The planned loft apartments moved north to their own five buildings and grew almost tenfold from 22 to 207. Gordon said the three- and four-story buildings will share some of the same natural colors as the retail areas but sport other hues as well as numerous balconies and a vertical orientation.

"It'll have a village-effect feel to it," he said.

Units in RiverWalk Village will range in size from 866 to 1,337 square feet in one- or two-bedroom floorplans, though Gordon hasn't yet set rental prices.

He said the city of Jenks could use more apartments. "There's not a lot of rental property in Jenks."

Finally, Gordon is planning RiverWalk Lofts in the same area as RiverWalk Village. The 50 condos will share a six-story building. Floors two through six will house 10 condos each, with a parking garage on the first floor.

Unlike the rest of the area, RiverWalk Village will have a unique look.

"It'll be a bit more contemporary in design, with lots of glass and angles," he said. "It's kind of a 'Jetsons' look."

Gordon hopes to sell the condos, which range in size from 1,506 to 2,260 square feet, starting at $250,000. The designs should be finalized within three months.

He has already begun pre-leasing for the condos and apartments.

The village and the lofts will share a clubhouse featuring a business center, media room, meeting rooms and a pool overlooking the river.

As part of phase two, RiverWalk Crossing will gain approximately 2,000 parking spaces, not counting parking for the lofts and the village. Gordon said he's working to purchase two San Francisco-style trolleys to shuttle people from area to area.

He said he's not concerned with a proposal by Rick Huffman, CEO of HCW Development, for a $500 million mixed-use project with retail, residential and office space over 100 acres between the 11th Street and 21st Street bridges on the west side of the Arkansas River.

"If they can pull it off, it'll be a great deal for Jenks and for the RiverWalk area," Gordon said, "though we'll be up and running long before they will."

From:
http://tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?articleID=070911_238_E1_hWate57366

[sgrizzle]

Sounds like his plans are now LESS big-box and more dense by far.

[swake]

The clock is ticking for any development momentum to be left for the Tulsa part of the river.

Jenks will get it's dam.

The Creeks are already pledging $5 million to the river, and can pledge more. The Jenks dam only needs $25 million to get done. And to add another $15 to $20 million to the $220 million River District TIFF in Jenks is easy. The city of Jenks and the Creek Nation will get it done.

Tulsa has already wisely developed most of that part of the river with a some restaurants that ignore the river, a Kum and Go and some gated subdivisions. So there will be a lot of benefit there

Still want to vote no?

[Oil Capital]

quote:Originally posted by swake

The clock is ticking for any development momentum to be left for the Tulsa part of the river.

Jenks will get it's dam.

The Creeks are already pledging $5 million to the river, and can pledge more. The Jenks dam only needs $25 million to get done. And to add another $15 to $20 million to the $220 million River District TIFF in Jenks is easy. The city of Jenks and the Creek Nation will get it done.

Tulsa has already wisely developed most of that part of the river with a some restaurants that ignore the river, a Kum and Go and some gated subdivisions. So there will be a lot of benefit there

Still want to vote no?

Actually, even more so.

This announcement proves beyond a reasonable doubt that quality development can occur without spending hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer money.  If it can be done in Jenks, why can't it be done inside the Tulsa city limits??  (Not to get too much off subject, but if memory serves me correctly, it seems that a good part of Tulsa's lack of development is because the River Parks Authority has historically been absolutely anti-development;  any truth to that?  If so couldn't we save a BUNCH of money by just getting some new commissioners on the River Parks Authority?)

[Renaissance]

quote:Originally posted by Oil Capital

quote:Originally posted by swake

The clock is ticking for any development momentum to be left for the Tulsa part of the river.

Jenks will get it's dam.

The Creeks are already pledging $5 million to the river, and can pledge more. The Jenks dam only needs $25 million to get done. And to add another $15 to $20 million to the $220 million River District TIFF in Jenks is easy. The city of Jenks and the Creek Nation will get it done.

Tulsa has already wisely developed most of that part of the river with a some restaurants that ignore the river, a Kum and Go and some gated subdivisions. So there will be a lot of benefit there

Still want to vote no?

Actually, even more so.

This announcement proves beyond a reasonable doubt that quality development can occur without spending hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer money.  If it can be done in Jenks, why can't it be done inside the Tulsa city limits??  (Not to get too much off subject, but if memory serves me correctly, it seems that a good part of Tulsa's lack of development is because the River Parks Authority has historically been absolutely anti-development;  any truth to that?  If so couldn't we save a BUNCH of money by just getting some new commissioners on the River Parks Authority?)

It proves without a doubt that developers will go with the path of least resistance and least cost.

That path does not currently run through Tulsa.  It runs through cheap pasture land and good ole boy mayors.

If you want that to change, one option - the most available, immediate option - is to vote YES for the river plan.  

ON TOPic:  This thing looks great.  It's a harbinger of things to come along the river banks.  Hopefully along the river banks in Tulsa, although if not, certainly in the 'burbs.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by Oil Capital

quote:Originally posted by swake

The clock is ticking for any development momentum to be left for the Tulsa part of the river.

Jenks will get it's dam.

The Creeks are already pledging $5 million to the river, and can pledge more. The Jenks dam only needs $25 million to get done. And to add another $15 to $20 million to the $220 million River District TIFF in Jenks is easy. The city of Jenks and the Creek Nation will get it done.

Tulsa has already wisely developed most of that part of the river with a some restaurants that ignore the river, a Kum and Go and some gated subdivisions. So there will be a lot of benefit there

Still want to vote no?

Actually, even more so.

This announcement proves beyond a reasonable doubt that quality development can occur without spending hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer money.  If it can be done in Jenks, why can't it be done inside the Tulsa city limits??  (Not to get too much off subject, but if memory serves me correctly, it seems that a good part of Tulsa's lack of development is because the River Parks Authority has historically been absolutely anti-development;  any truth to that?  If so couldn't we save a BUNCH of money by just getting some new commissioners on the River Parks Authority?)

The RPA is against private development on the park land. Nothing done in Jenks was on park land, it was on unwanted floodplains. Jim Inhoffe gave up prime real estate to pay for Zink Lake and now Tulsa needs it back to be able to develop the west bank. He claims that giving away developable land to build a pool is progress for the river but now we're paying for it later. With interest. Besides, last I checked the planned projects are 70% private funded, the 20% is going to things like trails, lighting and infrastructure which isn't getting built in Jenks either.

[swake]

There certainly has been public tax money spent in Jenks, and a lot more is about to be spent. Jenks gave infrastructure and half the needed land to Riverwalk Crossing, and there's been something like $20 million spent on the Aquarium and more on the new pedestrian bridge, street and trail projects in the area.

With the TIFF for the River District Jenks is working on something more than a quarter of a BILLION dollars in public money going to these projects.

No tax money in Jenks my donkey.

That about as accurate as the Branson Landing people not wanting any tax money for a "Tulsa Landing" (they want a LOT)

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by swake

There certainly has been public tax money spent in Jenks, and a lot more is about to be spent. Jenks gave infrastructure and half the needed land to Riverwalk Crossing, and there's been something like $20 million spent on the Aquarium and more on the new pedestrian bridge, street and trail projects in the area.

With the TIFF for the River District Jenks is working on something more than a quarter of a BILLION dollars in public money going to these projects.

No tax money in Jenks my donkey.

That about as accurate as the Branson Landing people not wanting any tax money for a "Tulsa Landing" (they want a LOT)

True, that means Jenks would be spending as much on 1 mile of riverbanks as tulsa wants to spend from Sand Springs to Jenks.

As I understand it, if the River vote fails, Tulsa Landing will go after a TIFF and then we won't reap any rewards from the river development for years. I'd rather pay up front.

[waterboy]

It's a nice looking expansion. Funny that a Tulsa area bank turned them down for the financing. They had to go to out of state? Sad.

[sauerkraut]

I'd them to focus more on the jogging trails.

[cannon_fodder]

Waterboy:  I know an officer at SNB.  As I understand it, the deal would have put them too far invested in that single project.  Having all the financing outstanding for Phase I they did not want to over commit as Phase II was moving forward faster than expected.  For a regional bank, funding the entire project (which is speculative in nature) would expose them to a concentrated risk.

It is too bad they went out of state, they neglected several other local alternatives... or at least chose not to do business with them for whatever reason.

[Oil Capital]

quote:Originally posted by swake

There certainly has been public tax money spent in Jenks, and a lot more is about to be spent. Jenks gave infrastructure and half the needed land to Riverwalk Crossing, and there's been something like $20 million spent on the Aquarium and more on the new pedestrian bridge, street and trail projects in the area.

With the TIFF for the River District Jenks is working on something more than a quarter of a BILLION dollars in public money going to these projects.

No tax money in Jenks my donkey.

That about as accurate as the Branson Landing people not wanting any tax money for a "Tulsa Landing" (they want a LOT)

Of course you know very well that neither I nor anyone else said "no" tax money had been spent in Jenks for these projects.  I said they have accomplished the river walk development and now Phase II and also the aquarium without spending "Hundreds of Millions of dollars of tax money," a statement that I believe is very much true.  Furthermore, whatever tax money they have spent, they have done so without raising any tax rates.

As to the possible TIF in Jenks paying for possibly as much as 220 million of infrastructure in connection with the River District development, again, that does not include an increase in tax rates.  Furthermore, in addition to the tax rate hikes we get with the river plan, we are pretty likely to also get our own TIF financing in the event a commercial development arises in Tulsa in connection with the river plan.  See Randi Miller's answer to the "Question of the Week" below:

Question of the week

Q: Who will decide which private, for-profit development proposals are constructed on the land along the river targeted for acquisition?

A: Once the river initiative passes, a nine-member River Trust Authority will be formed. The authority would be responsible for entering into negotiations with the property owners of the land under consideration for acquisition. Once it is acquired, the authority has several options. One would be to transfer ownership of the property to the city in which the land is located. That city could then create a tax increment finance (TIF) district, which can help developers cover the tremendous costs of site and infrastructure development. The city could then develop specifications for the development and issue a request for proposals (RFP) that developers could respond to. Once the city and development professionals have reviewed the responses to the RFPs, a developer could be selected and terms and conditions of the development would then be negotiated between the city and the developer.

Randi Miller
County Commission Chairwoman

[Oil Capital]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:Originally posted by swake

There certainly has been public tax money spent in Jenks, and a lot more is about to be spent. Jenks gave infrastructure and half the needed land to Riverwalk Crossing, and there's been something like $20 million spent on the Aquarium and more on the new pedestrian bridge, street and trail projects in the area.

With the TIFF for the River District Jenks is working on something more than a quarter of a BILLION dollars in public money going to these projects.

No tax money in Jenks my donkey.

That about as accurate as the Branson Landing people not wanting any tax money for a "Tulsa Landing" (they want a LOT)

True, that means Jenks would be spending as much on 1 mile of riverbanks as tulsa wants to spend from Sand Springs to Jenks.

As I understand it, if the River vote fails, Tulsa Landing will go after a TIFF and then we won't reap any rewards from the river development for years. I'd rather pay up front.

Chances are, Tulsa Landing will be going after a TIF even if this vote passes.  There is no funding in this for Tulsa Landing.  See the quote from Randi Miller in my previous post regarding the possibility of a TIF for developments.  The River plan money will only be used to purchase the land and re-sell it to the developer (or so we are being told).  When re-sold the money will go back in to the new river authority's hands to do whatever.  The city will then be stuck paying for the infrastructure for Tulsa Landing with a TIF or another tax increase.

[Oil Capital]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd



It proves without a doubt that developers will go with the path of least resistance and least cost.

That path does not currently run through Tulsa.  It runs through cheap pasture land and good ole boy mayors.

If you want that to change, one option - the most available, immediate option - is to vote YES for the river plan.  

So your proposed strategy is to incur $280 million of taxes to get around an anti-development River Parks Authority, who, correct me if I'm wrong, will still have full rule over Tulsa's River Parks...??  As Mayor Taylor would say, "That's CRAZY!"  ;-)

[Renaissance]

Hey, whatever gets me pretty pictures of apartments like they have in Jenks.  

Krazy like a FOX!  [8D]