Drillers Downtown Press Conference Today

[waterboy]

Hawkins, all I can say is you should question your assumptions. I am reminded of Jesse James' famous remark when asked why he robbed banks. He replied, "That's where the money is." Grizz is right. The money and assets are in the burbs. You are no safer in Jenks than you are downtown.

Why are the local TV news stories saying this is a done deal? Ch8 and Ch6 both report that Jenks has lost the Drillers and that they are in fact moving downtown after negotiations. Do they know something we don't? I thought this was simply a delay to give Tulsa a chance to put a plan on the table which seems a good idea to me.

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

quote:Originally posted by brunoflipper

quote:Originally posted by brunoflipper

yep, it's that dastardly, gool-ol' boy crowley up his tricks []

check the sig on the drawing...

Ha, nice.  Didn't pick up what you were putting down before.  Looks like the new Special Advisor to the Mayor on Urban Planning has taken a real hands-on approach!  I like it.

I think next time the city wants to come out with a concept drawing they should have someone put another eye on it.  I think this is a very nice rendering, but mechanically I don't see it working,  I measure the field as 415' deep and the design of the retail (I guess it's retail?) won't work that way.  I don't know if there is more to this rendering, but on-site parking is going to be a huge issue, just like it is with the current field.

The Mayor can call us here at Tanner Consulting, or Jerry over at Tulsa Planning and Engineering, or Ted over at Sac & Assoc. at anytime for a critical eye or to draw up a real scale color site plan that has a far better chance to work.

I would like to see the city draw on the expertise of the people of Tulsa when promoting these ideas.  I may be wrong, and I may not be seeing everything on this site plan, but it's producing more questions for me than answers.

Just my opinion.

P.S. I'd love to do a 3D rendering of this project.  Hint! Hint!

[booWorld]

The conceptual illustration appears to be similar to the plan presented on page 31 (or page 33 of the pdf) of the OU Urban Design Studio (OUUDS) study for a ballpark downtown.

The OUUDS study explains the size of a stadium needed for regulation play, and it includes examples of other ballparks in the league.  The OUUDS study also includes an explanation of the orientation of the field and of the use of a taller grandstand along the third base line to maximum protection from solar glare.

To get a sense of scale:  Most blocks downtown are 300 feet square and most streets are 80 feet wide.  It's typically 380 feet from the centerline of one street to the next.  Look at the blocks west of Frankfort to get a rough idea of distances.  

[T-TownMike]

IMO, Tulsans really should be more proactive and supportive of making sure projects like this happen in Tulsa. It's imperative to have a central core and I believe some would be very surprised at how much something that seems so trivial as a baseball stadium can spark growth, especially in a downtown district. Build it and they will come and in droves, which in turn sparks more growth to give people more options. Dining, shopping, entertainment, it all follows. Tulsa don't be thrifty, be nifty. people spending money in Tulsa generates MORE revenue, thus helping fill the coffers, thus allowing more money for better public schools, roads, etc...Please give this serious consideration and build a better Tulsa metro and invest in yourself and your community.

[Hawkins]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

quote:Originally posted by Hawkins

I know I'm in the minority here on this website, but this made me sick today when I heard the news.

I would never take my family downtown for a ballgame.

To me, there are two forces that exist in the downtown area, and those are Old money, and the low-income, high crime crowd.

South Tulsa/Jenks, on the other hand, has the middle-class demographic that is more likely to regularly attend a ball game.

This is a very poor decision, strictly speaking in revenue potential, by the team's owner.

The Drillers are not at the forefront of most Tulsan's entertainment, but if they put that ball park in a friendly neighborhood full of medium-income families, then they would get regular business every night, and they wouldn't be a 'once a year' event for most families to make an outing--which is what it is now.

This is a very sad day for baseball, and families in the south Tulsa area.

The Old Money/Politics has won the day, and the majority of folks will stay in South Tulsa on gameday, just like they do now.

[]

1)  Don't get too offended, but I have to say--your perception of the downtown demographic is so far from reality that it is laughable.  I just kind of wonder where it comes from.

2)  Your yearning for a ballpark close to your house is understandable.  Your interpretation of business reality is not.  Downtown minor league ballparks are universally successful.  Suburban ballparks work fine too, but there they don't have attendance advantages over those in downtowns.  Further, Tulsa is able to offer the Drillers a better margin on their sales because the stadium will be city-owned, and thus tax exempt.  In order to make their TIF work, Jenks has required private ownership of any stadium, and thus eliminated that possibility.

Look man, you can be sad that the Drillers aren't going to be close to your house.  I won't knock you for that.  But your anger at the situation is irrational, your ignorance of business realities is lame, and I've got to call you out on it.  This means too much to Tulsa not to.

Don't be offended yourself, but I find your conclusions quite laughable as well. Have you been to downtown Tulsa? Obviously you and I both have.

Here's the real question: Have you been to other downtown areas, places where these baseball stadiums work better than in the suburban areas?

Newsflash, Tulsa isn't one of them!

Every time something like this comes up, people say, "Great, we need to REVITALIZE downtown Tulsa." That's because downtown is not an attractive place to be right now.

I completely expected most of you to jump my case for this, because I know the this website is pro-downtown revitalization, but I have been to other places, and I'm telling you all that at the end of the day it isn't going to work.

Tulsans like easy driving access to their destinations, and the 1-way streets of downtown are a nightmare to the average driver here.

We can go round and round again about demographics and crime, but your argument is already lost.

Just look at the area--and the previous projects mentioned on the front page of the World today that have fallen through there--and what you see is a failed development area, and OLD area, and an area that a few wealthy Tulsans are pushing to revitalize for their own economic interests.

They have YOU believing that downtown revitalization is the best way for Tulsa to grow, but that cookie-cutter mold for city growth does not apply here.

[RecycleMichael]

Hawkins is right.

Let's start over.

"We are going to build, on this site...an exact replica of the town of Rock Ridge. Every building...right down to the orange
roof of Howard Johnson's outhouse."

Blazing Saddles

[TheTed]

quote:Originally posted by Hawkins

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

quote:Originally posted by Hawkins

I know I'm in the minority here on this website, but this made me sick today when I heard the news.

I would never take my family downtown for a ballgame.

To me, there are two forces that exist in the downtown area, and those are Old money, and the low-income, high crime crowd.

South Tulsa/Jenks, on the other hand, has the middle-class demographic that is more likely to regularly attend a ball game.

This is a very poor decision, strictly speaking in revenue potential, by the team's owner.

The Drillers are not at the forefront of most Tulsan's entertainment, but if they put that ball park in a friendly neighborhood full of medium-income families, then they would get regular business every night, and they wouldn't be a 'once a year' event for most families to make an outing--which is what it is now.

This is a very sad day for baseball, and families in the south Tulsa area.

The Old Money/Politics has won the day, and the majority of folks will stay in South Tulsa on gameday, just like they do now.

[]

1)  Don't get too offended, but I have to say--your perception of the downtown demographic is so far from reality that it is laughable.  I just kind of wonder where it comes from.

2)  Your yearning for a ballpark close to your house is understandable.  Your interpretation of business reality is not.  Downtown minor league ballparks are universally successful.  Suburban ballparks work fine too, but there they don't have attendance advantages over those in downtowns.  Further, Tulsa is able to offer the Drillers a better margin on their sales because the stadium will be city-owned, and thus tax exempt.  In order to make their TIF work, Jenks has required private ownership of any stadium, and thus eliminated that possibility.

Look man, you can be sad that the Drillers aren't going to be close to your house.  I won't knock you for that.  But your anger at the situation is irrational, your ignorance of business realities is lame, and I've got to call you out on it.  This means too much to Tulsa not to.

Don't be offended yourself, but I find your conclusions quite laughable as well. Have you been to downtown Tulsa? Obviously you and I both have.

Here's the real question: Have you been to other downtown areas, places where these baseball stadiums work better than in the suburban areas?

Newsflash, Tulsa isn't one of them!

Every time something like this comes up, people say, "Great, we need to REVITALIZE downtown Tulsa." That's because downtown is not an attractive place to be right now.

I completely expected most of you to jump my case for this, because I know the this website is pro-downtown revitalization, but I have been to other places, and I'm telling you all that at the end of the day it isn't going to work.

Tulsans like easy driving access to their destinations, and the 1-way streets of downtown are a nightmare to the average driver here.

We can go round and round again about demographics and crime, but your argument is already lost.

Just look at the area--and the previous projects mentioned on the front page of the World today that have fallen through there--and what you see is a failed development area, and OLD area, and an area that a few wealthy Tulsans are pushing to revitalize for their own economic interests.

They have YOU believing that downtown revitalization is the best way for Tulsa to grow, but that cookie-cutter mold for city growth does not apply here.

You're right. I say we scrap the downtown plans, move everything out of downtown and out to 132409524th Street. Then we take that money we would've spent on the ballpark to build 100 strip malls out on 132409524th Street, each with a TGI Fridays as the anchor tenant.

[TulsaSooner]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

Hawkins is right.

Let's start over.

"We are going to build, on this site...an exact replica of the town of Rock Ridge. Every building...right down to the orange
roof of Howard Johnson's outhouse."

Blazing Saddles

Somebody's gonna have to go back and get a ****load of dimes.

[jackbristow]

quote:Originally posted by Gaspar

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

quote:Originally posted by brunoflipper

quote:Originally posted by brunoflipper

yep, it's that dastardly, gool-ol' boy crowley up his tricks []

check the sig on the drawing...

Ha, nice.  Didn't pick up what you were putting down before.  Looks like the new Special Advisor to the Mayor on Urban Planning has taken a real hands-on approach!  I like it.

I think next time the city wants to come out with a concept drawing they should have someone put another eye on it.  I think this is a very nice rendering, but mechanically I don't see it working,  I measure the field as 415' deep and the design of the retail (I guess it's retail?) won't work that way.  I don't know if there is more to this rendering, but on-site parking is going to be a huge issue, just like it is with the current field.

The Mayor can call us here at Tanner Consulting, or Jerry over at Tulsa Planning and Engineering, or Ted over at Sac & Assoc. at anytime for a critical eye or to draw up a real scale color site plan that has a far better chance to work.

I would like to see the city draw on the expertise of the people of Tulsa when promoting these ideas.  I may be wrong, and I may not be seeing everything on this site plan, but it's producing more questions for me than answers.

Just my opinion.

P.S. I'd love to do a 3D rendering of this project.  Hint! Hint!

OH MY GOD PEOPLE.  The drawing says in plain as day lettering "NOT TO SCALE."  Geez.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by Hawkins

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

quote:Originally posted by Hawkins

I know I'm in the minority here on this website, but this made me sick today when I heard the news.

I would never take my family downtown for a ballgame.

To me, there are two forces that exist in the downtown area, and those are Old money, and the low-income, high crime crowd.

South Tulsa/Jenks, on the other hand, has the middle-class demographic that is more likely to regularly attend a ball game.

This is a very poor decision, strictly speaking in revenue potential, by the team's owner.

The Drillers are not at the forefront of most Tulsan's entertainment, but if they put that ball park in a friendly neighborhood full of medium-income families, then they would get regular business every night, and they wouldn't be a 'once a year' event for most families to make an outing--which is what it is now.

This is a very sad day for baseball, and families in the south Tulsa area.

The Old Money/Politics has won the day, and the majority of folks will stay in South Tulsa on gameday, just like they do now.

[]

1)  Don't get too offended, but I have to say--your perception of the downtown demographic is so far from reality that it is laughable.  I just kind of wonder where it comes from.

2)  Your yearning for a ballpark close to your house is understandable.  Your interpretation of business reality is not.  Downtown minor league ballparks are universally successful.  Suburban ballparks work fine too, but there they don't have attendance advantages over those in downtowns.  Further, Tulsa is able to offer the Drillers a better margin on their sales because the stadium will be city-owned, and thus tax exempt.  In order to make their TIF work, Jenks has required private ownership of any stadium, and thus eliminated that possibility.

Look man, you can be sad that the Drillers aren't going to be close to your house.  I won't knock you for that.  But your anger at the situation is irrational, your ignorance of business realities is lame, and I've got to call you out on it.  This means too much to Tulsa not to.

Don't be offended yourself, but I find your conclusions quite laughable as well. Have you been to downtown Tulsa? Obviously you and I both have.

Here's the real question: Have you been to other downtown areas, places where these baseball stadiums work better than in the suburban areas?

Newsflash, Tulsa isn't one of them!

Every time something like this comes up, people say, "Great, we need to REVITALIZE downtown Tulsa." That's because downtown is not an attractive place to be right now.

I completely expected most of you to jump my case for this, because I know the this website is pro-downtown revitalization, but I have been to other places, and I'm telling you all that at the end of the day it isn't going to work.

Tulsans like easy driving access to their destinations, and the 1-way streets of downtown are a nightmare to the average driver here.

We can go round and round again about demographics and crime, but your argument is already lost.

Just look at the area--and the previous projects mentioned on the front page of the World today that have fallen through there--and what you see is a failed development area, and OLD area, and an area that a few wealthy Tulsans are pushing to revitalize for their own economic interests.

They have YOU believing that downtown revitalization is the best way for Tulsa to grow, but that cookie-cutter mold for city growth does not apply here.

So where do you draw the line on what goes to the suburbs? Bass Pro, we dont need it, Aquarium, we dont need it, baseball stadium we dont need it, river development,... Whats next?
What wouldnt do better in the middle of Jenks demographics? Do we just abandon Tulsa and not try to revitalize it?


Do you live in Tulsa? Dont we need sales and property taxes here to pay for things? Entertainment options here? Or is it better to let things go to the suburbs so that more people go to the suburbs and pay for things "roads, schools, support restaurants, businesses..." in the suburbs and not Tulsa?

If the stadium does not stay in Tulsa, its going to Jenks. Its possible it may do better in Jenks. But it would do well in downtown, especially when downtown begins to grow more in the future. But if its not in Tulsa its not going to do anything for Tulsa....period.  We will just be losing more.

[Hawkins]

Like I've said before, the development area around 169 and 71st (the MOST EXPENSIVE RETAIL rent out there in NE Oklahoma that I'm aware of), would be prime location for a ball park or whatever else.

Why is there a Mathis Brothers building over there to the North of that? Take that, along with the adjacent available space, and that should have been where a stadium or ball park be built.

We have an IMAX theatre at 71st and 169, and several hotels. The Aquarium could have gone there too. Why did the Aquarium end up in Jenks?

I don't know anything about that. How did it happen? How did Bass Pro end up in BA? Why does the City of Tulsa lose all these tax revenue engines?

Probably because they only want to give incentives to businesses who locate downtown. So  the City is shooting itself in the foot right there.

[EricP]

I have worked downtown for almost 3 years now, and this self-perpetuating image of an old dark place nobody wants to be will only change if we make it change ourselves. It starts with GETTING PEOPLE DOWNTOWN. When people start coming back downtown for events, they will want a place to stop for dinner.. they will want to do other things.. they will want some of the 47 crappy looking parking lots with rusty-donkey fences and poles all over them fixed up.

If we paid 1/2 the attention we paid to some other areas of Tulsa county downtown, it would do just fine. Gosh, there sure is a lot of congestion in XYZ area of Tulsa.. what area could possibly be designed to handle such traffic!? Oh.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Hawkins

Like I've said before, the development area around 169 and 71st (the MOST EXPENSIVE RETAIL rent out there in NE Oklahoma that I'm aware of), would be prime location for a ball park or whatever else.

Why is there a Mathis Brothers building over there to the North of that? Take that, along with the adjacent available space, and that should have been where a stadium or ball park be built.

We have an IMAX theatre at 71st and 169, and several hotels. The Aquarium could have gone there too. Why did the Aquarium end up in Jenks?

I don't know anything about that. How did it happen? How did Bass Pro end up in BA? Why does the City of Tulsa lose all these tax revenue engines?

Probably because they only want to give incentives to businesses who locate downtown. So  the City is shooting itself in the foot right there.

There are a lot of stories in the naked city. I'll start with your first remark. Why is Mathis Furniture at 71st & 169? A couple of reasons. One is they warehouse their own furniture so they need a large amount of land with a rail connection nearby. Sure that's available downtown but not as visible and less costly to build in the burbs, then...Two- they sell most of their new furniture to new home buyers who live out South and use 169. Also easy for that Owasso crowd and other out of towners who know about Woodland Hills. Large durable goods retailers usually locate on the edge of a growing community because the land and building is cheap, and they can snag the young, affluent first time buyers.

It had nothing to do with the undesirability of downtown. There simply is no new construction to justify the investment as of yet. That will change in the coming years imo. In fact many smaller niche furniture dealers already do quite well between Mathis and downtown because they don't rely on generally less sophisticated newer buyers choosing instead to cater to higher end midtowners. Even North Tulsa has had several successful furniture dealers in spite of its poor reputation.

Yes, i suppose a ball park in a community with only one outdoor sports team would work next to Mathis as well as most anywhere. But why waste the synergy a downtown location would provide? Just so we could further clog the 71st corridor? Dumb idea.  

I don't have time right now to address your  other examples but none of them were because of the downtown you describe. The Aquarium and Bass Pro site locations had absolutely nothing to do with the downtown environment.