Maybe C2S needs to be scrapped

I am thinking more and more lately that Core2Shore needs to be scrapped. Not even pursued. Not a dime spent in that direction, even though it's too late..

These are the reasons: Yes, it would be nice to have a model contemporary, urban city. Yes, C2S is a neat opportunity to build that. However, I don't trust OKC to build that. I don't trust OKC to turn what is essentially brownfield into a model urban city.

The urban boulevard would have been nice.

The urban central park would have been nice.

The convention center located across the tracks would have been nice.

The urban waterfront would have been nice.

All of these things and more would have been nice.

All of them are being screwed up. Either there is a grand conspiracy to prevent urban from ever happening, or this city is simply clueless when it comes to building urban things.

Consider the boulevard. It's not going to be anything close to a model urban boulevard. The city is insisting that someone other than the city pay for it, and that means ODOT--so it's going to meet their specifications for new roads. It will have super-wide lanes, 6 or 8 lanes, and it will have pedestrian tunnels and bridges encircling it in every direction. Not people-friendly at the street level. The boulevard is already going to be a cluster, there is nothing that can happen at this point to mitigate that. The plan for that is already set in stone. The city could tell ODOT last minute to drop the project and the city could pursue it on its own, and build a much simpler boulevard on its own, but that isn't going to happen.

Consider the central park. This last week the council voted to do a new pedestrian TUNNEL underneath Robinson, presumably, between the convention center (the site the mayor is HELLBENT on) and the central park. First, I was bracing for the impact of the park just being a front lawn for the convention center. I had no idea they would take that even further and have tunnels leading from the front door of the convention center to practically the middle of the park. That is turning out to be a nightmare worse than I would have ever imagined. You don't even at least have to cross the street there. Oy veigh...

What is wrong with crossing the street? Why do we need all these pedestrian tunnels and bridges? Are we planning for some alternative future universe where humans will no longer be born with 2 legs that work?? Unless we're trying to get people across I-40 or across the tracks, that seems totally worthless and unneeded. Why are we spending money on that? Ugh.

What is wrong with simple 4-lane boulevards (2 in each direction) with a wide landscaped median or something? That would cost a fraction of what this street-level superhighway that meets ODOT specs is going to cost. It would be less of an urban nightmare, as well.

This city does not need Core2Shore. It doesn't need anywhere new to build a park and a convention center, even though the park is already being built. It doesn't need any more available land downtown. Downtown already has a huge inventory of vacant lots and abandoned buildings that aren't close to finding uses. I am scared at what OKC is going to end up building in C2S.

And I'll tell you how this will end up: It will just be a continuation of the superblock cluster. There will be virtually zero mixed-use development around the park or anywhere in Core2Shore. It will be parking enterprises and low-impact development like maybe a few restaurants and maybe a convenience store. It will have all these super-wide streets and million-dollar infrastructure pieces that nobody uses unless there is a big convention or a big event in the park. It will be absolutely dead. It will feel like an expensive, government-built ghost town. It will go down in history as the biggest urban renewal folly since the 1970s, anywhere. It will absolutely fail to attract private investment because people will not want to go there. Everything in it will probably be named after Mayor Cornett.

That's not a legacy I would want. Perhaps it is absolutely for the best that the MAPS3 Convention Center Subcommittee decided to scrap the two C2S sites from consideration. I would much rather see what they can do within the context of an existing area, which will at the very least put limitations on the project. More limitations are what we need as long as somebody very high up is listening to morons who know nothing about urban planning.

Brace for the 2nd wave of housing? (fingers crossed)

The first wave of new housing projects came shortly after the completion of the first MAPS package. We saw the completion of many projects, some that had been long in the works, others that were completed shortly after being envisioned. Some of these projects include the Legacy at Arts Central, the Montgomery, Park Harvey, the Seiber, the Harvey Lofts, Block 42, Central Avenue Villas, Maywood Park, the Centennial, and more. Then what's more important is that we saw more proposals coming out constantly so that it looked as if the second wave would come right after the first wave. All in all, I recall the total number of units being proposed between 2005 and 2008 being over 2,900.


The second wave included projects that almost unanimously fell apart at once. The Cotton Exchange. Overholser Green. Bricktown Gateway. The Flatiron. Bricktown Village. The Leslie. Maywood Hall. The Heights. And many more, and that's just residential. There was maybe ONE project from this entire wave that ever came to fruition, and that was The Lofts @ Maywood Park, which has been successful in selling smaller, reasonably-priced units to a younger demographic.

Then all of a sudden there was the silence and the frustration at the silence. Voters were asked to approve $777 million in public improvements on top of billions in the forms of other public improvements being made simultaneously downtown, and the rational is that it would spur the economy by resulting in private development. If that was so, then where's the private development? The first deal that looked like it could be a spin off was OCU moving its law school downtown--a deal which fell apart over the summer as a result of OCU's change in leadership.

Then things started to change. Was it one project? Probably not, because we are fairly certain that the owners of the land bounded by 2nd, 3rd, Oklahoma, and Walnut have been mulling over an urban project for a while. They were already past soils testing, which occurs toward the conclusion of the planning phase, when they were ready to publicly announce their plans. But the announcement of Jim Thompson's Aloft Hotel could have possibly resulted in things heating up and interested parties suddenly getting a lot more interested. The design of the Deep Deuce Aloft Hotel, which is very unique from all the other Alofts which are still very decent, turned heads. To say the least. Could the bold statement architecture of the proposed Aloft have a hand in moving McKown forward? Could it have had a part in persuading McKown to make his project as truly urban as possible?

Regardless, I find it very hard to say that a major investment like this would be unaffected by a game-changing addition such as the Aloft.


Then add a few more folks to the picture. Dick Tanenbaum is getting back involved downtown, who is competing for the attention of OCURA on the Overholser Green site, may have a viable proposal to build something where another successful developer, Chuck Wiggin couldn't. That's 250 apartment units that Tanenbaum says he can break ground on, in January 2011 (very soon) provided OCURA makes the right decision. Add that to McKown's 227. Mickey Clagg is finally about to resume the snail's pace renovation of Hadden Hall, which will bring 18 units onto the market, on top of the 20 or so they finished earlier this year north of Saint Anthony's. There are a few more smaller single home projects, such as 626 West Main, the Waters' residence in Deep Deuce, several homes u/c in SoSA, and a few around the medical district. Clagg says he'll begin 1212 Walker in the next few months, as well. 21 units there.

So add it all up, and there's at least 550 or so units that are about be underway once again, which actually does come close to the first wave in scope, which I think justifies this as the second wave, albeit a few years in waiting, and much smaller than expected. Still, hard not to take 550 units--especially in a cycle in which only conservative, pragmatic projects are getting off of the ground. I think Tulsa is still building more units, and if not more units, certainly at least twice as many individual projects seem quite possible (OKC's count is offset by two gargantuan-sized projects, 250 and 227 units). Do we count The Hill once again, now that it seems somewhat back on track? Hard to tell. One thing's apparent, is that downtown development is possible, even in OKC. Yes, "in this economy" (if that cliche phrase hasn't been banished yet). What I mean by that is that development proposals are still gaining traction, as long as you have the money to do it and aren't relying on speculation, and it's also a great time to get involved because construction costs have gone way down for urban development (although I think to agree this is regional, and depends on how desperate local contractors are for bids, which in Oklahoma isn't very desperate lately). I also think development is very cyclical, and I can see signs where the economy in the states is improving overall, and we've all been preaching about how well positioned OKC is to make some moves once the overall economy begins to rebound.

I think that this is a bona fide wave of residential projects, several that seem to be affecting each other, all the way across downtown from Midtown to Deep Deuce. Why I chose to write about this is simple: This means we could see some more very interesting proposals very soon, as well. Have we seen pent-up demand for downtown housing fully satisfied with the 550 or so new units from the 2010 downtown housing wave? Last I checked the downtown apartment occupancy rate was still 97%, so that would probably be a..no. Who's to say that there aren't more interested parties out there waiting for the right time, who no doubt have been encouraged by the Deep Deuce and Midtown projects that could all begin within the next 4 months.

Plaza done right..or is it?

Pretty spiffy urban plaza in front of the Old Post Office in downtown St Louis. Took this picture when I came through, on my way back from Chicago. The tower rising behind it on the left side is condos, and they are adding a restaurant to this plaza right now, apparently.

And let me just say, about those scrubby little trees adorning the edges, what a beautiful urban ecosystem! This plaza also maintains other resemblances to the SR Commons..it improves sight lines for the condo tower, it also requires that you STEP UP onto it because of the vertical separation between the plaza and the street level at the edge. Very anti-pedestrian, anti-urban.

I think you'll notice that there are a total of 2 people (plus myself, so I guess three) in existence on the entire plaza. This picture was taken at 4 pm on a Friday afternoon, when I'm sure even BOk Plaza in downtown OKC is more "bustling" than this.

I will say that you could make a stronger case for the need for a plaza in St Louis than in OKC, too--corporate towers in St Louis do not typically come surrounded by a moat and drawbridge like that they do in OKC (or in other words, a corporate plaza). Aside from the new elongated 3-block long "Citygarden" (green park) in downtown St Louis, there is very little open space.

And this, my friends, is the best-planned plaza I've seen in a LONG time.

10th Street Rising

Disclaimer: This is a post I have had in the works for weeks, and in my opinion, is still incomplete. Going to go ahead and put it up since I'm not going to get the information I'm looking for, after two weeks of placing calls at the Planning Department (where the phone oft goes unanswered) and sending emails to individuals. This is put together after evaluating the 10th Street Medical Business District Final Report and combining it with my own general knowledge of what is happening in this area.


An overview of the area of MidTown OKC under the changes proposed by the Medical Business District Final Report.

First of all, the purpose of the newly-formed Medical Business District (which will be referred to as MDB), which is basically just MidTown OKC, is a corridor along NW 10th Street that links the Oklahoma Health Center to Saint Anthony's Hospital and the medical cluster around there. The idea is that 10th can grow by serving the demands of the burgeoning health industry that anchor it on each ends..and that is a large, untapped resource for growth considering the needs to remain unfilled. While the Saint Anthony's end is becoming home to a critical mass of good restaurants, there is very little in the way of that across I-235 albeit a Quizno's and hospital cafeterias (Yum).

We are also finding out that these hospitals, the Medical District in particular, would benefit from having a hotel nearby for family members of overnight patients. Something like the proposed Embassy Suites just south of the new OU Cancer Institute in the Medical District--a project that has not moved forward after 4 years of being on the boards. It is also worth mentioning that at least one of the properties owned by MidTown Redevelopment/Renaissance/Whatever (the old Marion Hotel) is a former hotel, just as it is also worth noting that Marva Ellard proposed a mixed-use project with a significant amount of boutique hotel rooms at NW 13th and Walker that OCURA put the kibosh on--Marva was at one point rumored to be intent on taking her concept somewhere else in MidTown, but there has been a recession since then.

Other needs in the way of development that have gone unmet in MidTown and in the Oklahoma Health Center are typical office and housing needs. With the city's largest concentration of high incomes, the Oklahoma Health Center would benefit from seeing some more specially-targeted housing be developed between that area and downtown--just as Saint Anthony's would benefit from more housing being made available MidTown. Only MidTown has housing available and more on the works, with absolutely nothing coming in the Medical District. Health clusters also have a huge demand for office space, as often times surgeons, and physicians, and doctors of all stripes don't office in the actual hospital unless they are specifically hospital management--this means a market for nearby Class A office space.

These developments intended to serve what already anchors 10th are intended to go in certain areas of the MDB, defined as A, B, C, D, and E.

A: The OCURA redevelopment site at 13th and Walker. This area apparently justifies its own offset area, but I'll go into the development statuses later. The intention is to do something mixed-use, but primarily residential, and tie in the nearby Heritage Hills neighborhood. They recommend 80-120 housing units.

B: Between Saint Anthony's and Classen Blvd. Infill has been stymied by land speculation driven up by perceived potential demand for office space around Saint Anthony's, and another challenge identified is the damaging "welcome" you get when entering the area on Classen, and yet another challenge are the unsightly enormous surface parking lots that plague the area. It is an area of many challenges. It calls for connected 11th St between Classen and Shartel and large-scale residential and retail redevelopment. It does not touch on the issue of contemporary infill occurring in the SoSA area (between 6th and 9th) though it does mention that the area has 45 vacant single family lots available for such projects. It suggests that Classen Blvd development have no setback and something be done with the surface parking around the Surgeons and Physicians Tower. Total development: 264 res units, 54,000 sf new office, 65,000 sf new retail.

______________________
In between B & C: The Saint Anthony campus masterplan is as follows. Notice the two new buildings, which I demarcated with red dots, and the proposed new surface parking lots, which are the yellow dots. The two new buildings are to the south of the current campus, with the larger new building proposed south of the recently finished Surgeon's Office Building at Walker and 9th (with the Starbucks on the ground level).

______________________

C: The defining feature of area C is the extension of Classen Drive, different from Classen Blvd, which diagonally cuts through MidTown, and will have new traffic circle interchanges at 9th and Hudson and 8th and Harvey, its terminus. There will also be a new traffic circle at 13th and Shartel. These traffic circles were funded by the 2007 G.O. Bond. There is also a park proposed on 10th between Hudson and Harvey, on the site formerly occupied by the Red Cross Building. The plan calls for high-density mixed use in area C, they must have forgotten about projected development counts though--or intentionally left it out due to the flexibility of high-density.


D: This area has some interesting opportunities, with the prospective commuter rail coming through here making a transit-oriented development (TOD) very possible (think Mockingbird Station in Dallas), and also the fact that it represents one of few large scale redevelopment opportunities downtown, where you can really do an RFP for a HUGE site and see what kind of mixed-use development we get out of it, though the last time we did that..we got The Hill. The report proposes creating a new N/S street adjacent to the east side of the BNSF tracks, make Oklahoma Ave two-way, activate Campbell Park (parallel to N. Broadway), realigning a 235 ramp, focus on the potential for a TOD, among other things I see here.

(Just as a side note, I would seriously question how the development appears to be inward-facing on the newly created N/S pathway..it doesn't turn its back on Broadway or Campbell Park, but I feel like it needs to have more presence in connection to the REST of downtown, Broadway, and even the MDB area. Orienting the buildings primarily toward Campbell Park would create a much stronger sense of place on Broadway to connect it to other downtown areas--and it would give Campbell Park an almost "Jackson Square-like" feeling.) The red dot marks the spot for the old Bond Bakery building.

E: This is a proposed extension of the Presbyterian Health Foundation Research Park north of 10th Street. It is suggested that the density be higher here than on the current PHF campus, and recommends that PHF try to raise density on their campus--which as it stands is not even built out to the original proposal. Also proposed a new 235 ramp for 10th Street, pedestrian and aesthetic improvements for the 10th Street bridge, and connecting the grid to the current PHF campus. Proposes 31,000 sf of new retail and 190,000 sf of new office/R&D.

TOTAL: The total numbers for MBD development, which is anticipated to be near complete in 2020 (yeah, right) are as follows: 450,000-800,000 sf of new office space, 130,000-175,000 sf of new retail space, 200-250 new hotel rooms, 1,500-2,000 new residential units. Keep in mind that the 2005 Downtown Housing Study noted that downtown could absorb as many as 8,000 new housing units by 2015 (we'll be lucky to get 2,000, in reality)--so 2,000 for the MidTown OKC area is not at all unreasonable.

Let's also keep in mind that there are a number of projects potentially in the works. We know that Mickey Clagg and Bob Howard (MidTown Redevelopment/Renaissance/Whateverthenameisrightnow) are progressing mightily on the redevelopment of several properties. A half-dozen or so smaller apartment buildings have been refurbished west of Walker, mostly by Clagg/Howard. These projects have gone off without much hoopla but have added a significant residential presence. They are also progressing on their bldgs at 10th and Robinson, with the Hadden Hall lofts nearing completion, the Packard Building nearing completion, and the Guardian Lofts very well underway. The Cline Hotel will also be residential of some sort, it appears. I have also heard that they are more actively reviewing the 1100 and 1101 buildings (at 10th and Broadway) and a number of possibilities may await these buildings, so we'll have to wait and see on that, but an announcement will probably be coming (by the end of this year, I would imagine). 1212 Walker and the Osler Lofts are also still on, just not a priority right now for them.

The city has acquired the Red Cross bldg, completed the asbestos abatement, and demolished the bldg--the site has been cleared. Interestingly though, despite being recommended by the final report to become green space, the city is pursuing RFPs for redevelopment proposals. On the other city-action redevelopment site, Overholser Green appears to be dead in its tracks. They are fixing to get a short-term extension from OCURA that I don't think they should be given, so we will have to wait even longer until OCURA can open it up with a new RFP and maybe we can get a...more committed developer in there. Wiggin Properties seems more interested in Downtown Tulsa right now, anyway. That's just my opinion, though. The Palo Duro II project, which was one of those "rendering bait and switch" projects that we love so much (compare original rendering to what was actually built, and you'll see what I mean), is also finished at Hudson and 12th. The Grateful Bean Cafe is also closing, but the building owner is just going to replace it with a different restaurant concept that can be more competitive in the new MidTown scene.

I pointed out the Bond Bakery because Gary Hasenflu, a noted historic redeveloper from KC (Cold Storage Lofts + numerous OK projects) is working on a deal to redevelop the Bond Bakery into apartments that I hope is still on the table after we rescued the historic tax credits. There is also a plan to turn the Java Dave's space into a new deli, and Java Dave's will be moving into a smaller space. Also let's not forget the housing Marva Ellard has been very successful with (Seiber Hotel), and if the rumors are true that she is interested in taking her Mercy Park concept to a different site, perhaps she would be interested in doing a TOD in the offset area D? The Campbell Park-front sites are still owned by Bert Belanger, who demo'd the old flop houses that once stood at that site. Before the recession, he said he was planning a large mixed-use development, which is obviously no longer on.

I'll end with the unanswered questions I had for the Planning Department staff which have to do with the following:

1. There has been some confusion out there regarding the public classification of Medical Business District, Inc. It appears to me as what would be called a quasi-government organization, in that it looks like a private incorporated group, but in effect acts as a development surrogate for the city. The coordinator for this group is Robbie Kienzle, a redevelopment specialist with the Planning Department. The board is made up completely of civic figures. They have an okc.gov website. Articles interchangeably refer to it as the city. Yet there are people out there adamantly insisting that MDB, Inc. is entirely separate from the city and 100% private--so could someone clear this up? Interestingly, the very number that one of these people told me to call at City Hall never answers her phone, so it's almost worth just writing the whole concern off altogether.

2. The Final Report recommends making the Red Cross site a green space project, but the MDB is pursuing private redevelopment concepts. 1, how has the response to that been; and 2, why did they opt to go with the private redevelopment over a public green space?

3. The Classen Drive extension was funded in 2007, and since it is a bond project, I don't understand why we haven't already begun with extending the road, let alone with right-of-way acquisition necessary to begin with first. When is the Classen Drive extension finally going to get underway? If these developments are supposed to be finished by 2020, and Classen Drive is the pivotal lynchpin toward redevelopment of the central swath of MidTown OKC--what's the hold-up?

4. How do we intend to route the streetcar system through the MDB? Most proposals I've seen have it running along 11th or 12th to avoid the traffic circles, but it would be possible for a streetcar to circumnavigate or more likely just transect a traffic circle, though you may have to have flashing stopping lights to clear the traffic circle of traffic before the streetcar can travel through there. Would it not be well-worth it to have streetcar contribute toward the sense of place and also as a development impetus for the 10th Street corridor--I just don't see why so much emphasis is placed on activating 10th Street as a focal point for MidTown, and then we would run the streetcar down 11th (which is not even contiguous) rather than 10th. It is one of the many things going on right now that I do not understand at all.

Here we go again

Here we go again, for what, the 5th time? About to leave and head downtown for what is hopefully the last SandRidge hearing.

All that's at stake is historic preservation, the authority of planning boards, the value of urban design standards, and the city ordinances. If SandRidge Commons goes forward it will repudiate every planning and urban design doctrine we have recently adopted and undermine the authority of the planning boards, city ordinances, and the public process altogether.

I think it is especially prudent to note that SandRidge advocates have insisted that this is a special case that stands alone and will not set a precedent, and even in the unlikely case that it is so, that's a pretty negative "proponency" point to make that at least it won't lead to a larger cirrhosis like all of our ordinances and standards spiraling down the drain. Aren't all projects part of the bigger picture, for better or for worse?

So consider this Geronimo's Last Stand, which I think is an apt comparison in a tongue-in-cheek way, with SandRidge dismissing urbanists and preservationists as just obstructionist and oppositional.

I am going to assume Steve will be live-blogging today again, so I'll recommend the OKC Central blog for need-to-know and up-to-the-minute updates. This blog will probably have the first full analysis up. Doug will probably have a more complete, and further in-depth analysis up later, probably tomorrow.

Let's hope for the best for Oklahoma City, and can't wait to see what lovely threats SandRidge has waiting for us this time.

10th Street Rising

Post moved up.

Rogers Marvel architects

I have been searching for an email address for Rob Rogers that I can send him my suggestions for how to improve the SandRidge Commons proposal. Can't find ANYTHING on the web, not even on the Rogers Marvel Architects website. If anyone knows the email address, please let me know. You can leave a comment on here or email me as many readers do at moore.energizer@yahoo.com.

Thanks, and save the India Temple!

Here goes another..

The old Grace Cleaners bldg at 529 W. Main Street -- targeted for demolition. The proposed replacement: Surface parking.

SandRidge appeal tomorrow

Tomorrow is the day of the SandRidge appeal before the Board of Adjustment. The appeal was filed by Preservation Oklahoma and has recently gotten a letter of support from the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

The meeting is tomorrow in the City Council chambers, at 1:30. I will be taking off from work to attend the meeting. The way I see it, I already saved these buildings once from demolition..against the odds, time to do it again.

I don't really take ANY credit for saving the buildings initially, the real credit goes to Scottye Montgomery who read my letter to the City Council and other citizens who actually were able to show up on that day. The Downtown Design Review Commission obviously saw that citizens were concerned and responded by deferring it to a special meeting at which we eventually lost.

I still don't feel very confident about the appeal, but we have to make a good showing nonetheless on the off chance that we can make a difference. I also wrote a letter to Kathe Casula, who works for the Board of Adjustment. Her email is: kathe.casula@okc.gov

My letter is as follows:

Dear Ms. Casula,

My name is Nick Roberts and I run a popular local urbanism blog at downtownontherange.blogspot.com--recently I did a poll of my readers on the SandRidge demolition permit and determined that 42 of them actually opposed the $100 million SandRidge Commons project simply on the grounds of the demolitions. 20 readers approve of the project, but I wonder how many of them are just "glass half full" people who still wish SandRidge would do more to preserve a few buildings rather than tearing them down.

I like the SandRidge Commons proposal--in concept, but the incompetent, horrible, uneducated architects and planners who put it together need to be banned from ever doing any Oklahoma City projects again. If they really knew OKC, they would know how sour we still are over the I.M. Pei legacy. He ruined our city, basically--and they want to continue his urban renewal schemes. Basically we oppose two of the demolitions and support the other elements of the project, but with hesitation.

The India Temple, as I am sure everyone in downtown is aware now, is the oldest remaining building (built in 1902) and also served as the home of the Oklahoma State Legislature for years. It is an incredibly relevent historical site and SandRidge wants to tear it down and replace it with...nothing. A windswept corporate plaza will replace it. The person who put the false facade over it says it can be removed, although SandRidge says it can't. The building poses challenges but should be given a chance. Asbestos abatement will have to be done before it can be demolished anyway.

SandRidge wants to tear down the KerMac building to increase the visibility of the main tower. This is not only a bad proposition, but also sets a dangerous precedent for other companies thinking they can move downtown and establish a "corporate campus" area by demolishing density that leads up their tower. This building has no structural issues and on the outside appears to have a lot of really cool historic detailing--it should be saved even if the India Temple can't be. There is just no reason for it to not be saved, and in the past, there have been numerous (not just one) development groups interested in redeveloping this building and the adjacent Braniff building (as well as the India Temple). These buildings should be restored, not by SandRidge if they don't want to do it (but by someone), and not torn down and replaced with nothing but dead plaza space. We also need to preserve the streetwall along Robinson, one of the few in-tact streetwalls that remain from downtown's urban days. The effect of these streetwalls is defined space, which is becoming a rarity in downtown of all places.

The rest of the plan doesn't threaten the existence of downtown, but that doesn't make it wonderful. There is a really great cubist modern building proposed on Robert S. Kerr, but it's proposed in the middle of the Commons area and doesn't have any frontage on Robinson or Broadway. It makes no sense to have this building where it is proposed and it should be moved to be along Robinson or Broadway--preferably Broadway, where it can help reinforce an area with poorly defined space. This also would extend the Commons area up against a straight edge, which would support the commons and give it more definition as well.

By saving the India Temple and KerMac and allowing redevelopers to buy the buildings from them, moving the new building to Broadway near the India Temple, and extending the Commons to a straight edge--SandRidge Commons goes from being a horrible assault on downtown's urbanity and becomes a fantastic addition that will surely be praised in architectural journals as being a well-planned downtown asset. At any rate, we need to go back to the drawing board with this proposal--the public needs to be heard and the community's concerns for downtown's density and urbanity need to be taken into account. By taking into account these concerns, not only does SandRidge get a truly fantastic proposal at the end, but also would deserve praise for valuing the public process. How about it?

Thanks for reading, and I hope that you will pass my concerns along to anyone who might be concerned.

Have a great day!

Nick Roberts
-address removed-
OKC, OK 73170
(Walters' ward)

______________

In hindsight, I forgot to mention another important point: This should technically be against city code. City code for downtown development states that setbacks aren't allowed for downtown development and new buildings should be built right up to the sidewalk--so why is SandRidge being allowed to demolish buildings that DO come right up to the sidewalk in favor of nothing, for the sake of a plaza setback for their main tower. The city code states no setbacks for new development, but we're still allowed to have development that is basically just one huge setback??

Chance to get involved

Here's a really good chance for some of you guys to get involved: It's the Plan OKC initiative, in which the city is currently updating a lot of the planning documents that guide the city and its development. If the city is serious about sustainable development, which we know it isn't, it's going to show it in this initiative. I would still encourage everyone to come and be active in it, I know I will. The website is here.

I meant to get this posted yesterday because now it's a day late..Thursday was the kick off meeting, but missing the kickoff meeting won't really prevent anyone from being able to get involved. As for upcoming events, I don't know a whole lot yet, but I do know that on May 24th there will be a free coffee meet and greet in the Plaza District.

You'll be able to get updates on here, and it would also be a great opportunity for some blog readers to get to meet each other and take part in actively pushing for sustainable development.

Still standing: The Gold Dome

I came across an interesting article recently. You can read it here. It has to do with the Gold Dome building which was saved a few years ago from demolition, and has since become a community treasure. It is the home of an Asian community center, law offices, an upscale restaurant and bar called Prohibition Room, and more.

As we know, the Gold Dome is still standing, full of quality local tenants, and adding lots to the culture of Oklahoma City. But in 2002 it was an uphill fight to save this building from demolition. The owners of the building wanted to tear it down and put a Walgreen's on the site instead.

"'They (the building owners) have a building that is functionally obsolete,' said Dennis Box, an attorney representing Walgreen Drug Stores."

Obviously in this guy's infinite wisdom, the Gold Dome was an eyesore and needed to be razed for new development that was not "functionally obsolete."

Maybe "functionally obsolete" is the new "cool."

A thousand questions

So many questions, so little time. In lieu of a full post (currently working on an exhaustive retail post), I think for this week I'll just post some questions that are burning in my mind. If anyone would venture some answers, feel free.

I am afraid that if it's questionable, in "this current economy" (I disagree with that..) and in the current malaise that is private development in downtown OKC, you have to assume the worst..that each of these possible projects are negligible. I want to be wrong. Or here's a much more optimistic possibility: Maybe everyone is waiting to see what's going to happen with MAPS 3 before they put any more investment into downtown? Too much up in the air right now. There is an amazing amount of change going on, but it's virtually all public sector and instead of invigorating the private sector, the private sector seems to have taken a breather.

So here goes, no particular order:

1 Is OKC still doing anything to attract more retail? Did the ULI panel give the city some ideas? Is the city willing to subsidize a "Core to Shore boulevard" retail development?

2 Has anyone besides myself realized the demolition spree that this city is on? Multiple buildings on 10th Street, the SandRidge proposal, Bricktown Steffen Creamery bldg, and more. Now it looks like the next may be a row of shops at Classen and NW 30th. Oh and the site Bradshaw cleared at Broadway/12th. The more I think, the more examples I come up with.

3 How has first-floor leasing been going? Legacy and Park Harvey were huge successes in that regard. What about the Maywood Lofts? Chuck Ainsworth's Candy Factory project? I'm sure there's some I'm forgetting. I know there is no first-floor retail yet in the Candy Factory "Lofts" or in Maywood Lofts' spaces..

4 I'm curious what Steve Mason's been up to. He's always up to something cool.

5 The Maywood Brownstones have changed hands. So does that free Ron Bradshaw up to do some more projects? Hopefully something more economically feasible. And what does this mean for Maywood Park? Will the brownstones be finished out as originally planned? (dozens more were originally planned)

6 When I was last in Bricktown I saw a ton of site work going on around the Steel Yards project. Is that going forward, or is something else entirely going on?

7 Did the ULI knock some sense into the city, or is Mayor Mick still intent on building the convention center adjacent to the Core to Shore park? It might make or break MAPS 3. Not really, but still--why be intent on making the worst out of the top-dollar ticket item?

8 What is the deal with Chesapeake? I realize we will never find out, but it's worth speculating. So much construction equipment between Classen and the tracks, on top of several blocks that I'm guessing they cleared. They've also been clearing a half dozen apartment buildings off of Grand Blvd between Western and 63rd. There was an apartment building on 63rd in front of Nichols Hills Plaza they also just razed. No announcement from Chesapeake as usual. What is going on? We already know Whole Foods is going in where they tore down the funeral home earlier this year.

9 Ron Bradshaw (I think it was him) bulldozed that site at like.. NW 12th and Broadway. What will come of that? Another site that was bulldozed just to sit for decades? We all thought we'd see development of that site by now, no surprise--no development. Maybe something is still planned, or is he no longer developing?

10 What is going on at Saint Anthony's Hospital? I'm hearing a lot about two possible new mid-rise buildings at the hospital, including a new emergency ward--and in addition to that, I'm hearing about a group of doctors interested in building a new doctor's office building (significant midrise as opposed to lowrise from what I hear).

11 What's the deal with some of these downtown developments that you hear nothing about? Like The Carnegie. The First National Building renovations? The CityPlace Lofts (in the upper floors)? Will Lower Bricktown ever be finished (is Randy Hogan going to be 'let off' or will OCURA ever take the land back)?

12 Our friend Nicholas Preftakes... 'nuff said.

13 Are some property owners actually trying to make sure that the downtown streetcar does not go in front of their property? Words can not describe how misdirected I think such a move would be. Streetcar = good. Usually the argument against it is "I'm too cheap to pay for it," and not.. "It better stay off of my lawn!"

14 Would a downtown grocer even be successful? Crescent Market closed. The deli is still open, thankfully. People really do a lot of talking about what downtown needs and yada yada--when someone comes in are they supporting them? It's a valid question I've heard raised by many. I've asked people what businesses they think are in need of support, nobody wants to specifically name a business that's doing badly, but maybe we really do need a downtown endangered list..if it would help.


Not to be all negative, unexpected answers that have come up..

1 Is Bricktown EVER going to have some decent retail? Apparently, yes--in June. The people behind the Red Dirt Emporium are opening a "public market" type space in June that will feature a collection of local vendors with different kinds of booths. It will also hopefully act as an incubator for new retail in Bricktown, where people who make shirts or food or whatever--can start out with a booth here and then get their own store as they expand. The market will be located on the canal level of the Jackson Building in upper Bricktown--the interior will be very avant garde, very Bricktown. Can't wait to see it.

2 Will SandRidge be opposed? Yes, big-time. An awesome group has formed with the mission to "Keep Downtown Urban." Preservation Oklahoma has filed a public appeal against SandRidge Energy's plans to raze north downtown leaving only SandRidge Tower standing. Today during lunch they held a "Building Hug" ceremony downtown, gathering about 40 participants, as well as spectators and news reporters. They gave out free "Keep Downtown Urban" t-shirts as well.

3 Can development happen during this economy? Yes. Look at Paseo, look at the Plaza District--not only is there significant redevelopment going on, but these are also by far some of the highest-risk (as far as lender's are concerned) development areas of the city. Low risk development: Bricktown, or Memorial Road. High risk: Plaza District (because there aren't active precedent indicators that a project will be successful). Look at the transformation the Plaza has undergone during a bad economy, and look at the local retail tenants that have miraculously popped up. Plaza has a truly awesome retail scene in my opinion. Maybe the low expectations lent themselves to a surprisingly successful district? Maybe the ridiculously high expectations are what's problematic in Bricktown.

Think about it, OKC.

Keep Downtown Urban

The SandRidge fallout is beginning to roll. Keep an eye out for this new site..looks really good. The address is Keep Downtown Urban and it is going to be dedicated to opposing the SandRidge application and hopefully other anti-urban proposals that continue to destroy the remainder of Oklahoma City left over from the first Urban Renewal (with today being the "second Urban Renewal").

Also you can read more about the political fallout here on Steve's blog..and there may be an appeal down the road. I honestly didn't even realize that opponents of a proposal could appeal a DDR ruling. My personal opinion is that DDR members are doing a good job, they're doing the best they can. They deferred it as long as they could and did due diligence to survey the buildings themselves.

Something just doesn't seem right with SandRidge and the OKC good ole boy system, and my opinion is it'll be interesting to see what happens to Betsy Brunsteter who was the only committee member that voted against the demolition. Anthony McDermid was extremely critical and said that "blood" was on their hands, but in the end he voted yes just because it was a forgone conclusion in his opinion. Or did he vote yes for other reasons?

Steve raises some good questions.. why was Jim Couch there? I've been to DDR meetings myself before and I know Jim Couch doesn't typically come to those. Typically by the end of a DDR meeting I am the only person there, because it's just people who have an item up for consideration and they leave as soon as they get a verdict. Jim Couch does not even attend City Council meetings typically because he is supposed to be too busy running the day to day operations of the city to give a crap about the crazies who speak at the end of meetings or Brian Walters' political posturing as the neo-con who's gonna save OKC from the grip of the libs. (to summarize a typical City Council meeting)

There are a lot of other good questions being raised. Now it appears that the most important question of all is, did the DDR members have any choice but to vote yes towards the demolition?

Wow.

Well. I just don't know what to say anymore. Apparently the entire damn city is united toward razing entire blocks of downtown historic structures.

I was flabbergasted by reading this post on Steve's blog, including letters from Clay Bennett and Larry Nichols arguing on behalf of the SandRidge Commons project. These aren't people who intend to slight downtown..

Oy veigh.

Tear that sucker down

That sucker I am referring to is Downtown Oklahoma City. SandRidge Energy's application for what is being dubbed as SandRidge Commons, which includes the largest demolition downtown has seen since the 1970s, proving to the world that urban renewal and downtown demolition is still alive and well in Oklahoma City. Maybe we can also put Urban Renewal Capitol of America in with the rest of our hokie promotional pitches--that is one that there would be virtually no other contender.

Downtown Design Review voted 6-1 to approve SandRidge's application for demolition of four buildings, including the India Temple with its historic merit, and the Kermac Building with its historic merit as well as feasibility. My opinion on the DDR verdict: It was expected. Can anyone say they're surprised? Should DDR have acted differently? Probably, couldn't they have split the proposal and granted all demo's except the Kermac? Probably, but at the end of the day, it was SandRidge's bad proposal. Go check out Automobile Alley, MidTown, Core to Shore, and now especially the downtown area and can anyone TRULY say that demolition isn't becoming extremely widespread? What's more is that almost none of these buildings being demolished left and right, probably about 8 total for now, are going to be replaced with ANYTHING. So this is en effect the continued hollowing out of our downtown core. The only two that are being replaced by something else is the MidTown Medical Business District redevelopment site and one of the uglier buildings SandRidge is demo'ing.

This is an example of a dense downtown (Louisville)



This is what we've done to our downtown, and we continue to regress. We continue to lose density, create more vacant space in downtown, and tear down great historic buildings. There is at least one building with historic merit AND redevelopment potential that we are senselessly losing to SandRidge alone, not to mention the Community Foundation, and other demo's elsewhere.

This is the impact: Can you seriously tell me Downtown OKC is urban on a "Big League City" scale? How can we tout ourselves as a model of urban growth, when to be frank, we are not even close. How are we proud of Downtown OKC? The pride that we did have was mostly in our historic areas and what LITTLE density we did have, and those things continue to shrink and get smaller and smaller in our city. So what do we say next time there are comparisons made between Downtown OKC and .. Tulsa? Charlotte? Fort Worth? Kansas City? How does our downtown compare, what impression of our city will we give out of town residents, etc? The answer can be nothing short of the fact that we are modeling Downtown OKC more and more after Amarillo it seems. With all of the great stuff going on, all of the public investment going on, and all of the private investment just flowing .. we are STILL loosing density, and not gaining density. 2 steps forward, 2 steps backward.. destined to be a downtown that falls well short of the standard set by real cities, such as Tulsa, Louisville, Fort worth, Kansas City, and yes..even Charlotte, which isn't foolishly demolishing numerous buildings without replacing them.



So feast your eyes: It's the downtown of the future that OKC could become..Downtown Amarillo, almost the most underwhelming "urban" environment in America (which is saying a lot in America).

Development potential

Sometimes you hear a site proclaimed as having the most development potential in downtown. There was even a survey back in 2005 that identified the intersection that would be the most important development site in the growth of downtown. This 2005 survey, way ahead of its time, predicted that Midtown would become a resurgent hotspot area, and recognized the fantastic building stock still standing along North Broadway in A-Alley.

That site, identified as the most important piece of the puzzle for downtown redevelopment, was the intersection of NW 10th and Broadway. Imagine the potential it had; it could have been anything..a corporate headquarters, a large mixed-use development, a condo mid-rise, an NBA practice facility, and so on. What ended up going on that site, the OKC Community Foundation, while underwhelming from a development standpoint, ended up being as good as we could have hoped for. The community foundation, a respected community institution dedicated toward helping the inner city poor, is a great thing to have there..it's a shame they have to bulldoze adjacent buildings for extra parking. The EIFS entrance is tastefully done, so we can surely forgive the dreaded "fake stucco," and I think their facility fits in well with the surrounding environment, even if it isn't the pinnacle that North Broadway could have hoped for.

So since there is no condo mid-rise at NW 10th and Broadway, in the interest of jinxing another site to be underutilized, let's ponder the NEXT best development potential. And it's worth considering that things such as potential change each year as downtown continues to evolve and revitalize. I think that the progress since 2005 makes NW 10th and Broadway even more vital, especially as we anticipate that 1101 and 1100 N Broadway get restored soon.

But the progress since 2005 also makes other sites pop up on our radar. Those sites will be around the Devon Tower site, sites that connect downtown and "Core 2 Shore" taskforce lands, key sites in Bricktown and Deep Deuce, as well as the city initiative to develop a particular site in Midtown.


I like the potential of the NW 10th and Harvey-to-Hudson block to be a "perfect" development, although I don't think it's the "most vital" to the city's continued evolution. I think it is important however for Midtown, in fact, it's not hard to imagine the site's development being a prerequisite for the further development of Midtown, which is currently a collection of separate hotspots, mainly the Walker Circle area. There is also the area around the Sieber, Beatnix, Packard, Church Row, etc etc.. The one site that will connect it all, to lay the path for Midtown to evolve into the next Bricktown, will be this site that the city is taking action on. The ideal development is not anything that might be much larger than the scale of surrounding buildings, but it's important to realize that anything that doesn't completely fill the site out would be underutilization. Something very similar to Marva Ellard's former Mercy Park proposal would be ideal. Something around 4/5 stories max, but more than 2/3, and try and package as many different uses as possible. The key with residential, in order to be assured success, is to appeal to the pent-up rental demand downtown and not buy into the utter fallacy that we need more high-end for-sale units. We all fell for that one..and most of us regret it today.


The site with the most importance, by far, for the city's continued development, given the current Devon Tower development underway--is the city block owned by Nicholas Preftakes to the west of Devon. It is safe to assume Preftakes has plans because of his history as a downtown developer, being involved in many, many past downtown projects, and now given his acquisition of this entire city block at such a convenient time. The important thing to realize here, in order for this city block to realize its full potential, is that every building must remain standing. This block already comes with an exciting stock of buildings that have a ton of potential, not to mention many unique architectural features, ranging from Art Deco to Brownstone. It's a very urban, diverse, and colorful block, not to mention a sadly underutilized block. The potential uses for these buildings, once redeveloped, should take an arts-based focus. The site is surrounded by the Myriad Gardens, Devon World Headquarters, Stage Center, the Civic Center Music Hall, the OKC Museum of Art, City Hall, and Trattoria il Centro. The uses here should reflect truly being in the center of it all. Here, an art gallery could thrive, as well as upscale restaurants, law offices, perhaps a bodega, a winebar, etc etc..

The potential for new development, even large-scale new development, is going to exist across the street between the Arts District and the planned boulevard. (I would be dismayed to see large-scale infill, any time soon, proposed on the south side of the boulevard.)

Many people have their own eye on sites in Deep Deuce and Bricktown. Because of the inorganic way in which Bricktown developed, you see vastly important sites just sitting there in the middle of Bricktown. Many of these include the festival site/parking lot across from the Brewery at Sheridan and Oklahoma, the surface parking next to Tapwerks at Sheridan and Mickey Mantle, and especially the canal-front sites along Mickey Mantle. And I could go on and on about the canal. Nevermind development sites along the east periphery of Bricktown, such as Candlewood Suites and The SteelYards, there is so much work left to be done at Bricktown's core. I know that people behind the scenes are still working diligently to attract the development Bricktown will need to be successful, and there are several deals in the works. Let's hope some of them are successful! What Bricktown needs, at this point, are rental units. It needs "rooftops" in order to pave the way for more retail, and also to take some of the seasonality out of its business cycle (which has been difficult for some "pro retailers" to grasp).

SandRidge delayed

For those who haven't heard by now, SandRidge Energy's request to demolish several structures has been delayed until April 8th at 8.30 in the City Council chambers. The delay will give Downtown Design Review committee members time to individually tour the buildings slated to be replaced by nothing more than a plaza. This will allow each committee member to individually make the assessment of the building's potential for reuse.

A letter I sent to Scottye Montgomery was read at the meeting, since I wasn't able to make the meeting myself on account of being up north. Steve Lackmeyer suggested I post the letter. Since it was provided at the public meeting, here it is. For the record I don't think my letter had significant impact..I think the individual members of DDR know what they're doing, have a good feel for the community, and they've got a good staff. I just hope that my letter can show that, should they be inclined to seek out a better proposal from SandRidge, they have strong community support. The community, and everyone who reads this blog, is keenly interested in the preservation of downtown and good urbanism.

Here's the letter:


Dear Ms. Montgomery,

My name is Nick Roberts, and I'm a local resident at [address removed]. I maintain a blog advocating for Downtown Oklahoma City, but as I'm an architecture student out of state I couldn't be here for Thursday's meeting. I recently came to a Downtown Design Review meeting back in December to speak on the SandRidge Commons proposal, which was inappropriate for a non-agenda item I understand, but you gave me your email if I wished to contact you about it.

I just wanted to share some serious concerns about the SandRidge proposal, prefaced with my appreciation that SandRidge is willing to invest $100 million into our community on top of keeping Kerr McGee Tower off the vacancy rolls. They have become a true downtown supporter, which is why it's odd that this proposal poses so much harm to downtown by further hollowing out what little density remains.

The premise that sight lines from one end of downtown through to another end need to be improved so we can all feast on the site of SandRidge Tower is ludicrous. If it's for shame that great historic brick buildings block the view of the tower from Robinson, then perhaps every charming, historic building our city has left needs to be a part of SandRidge's proposal to improve sight lines of glass, steel, and concrete towers. I also am concerned by SandRidge's attempt to develop a corporate campus in the middle of downtown, when that concept is much better suited for the burbs. We'll gladly take a corporate campus out by my neighborhood, and they can enjoy incredible sight lines out there as well. In downtown, those of us with a vested interest in the center city don't want more focus on corporate towers. We want more focus on pedestrians and streets, which is a situation that gets worse when you remove density and defined space from the streets of OKC.

I would seriously question the wisdom of the out-of-state architectural firm employed by SandRidge, and clearly they are not at all familiar with OKC history. It is upsetting that they try and bring back 1965-style urban renewal, by tearing down the original headquarters of Kerr McGee as well as a 1902 building that for 4 years was home to our State Legislature. It is as if they are attempting to recreate the I.M. Pei Plan that was responsible for downtown's demise. Do they not realize the folly with the Pei Plan?

I think SandRidge's willingness to improve the two city blocks they occupy should be commended, but they should have seeked citizen input on this matter, and not the input of out-of-touch and out-of-state architectural firms. What do NYC architects care about OKC history? As evidenced by their proposal to turn the India Temple and KerMac Bldg into rubble and debris, not a whole lot. The reality is that both buildings can be placed on the national register of historic places due to their local signifance, and are eligible for tax cuts that can cover 20% of development cost. They can be feasibly brought back, and according to the man who laid the horrible EIFS facade over the India Temple, even that can be removed. Even if they went the demolition route, they would still have to do expensive asbestos abatement before the wrecking ball could come in, so by the end of it, demolition is hardly the only option due to cost constraints, especially for the KerMac Bldg which can undoubtedly be saved even if the India Temple really is "beyond saving."

Once they are demolished, notice that the immediate plan calls for none of the buildings to be replaced. Instead they will be filled in by a windswept plaza, which is a problem that currently plagues downtown. There is hardly any defined space except on Park Avenue because in the 70s we razed all our historic buildings and replaced them with these corporate moats, and now SandRidge wants the same, a moat around their corporate fortress. No plaza is good, no matter how pleasant the orthographic drawings are--they all degenerate into the same continuous windswept plaza that seems to wrap around all of downtown's lamest buildings.

There are actually a ton of people upset over the SandRidge proposal, not just myself, and I just hope that we get the best plan of action for the two city blocks between Broadway and Robinson that they own. I know it's probably too late for my comments and concerns to have much impact, but I just realized that the hearing is at tomorrow's meeting. If there is any way for my objection to be a part of the public record, I would appreciate that very much.

Thanks so much for everything you do for our great city, and thanks for hearing me out!

Sincerely,
Nick Roberts

Thursday means History, Streetwall, and Corporate Campus

March 18th will be the showdown at City Hall over whether SandRidge can turn OKC history into rubble and debris as a part of their newfangled makeover of the SandRidge corporate campus.

So before I make my last post before the vote, let's examine this concept..corporate campus. I think that first we have to identify the nature of SandRidge's project. Is it fair to label it as a corporate campus, and if not, what else could it be? I would argue that if it's not a corporate campus, it should be a dynamic and urban-friendly addition to downtown.

A few more questions are, if the project falls under the category of corporate campus, is that good for downtown? What are the ramifications of that?

Here's a better question, is it fair to look at this in the context of what the ideal development of this site would entail (comparatively opposed to the proposal at hand), or should we be bending over backwards just happy as a peach that someone was willing to occupy KMG Tower immediately after it was vacated?

Needless to say, this will be an objective post. For the most part.

This is an ideal corporate campus. It is that of Chesapeake Energy, who has gobbled up land around NW 63rd and Western Ave to build the corporate campus of Aubrey McClendon's dreams. AMC, the only OKC resident on Forbes' list of billionaires, is quoted in the Gazette saying, "I want to turn 63rd and Western into the second major focal point of this community." The Chesapeake campus continues to grow by leaps and bounds as the company expands, and currently they employ 3,500 people at their OKC headquarters that currently has just under 1 million square feet. The funny thing is that the plan keeps changing and evolving, in the masterplan shown here you see "Chopt Square" or the older, uglier office buildings at the heart of the campus--as I posted earlier, those were recently demolished for a recreational green for CHK employees. The plan has also grown to include a large mixed-use village component across Western. In the mind of AMC, his corporate campus would be completely constructed now if it weren't for the pesky recession (talk about a man with vision).

But at the end of the day, the Chesapeake Energy development is a corporate campus. That is to say the epitome of "dead after 5," and it could just as well go around any major intersection in the metro, whether it be NW 63rd, the NW Expwy, Memorial Rd, May Ave, Edmond, Hefner Rd, Broadway Extn, I-240, SW 119th, Norman, or..well you get the point. You can do a corporate campus anywhere, it's a development genre that is more suited to a suburban corridor than it is a downtown, so therefor it is in essence a type of suburban development.

The strategy behind it is to have a fabulous setting to showcase a corporation's image that dominates the entire environment it is projected onto. Downtowns boost their corporate image in the form of a skyline, and that is it (for the successful downtowns at least), whereas with a corporate campus you can have wide, rangy plazas, useless green spaces, and other elements that act like a picture frame around your corporate headquarters. All of these plaza and landscaping elements don't get in the way of pedestrians or any street life or functional purpose, because it's a corporate campus, and it's functional purpose IS to make the corporation look mighty.

There is nothing wrong with corporate campuses, and the really nifty ones like Chesapeake are planning to add the detached urban village across the street from the corporate confines. They just aren't suitable for a downtown environment in most successful downtowns.

On the other hand, the whole "dead after 5" problem that people talk about with our downtown stems from the fact that from the 60s until recently, the goal was apparently to turn downtown into one large corporate campus. I would actually suggest, aside from the point I'm getting at, that today downtown has degenerated into an executive fantasy land, where on the west side of the tracks you've got the wonderful suburban office park, and on the east side of the tracks you've got the wonderful upscale gated community--all it lacks is the gate with a sign that says, "Maywood Park." And Lower Bricktown, of course, is the suburban strip mall de jour.

Obviously we in OKC are not serious about building a downtown that is designed for people, diversity, density, and PEOPLE! If we were, then we'd be boosting downtown's density, not tearing down buildings. We would be attempting to attract residential development at all different price points, and not doing everything we can to prevent development at reasonable price points (OCURA!!). And most importantly, if we were serious of course about this whole urban thang, our focus would be on the street, and framing the street--not on corporate office towers, and framing them.

For those not familiar, Tom Ward was a co-founder of Chesapeake Energy with AMC--he left on amicable terms, and now AMC is in lone charge of CHK. However, I would use this as proof to venture that Tom Ward is a suburbs man. He's a corporate campus man. He understands the potential impact that Devon Tower will have in terms of projecting Devon's corporate image on downtown, and he knows he has to keep up in terms of the community relations race (it's not enough to have commercials everywhere there's a Devon commercial, billboards everywhere there's a Devon billboard). And believe me, that 850 ft tall tower will be visible everywhere from Edmond to Norman. From Tom Ward's perspective, he's going to go with the suburban model because that's whats most familiar to him--and the whole Devon thing means that it's time to step it up. Keep in retrospect through all of this that Tom Ward didn't go downtown for reasons that he just always liked downtown..it was financially a real deal for him to move into KMG.

_________________________________________

Or is SandRidge Commons a suitable downtown development? Does it contribute to the livability, or 24/7 vitality of downtown? Does it add life downtown, or just more of the same unfortunate sameness of corporate plazas and useless parks? You be the judge.


"Oh, but this will be different. This will be nice pavement and grass." That's what they always say..

Of course, even if you are convinced of how horrible this development will be for downtown, it is still worth considering that SandRidge still has an argument. I don't think that my argument is 100% infallible, I'm not that big-headed. There are still the arguments of property rights, and whether SandRidge should have to take marching orders from the public. That said, I don't think it's too much to ask for quality developments at least in downtown. Also I think there's something to be said for how thankful we are that SandRidge is growing, here in OKC, and that they took over KMG Tower. Should we be bending over backward and let them lay waste to our downtown since they helped us with KMG Tower?

I think it's pretty obvious that this is about developing a corporate campus. This is about taking the hollowed out area of downtown around the old Kerr McGee campus and expanding it all the way to Robinson Ave, hence how SandRidge has boasted that demolishing the KerMac will "improve the sight lines of the tower." Translation: It will inflict the corporate image of SandRidge Tower, once hidden from sight on Robinson by the streetwall.

Streetwall, which I once again brought up earlier, brings me to my last point. I agree, everyone around here has been talking about streetwall lately, and I'm no different, and it's a tired argument. Except for the point that it's true. Great cities and great downtowns are made up out of well-defined space, and private property that comes together and frames the public realm, and also adds its own flavor to it. That indeed does exclude windswept plazas which contribute nothing, but actually detract in terms of possibility cost, as well as lack of definition for the public realm. What we ought to be doing with all of these plazas is start fashioning them into the surface of the moon (how about a plaza made out of cheese?), because that's about how urban they are.

But Thursday's not about streetwall. It's not about history either, even though yes, we do stand to lose significant parts of OKC History when the India Temple and KerMac are turned to rubble. It's not about urban renewal, either. It's about corporate campus, and a combination of all of those things. On Thursday, Downtown Design Review has the opportunity to say "NO" to tearing down OKC history, urban renewal in the year 2010, removing one of OKC's last streetwalls, preventing historic loft conversions, and last and not least, hollowing out more of downtown for a suburban corporate campus.

_____________________________________________


I recently discovered a REALLY COOL set of KerMac interior pics on Steve Lackmeyer's okchistory.com website. Apparently the inside of that old building is just full of old murals and paintings commemorating Kerr McGee's storied history in Oklahoma, afterall, the shabby old KerMac building IS the original headquarters for old KMG. If we have to lose the building that temporarily housed the Oklahoma Legislature for 4 years because the building is beyond saving, that's sad but so be it, but let's at least not lose the old KerMac Building that we know investors would like to convert to historic lofts. Imagine it: Kerr McGee Lofts, or better yet, Oiler Lofts.

If you're interested in a cumulative read, and have lots of time, consider reviewing the long series of posts I've written on the SandRidge demolition proposal:

Save the KerMac!
It's baaaaaaack... (Urban Renewal)
Hard to argue
Building demolition rampant
The problem with an otherwise excellent SandRidge proposal

As well as as these Cityshots:

Cityshot XVII
Cityshot XXXVI

Save the KerMac!

As we all know, the KerMac Building, the original headquarters of longtime Oklahoma energy giant Kerr McGee, is slated to be demolished. After they get approval from the Downtown Design Review committee and get the permit from the city, there will be no stopping this particular component of an otherwise excellent and laudable sweeping campus redevelopment scheme being proposed by SandRidge Energy.

So before that happens, let me just pose the question: Was Kerr McGee important to Oklahoma? I would love to hear the explanation from anyone who can say KMG was NOT incredibly important to Oklahoma. The fact is that throughout much of the 50s, 60s, 70s, and especially the 80s, and on until 2005 when KMG was no more--that this was a very important corporation. Look at the people who have come from this corporation, the extremely powerful U.S. Senator Robert S. Kerr; and the godfather of Downtown OKC during Urban Renewal, Dean McGee (they now give out the Dean A. McGee Award to the biggest downtown players in his honor). These two people had an incredibly lasting affect on Oklahoma City, worthy of commemorating alone. These men's dreams to form an energy giant came together in the building SandRidge now wants to tear down.

The impact of Kerr McGee, as a corporation, is also widespread and huge. For a long time, KMG was OKC's largest energy company--up until the recent breakneck ascent of Devon and Chesapeake. It employed thousands and thousands of hard-working Oklahomans and powered the OKC economy. That's the good history. There's also bad history we must not forget, such as the affair with an activist employee at their nuclear facility in Crescent, OK--Karen Silkwood.

SandRidge is new to Oklahoma. I don't want to second-guess their commitment to the community, as it turns out SandRidge's founder, Mitchell Malone, is an OSU alum who recently donated $29 million to OSU. So there's no doubting their commitment to Oklahoma, and that's great. But SandRidge, formerly known as Riata Energy, is not from OKC--it relocated here from Amarillo. They are likely familiar with the Kerr McGee story as anyone in the energy industry probably is, but preserving that history is undoubtedly not a priority for them like it should be for people who are from OKC.

Furthermore, who's to say SandRidge isn't out-right trying to root out the KMG legacy around their headquarters and replace it with SandRidge footprints? I can even see a reasonable debate for and against that, because it's certainly understandable that SandRidge DID thankfully purchase and occupy the tower when KMG left us high and dry. However on the other side, the argument that KMG history is NOT Luke Corbett history has to win at the end of the day. KMG history is OKC history, and it's about the history of the thousands of people that worked for it, people from hard working oil drillers, to people like Karen Silkwood. It's the history of Oklahoma, in a microcosm. SandRidge needs to be respectful of that, and there is no reason for them to mow down the original headquarters of Kerr McGee and replace it with nothing more than a windswept plaza to inflict SandRidge's corporate image on Robinson Avenue.

The old KerMac building also needs to be placed on the National Register of Historic Places, and this is something that SandRidge can do. If SandRidge doesn't want to do it, then a historical group in OKC can start the nomination process themselves. If the National Park Service finds that the original headquarters of Kerr McGee is significant to the legacy of this former energy giant that shaped much of Oklahoma history, then it will be placed on the Register of Historic Places. This will be a boon for the property, with a plaque out front detailing the building's importance, as well as avenues for special preservation grants that can be used to rehabilitate the building. Many of the grants would not prevent it from being rehabilitated and put back on the market as offices or apartments. There's no reason that a building with its historical importance being rooted in business function can't be commemorated by being functional once again.

It's baaaaaack...

Urban renewal. It's back, and it's in full force. Examine the "main" blunders that OKC made during urban renewal:

-Reconfiguration of the city grid. By removing several streets, making way for superblocks (city blocks that are made up of combined blocks, such as the Cox Center site), and filling them up with single structures we accomplished one thing: We cut off flow from the north side of downtown to the south side of downtown, and as a result, the south side withered away. We cut out large swaths of city and replaced it with dull superblock structures like a convention center, an arena, etc.. and what's even worse, we put them all together. If they were spread around, the edge of the Myriad Gardens would have vitality, the convention center wouldn't be so bad, the Ford Center would be surrounded by retail and restaurants, etc.

-Demolition of existing urban fabric. Here's a shocking concept to most people: A dense city is something that happens naturally, believe it or not. So at the end of the day, after all of these crappy incentives and urban renewal projects, what have we really accomplished? You get more of a downtown that's suited for events and special occasions than for any kind of lifestyle at all, and that's detrimental. Now the incentives are needed because it was unnatural forces that killed most downtowns in the first place (i.e., government subsidizing freeways, roads, cars, white school districts, etc). But when you remove that urban fabric, not only do you remove something that was built specifically for a city to grow into it, but you've severely diminished your ability to bounce back economically.

-Wiping out the architectural and cultural jewels of our city. What's probably the #1 thing that downtown used to be full of that no longer exists in any comparable form or fashion? MOVIES. Vaudeville. Film houses. The only performing arts that exists in downtown anymore are that at the Civic Center Music Hall, which has become a major league performing arts center. The Stage Center hosts a theatrical production once in a blue moon, too, but that's it. There were literally dozens of cultural jewels we have lost. We also lost a lot of our downtown's architectural significance. The result, once you lose all of those things that add intrinsic value to the built environment, is an environment that is not worth caring about to most people.

-Loss of defined space. Believe it or not, well-defined space is another absolutely essential aspect of city development. When people think of the great cities they don't think of one building, but usually it's a street lined with special buildings that build off each other. When people think of these great cities they think of entire environments, not isolated buildings. Defined space, such as a street lined with uniform buildings, also creates natural safety. There is clear definition of the space intended for pedestrians, and you see pedestrians and news stands and more there; there is clear definition of the space intended for cars, and you see cars and bicycles there. When you lose definition you get a downtown environment that behaves more like a stretch of the Northwest Expressway, where there is space for cars, and then the buildings randomly placed, and that's it. You also lose the natural ability to navigate a downtown without a map, which would be possible with a downtown grid that makes SENSE. Today's downtown resembles a space rover trekking through Mars, past unnatural developments like the Century Center and the parking garages along E.K. Gaylord, one-way streets, blocked off streets, streets that dead-end such as Broadway and Harvey and every other street, and so on. It's a nightmare to get around Downtown OKC if you aren't from there!! It just doesn't make sense, there is no defined space, it has not been allowed to develop naturally, and we still don't get that.

-Loss of traditional community uses. Believe it or not the traditional community use of a downtown is not 95% office. Downtowns of olden days were dominated by retail, the thing that is most absent from downtown today! They also had abundant residential units, civic amenities, recreational space, and then there was also a lot of offices. It used to be the beating heart of the city. When we took out the retail districts of downtown, and expected it to relocate to new space that was yet-to-be-built (the planned "Downtown Galleria") we were expecting something unnatural and heavily subsidized to work just as well as the naturally-developing retail district had for decades. That didn't cut it. The result from that blunder was that downtown lost all personal relevance and for a small handful of people that have lived in OKC for a long time, they're still skeptical of going downtown after 5.

So I have gone over some reasons why, specifically, urban renewal was bad. However it obviously doesn't take a rocket scientist or complex explanations for the average pedestrian to tell that urban renewal is bad, all you have to do is experience Downtown OKC today for yourself and you can tell it was not good.

Well looks like we're at it again! And because we have not learned from our own history, we are absolutely doomed to keep repeating the mistakes over and over. Let's go over the main blunders I outlined above, again..



-Reconfiguration of the city grid? Yup, we're definitely at it again. Just look at Core to Shore, particularly the enormous cluster of superblocks beginning at the Cox Center and Myriad Gardens and going all the way down to the new Crosstown. That is a TON of wasted frontage that could be taken up instead by cafes, townhomes, retail storefronts, and other delightful things a downtown SHOULD have. And if the vitality of a city is in the movement of life from one block to another, what is this? There are no blocks here. The Myriad Gardens is an underutilized park surrounded by no significant development that takes advantage of the park front real estate. Likewise, the new Core to Shore park is doomed to the exact same fate, minimized to the point of serving as nothing more than a pretty front yard for the convention center. Instead, why don't we immerse the convention center in the city and surround it on all sides by neighborhoods? It would seem to me that would ensure the success of the park more than anything else!

-Demolition of existing urban fabric? Yeah, we've got tons of that, too! As I wrote the other month in "The problem with an otherwise excellent SandRidge proposal," and in "Building demolition rampant," and countless other posts from before the recent SandRidge proposal, there is a very disturbing trend of tearing down buildings that has come up over the last 5 years. It started with the Brewers who weaseled a demolition proposal through downtown design review mechanisms without anyone ever getting notice of it. Then one day people on their way to work noticed that there was no longer a building standing on East Sheridan, across from the new Hampton Inn. People scratched their heads and wondered, "Wow, how did that happen?" The bottom line is that downtown design review mechanisms have lost any of their effectiveness. The Brewers and others are getting everything from demolition proposals to inflatable dragons in, against "the rules," without ever getting approval from the design review mechanisms intended to prevent that very thing. Sometimes it's because the person filing the permit at City Hall doesn't realize that a signature is missing, other times it's sheer corruption, other times it's sheer incompetence, but most of the time it's a lethal combination of all three things. Today we are witnessing an era in downtown OKC where demolition is championed as "substantial development." How did we get this low?

-Wiping out the architectural and cultural jewels of our city? Yessir, we've got plenty of that going on as well. Just look at the grand historic KerMac building, a solid building with developers clamoring to renovate it into apartments, with unique architectural detail. It's going to be replaced with a windswept plaza, similar to what already exists all the way around the periphery of the SandRidge Tower. We're also looking at buildings disappearing from Bricktown and MidTown and Automobile Alley. We're also fixing to tear down the India Temple, a building covered by a hideous bland EIFS facade, underneath which is a beautifully detailed and intricate structure. In fact the India Temple was also once home to the State Government during the period after the State Government fled Guthrie and was waiting on the new Capitol Building to be built. That's something we're about to recklessly tear down.

-Loss of defined space? Oh yeah. This is perhaps the most troubling aspect of the "New Urban Renewal" that OKC has set out on, particularly with tearing down one of the last remaining streetwalls in Oklahoma. Out with the old, in with the new, as they say. Downtowns used to be lined uniformly with complimentary buildings. Now all Tulsa has left is Boston Avenue and Main Street. Tulsa's Boston Avenue is by far Oklahoma's greatest street, lined with complimentary highly detailed high-rises as it is, bounded on one end by Oklahoma's tallest skyscraper (for now) and on the other by one of the world's tallest cathedrals, the towering Art-Deco symbol of Tulsa (The Boston Avenue Methodist Church), you could literally drop the unknowing off on Boston Avenue and convince them they are in New York City. OKC really only has three such streetwalls remaining from its once-great downtown: Park Avenue, Harvey Avenue, and Robinson Avenue. Broadway would count too, if its buildings weren't all surrounded by plazas. It is however Robinson Avenue, the least-intact corridor that still resembles some kind of streetwall, that is most endanger due to its proximity to energy giant SandRidge.

Which of these do you like better? Which of the below pictures shows a more defined, urban space? Yeah, tearing down the KerMac bldg will be GREAT for making SandRidge Tower perfectly visible all across downtown--but is that a good thing? Should we be able to look from one block and see straight through to other blocks, and should we HAVE to look at SandRidge Tower everywhere we go in downtown? Those are things worth considering. That's what this is about, is tearing down parts of downtown to make their building more visible. At what cost to the rest of us is that worth it?











-Loss of traditional community uses? Well, you be the judge of that. For what it's worth, we still haven't hardly gotten any meaningful retail going on anywhere in downtown. And all the restaurants are in MidTown or Bricktown. So I would have to say that not only have traditional community uses failed to materialize throughout this "renaissance" of downtown, but in the end we are actually getting ourselves further and further from that ever being realized downtown.

So after all, let me be the first to welcome you to the year 1975. Our mayor is Mick Cornett, our cause is Core to Shore, this message was brought to you by SandRidge Energy, and everywhere else it is the year 2010.