I just hope they put electric heaters on the underside of the awning. This should be a requirement for all awnings.

I just hope they put electric heaters on the underside of the awning. This should be a requirement for all awnings.

Electric heaters are energy hogs. Why would they do this in OK? Maybe at the entrance, but I doubt even that.

Electric heaters are energy hogs. Why would they do this in OK? Maybe at the entrance, but I doubt even that.

Because is it keeps the area warm for people getting out of their cars, waiting to be picked up, or walking on the sidewalk. They are used all over the world. I know some place around downtown already uses them but I can't remember where.

They make them so someone must be buying them.

http://www.somfysystems.com/en-us/home/our-products/product-solutions/retractable-awnings/somfy-s-new-heater.html

Infrared Heaters...the Green Alternative!

Lower running costs than gas heaters
Not affected by wind unlike gas heaters - IR heaters warm the people and not the air!
No time for heater to warm up - no wasted heat or electricity

Because is it keeps the area warm for people getting out of their cars, waiting to be picked up, or walking on the sidewalk. They are used all over the world. I know some place around downtown already uses them but I can't remember where.

They make them so someone must be buying them.

Somfy's New Heater - (http://www.somfysystems.com/en-us/home/our-products/product-solutions/retractable-awnings/somfy-s-new-heater.html)

Infrared Heaters...the Green Alternative!

Lower running costs than gas heaters
Not affected by wind unlike gas heaters - IR heaters warm the people and not the air!
No time for heater to warm up - no wasted heat or electricityLike!

I like the entrance design, and hope BUD doesn't make them change it.

When yer right, yer right. Looks good.

Because is it keeps the area warm for people getting out of their cars, waiting to be picked up, or walking on the sidewalk. They are used all over the world. I know some place around downtown already uses them but I can't remember where.

They make them so someone must be buying them.

Somfy's New Heater - (http://www.somfysystems.com/en-us/home/our-products/product-solutions/retractable-awnings/somfy-s-new-heater.html)

Infrared Heaters...the Green Alternative!

Lower running costs than gas heaters
Not affected by wind unlike gas heaters - IR heaters warm the people and not the air!
No time for heater to warm up - no wasted heat or electricity

Yes, I know all about IR heaters and have developed products around them. They are used in spot duty, but not generally used under all awnings, just strategically placed in drop-off/pick-up areas. Depending on the type of IR filament they are 60 to 95% efficient, but that doesn't make them energy efficient. Plain electric resistance heating is 100% efficient, but still an energy hog. They are used outdoors as they don't heat the air, just the surface on which the IR waves land, providing they are within range. Around here they are considered a luxury. In northern climates with cheap (hydroelectric) power they are more common.

Maybe you see awnings I don't then because I only see the ones at the waiting/drop-off area and the outdoor seating area.

Guys - please take it to the heating & air forum.

Guys - please take it to the heating & air forum.

What is wrong with this thread? We are talking about the Holiday Inn Express.

Maybe you see awnings I don't then because I only see the ones at the waiting/drop-off area and the outdoor seating area.


Okay. I was looking at the ones to the left of the drop off and around the corner abutting the glass area. Drop off area is appropriate but the other areas I don't think so much.

Guys - please take it to the heating & air forum.


What is wrong with this thread? We are talking about the Holiday Inn Express.

LOL, it was a joke and I found it humorous. Maybe we should take it to the have a sense of humor forum?

Bob Bright is not an architect, he's an attorney. Krittenbrink IS an architect (a respected one, with lots of HP work in his portfolio), but I would disagree with him regarding the need for absolute adherence to a historic architectural style on a new structure, albeit one in a district largely made up of historic structures. I would argue that the proposed entrance (whether intentionally or not) echoes the modern architecture of Aloft, which will be plainly visible from the Holiday Inn Express. I think a flourish like this helps provide a visual transition between Bricktown's century-old warehouses and the starkly modern lines of Aloft.

The project architect (Scott Dedmon) who was quoted in the story hit the nail on the head when he says the design team wished to avoid a “Disneyland replication design” that attempts to recreate historic buildings. The intricacies of historic preservation and good design within urban historic districts is sometimes a little confusing if someone isn't studied on the specifics. However, usually it would actually be considered INAPPROPRIATE within the HP community to build a new building that is indistinguishable from the historic buildings in its neighborhood. Now, if you were adapting an existing historic building and wanted to cut away a bunch of the existing structure to put in a glass entry, it would definitely be troubling from a pure HP standpoint (Bricktown is NOT technically an HP district, however). But that is not the case here, since it is new construction.

As mentioned above, it is wonderful and entirely appropriate that the building's facades are primarily brick and that it uses district-appropriate styling cues such as the parapets and their details. But ALSO appropriate is the glass entryway that acknowledges this is a modern building with a modern use. Frankly the only thing that bothers me at all is the HVAC units below all of the windows, but that is hardly a deal killer for me on a limited-service hotel.

The BUDC for the most part has its heart in the right place, but is definitely prone to overreach. Like other urban design commissions, their job SHOULD BE to interpret whether or not a project meets ESTABLISHED design guidelines as previously set out by the planning department, and to approve or disapprove projects almost exclusively based on those guidelines. Most of the time this can be accomplished by acting based on staff recommendations. In most cases the assigned planning department staff liaison is far more qualified to determine whether something meets the requirements or not than the board member is, because they live with those design guidelines and/or helped draft them. But fairly often they will ignore staff recommendations (this happens on other design commissions too of course) and try to impose their own subjective tastes and values on a project.

If a commissioner believes a certain design element should be a requirement or at least encouraged or discouraged within their subject area, they should be taking this up with the planning department and working to have it added to the official design guidelines for the district, NOT springing it on an unsuspecting architect or developer at a meeting where they are hoping to get their project approval. The problem with the work-to-change-the-guidelines approach is that it actually requires real work outside of just showing up at a monthly meeting and pontificating.

The absolute worst are people on these types of committees who show up to meetings without even studying their packets in advance or fully understanding the design guidelines for their area, who then start making subjective taste-based pronouncements off-the-cuff. It's not a fiefdom, and the requirements on people hoping to invest in a district should be completely open and transparent (and CONSISTENTLY enforced).

If a project ignores established design guidelines, then by all means it should be deferred or turned down. But 11th hour suggestions based on nothing but the commissioner's personal tastes (or ignorance of the actual requirements) can be extremely detrimental to a project and are also the source of most developers' trepidation when seeking approval. This can actually have a chilling effect on others considering investment in a district.

In my opinion this project is totally appropriate for Bricktown, and I for one am glad to welcome it to the neighborhood.

Well said. And I would add that Bright is pretty strong in his planning commission views as well. Sometimes against logit and reason

I'll be curious as to whether the design committee changes its stance on this.

I'll be curious as to whether the design committee changes its stance on this.

Its stance on the modern entryway, or what? If construction is about to start, they better change their minds quickly.

Well said. And I would add that Bright is pretty strong in his planning commission views as well. Sometimes against logit and reason

He has his brilliant and no-so-brilliant moments.

That was a lot of typing I did yesterday, and I'm not sure I would have bothered reading it myself, if it were posted by somebody else. In a nutshell:

The job of that and other like commissions is to gently yet firmly enforce City guidelines developed over time (and with much thought) by trained planning professionals, NOT to show up at a meeting and start randomly spouting off-the-cuff, trying to force a district or a project to conform to their own personal (and in some cases misinformed) tastes and vision, or whatever strikes them at the moment as pretty. If no City design guidelines directly address a particular element of the project, they should fall back on nationally established planning and/or HP guidelines, when applicable. If they are not personally familiar with such (which is OK - it is actually a GOOD thing to have some people on those committees who are not architects and planners by trade), they should defer to the recommendations of their trained and qualified City staff liaison. Period, end of story.

That job should be very much like that of a judge. Judges don't write the laws; their job is to interpret and fairly enforce the laws that are on the books, and when they are in a grey area, to look for precedent that might assist in their decision. Unfortunately I think that sometimes members of various design committees forget this, or might not even believe it to begin with.

I like the entrance design, and hope BUD doesn't make them change it.

I do too. It's so strange the garbage the BUD will approve and then you have something like this, a super design, really, and they quibble with it? Jesus what's wrong with these people?

I do too. It's so strange the garbage the BUD will approve and then you have something like this, a super design, really, and they quibble with it? Jesus what's wrong with these people?

Garbage they approve? What's been garbage in your mind?

Garbage they approve? What's been garbage in your mind?

Canal front parking?

Canal front parking?

They legally HAD to approve it. How many times do I have to explain that on here? They complained, complained, and complained at those meetings, but worked to get a solution that was relatively acceptable. had they rejected it right away, the applicant could easily have gone to the Board of Adjustment and won; which would have resulted in a design even more disgusting than what was approved. The Code, which has since been modified, allowed it. It had nothing to do with the Committee.

You might say that, in judicial terms, that BUDC is an activist panel, where as Downtown Design Review is generally a pacifist group not wanting to push limits or people too far. Which model is better is up to the people to decide.

They legally HAD to approve it. How many times do I have to explain that on here?

You don't have to explain. The only point being made is that they approved crap and question this (HIE). Did they approve the crap against their will? Yep. The same thing happened with Sandridge.

You don't have to explain. The only point being made is that they approved crap and question this (HIE). Did they approve the crap against their will? Yep. The same thing happened with Sandridge.

Hardly the same thing. I think at least half of that Committee was all for tear down.

My biggest problem with activism on those types of committees is when it comes from an ignorance of the actual guidelines. Just because something SEEMS right to someone in power doesn't mean it IS right. Those decisions should be fully informed, or if not informed they should defer to staff, who are both informed AND trained. If they want to be activists, they should instead take an active role in modifying code before it comes to a head on a project. Off-the-cuff surprises on projects are time, money and resource wasters, and they need to respect that. The canal-front parking issue is a perfect example. Kudos to them for taking a stand in that case, but that rule should have been changed long before it came into question on a design review. Planning should involve, well, actually PLANNING rather than just REACTING. And that is no dig at the Planning Department or staff, who I think do a great job despite being historically and routinely undercut by politics and politicians.

But someone in Bricktown (or other districts in question) should be taking an active role in working with planning to keep guidelines up-to-date and protective of the district's character and potential, and then zealously protect those guidelines AS WRITTEN. It seems that we have a hard time sticking with this course of action on committees like this; the pendulum usually seems to swing too far in either one direction or the other.

Isn't it Holiday Inn Express that does the "...oh, well, I stayed at a HIE last night so I know what I'm talking about..." commercials? Maybe BUD stayed at one recently :cool:

My biggest problem with activism on those types of committees is when it comes from an ignorance of the actual guidelines. Just because something SEEMS right to someone in power doesn't mean it IS right. Those decisions should be fully informed, or if not informed they should defer to staff, who are both informed AND trained. If they want to be activists, they should instead take an active role in modifying code before it comes to a head on a project. Off-the-cuff surprises on projects are time, money and resource wasters, and they need to respect that. The canal-front parking issue is a perfect example. Kudos to them for taking a stand in that case, but that rule should have been changed long before it came into question on a design review. Planning should involve, well, actually PLANNING rather than just REACTING. And that is no dig at the Planning Department or staff, who I think do a great job despite being historically and routinely undercut by politics and politicians.

But someone in Bricktown (or other districts in question) should be taking an active role in working with planning to keep guidelines up-to-date and protective of the district's character and potential, and then zealously protect those guidelines AS WRITTEN. It seems that we have a hard time sticking with this course of action on committees like this; the pendulum usually seems to swing too far in either one direction or the other.

All too true.

Saw some workers milling around in the building today. Should be starting demo soon.

Looks like they are getting ready to crank up this project, as the contractor (Brightman Construction | Dallas, TX Hotel Construction Company (http://brightmanc.com/)) has applied for a move-on permit, which usually means they will be bringing a construction trailer to the site.

Looks like they are getting ready to crank up this project, as the contractor (Brightman Construction | Dallas, TX Hotel Construction Company (http://brightmanc.com/)) has applied for a move-on permit, which usually means they will be bringing a construction trailer to the site.

I like their conversion of The Fisk Building in Amarillo, into a Courtyard Marriott. I think a building, like the one at approximately 420 W. Main would be awesome for a hotel conversion. You could already have retail on the first floor. Hopefully since that building is in the Preftakes block, it doesn't go. Its got great character.

This whole project has moved very fast.

The building is coming down

YouTube:

http://goo.gl/pgPOU

Steffen?s Dairy Demolition Begins in Bricktown, Hotel Construction Set to Start | OKC Central (http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2013/02/19/steffens-dairy-demolition-begins-in-bricktown-hotel-construction-set-to-start/)

Kind of sad to see the old dairy go as I think it had some nice charm, but demolition is well underway.

I can see the backhoes doing major work from my office window. Really coming down fast! lol.

I wonder if this project will have a crane for reconsutruction?

The photos and video show the area between buildings west of Steffen’s, not on Main St. by the way. Starting from the back to the front.

The building is coming down

YouTube:

http://goo.gl/pgPOU

Cool. Thanks!

You gotta love it. A building in OKC starts demolition, and minutes later a video of it shows up on YouTube.
:)

Am I hearing chickens clucking in the background in that video?

just fyi this property closed recently for

Supreme Bright Bricktown LLC from MKT Bricktown LLC, 101 E Main Street, $1,621,000.

Knocked down the remaining front walls today.

did you snap a pic?

http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/4120/hotelwj.jpg

Well, no need to post my pic from last Sunday now, lol.

http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/4120/hotelwj.jpg

Looking good! That's some nice rubble!
:wink:

Looks like the demolition is just about complete (photos from today courtesy catch22):

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/holidayinnexpress3713a.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/holidayinnexpress3713b.jpg

Someone might want to change the status from proposed to under construction.

Several entrance alternatives to be considered at the next Bricktown Design Review Committee meeting on March 13:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/hiexpress0.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/hiexpress1.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/hiexpress2.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/hiexpress3.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/hiexpress4.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/hiexpress5.jpg

This is so ridiculous. The original design was fine. These new designs are fine. The Bricktown Design Review Committee should really pick their battles better.

Yes the original proposal was excellent. They need to be fighting the hotel down the street at Lincoln and Reno.

I think Alternative 4 is the best option. I went and looked at urban hotels that I like from a pedestrian view point and ones that have a uniform front with continuous horizontal lines seem to be the best. Give it a shot yourself. Go look at hotels in walkable urban areas and see what kind you think looks best and then see which of these alternatives most closely resembles that. In these rendering you are seeing it from an angle you would never see it from in real life.

If it was me I would even get rid of the extra thickness at the top of the entry and just make it the same as the rest of the corner of the building and maybe even run that trim piece all the way across the front.

Upon further inspection, I am even finding the ones I like the best extend the entrance out over the sidewalk and not up the building.

option 1 would be my pick

What in the hell was wrong with the original design? I don't understand what this city does sometimes... Why do we pick apart this development when RIGHT DOWN THE ROAD there's a parking lot being built with a hideous hotel as a side project?

What in the hell was wrong with the original design? I don't understand what this city does sometimes... Why do we pick apart this development when RIGHT DOWN THE ROAD there's a parking lot being built with a hideous hotel as a side project?

That hotel down the street isn't approved yet - and won't be in the configuration we saw.

That hotel down the street isn't approved yet - and won't be in the configuration we saw.

they didn't have a big problem with that site layout during the informal presentation

they didn't have a big problem with that site layout during the informal presentation

That is probably because they were dumbfounded by the building itself.

Original, Alt 2, or Alt 3 - IMO.

good design, good project.

Option 3 please

I think Alternative 4 is the best option.

I agree. That is my pick.

Going Too Far on Design Review in Bricktown? | OKC Central (http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2013/03/12/going-too-far-on-design-review-in-bricktown/)

Going Too Far on Design Review in Bricktown? | OKC Central (http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2013/03/12/going-too-far-on-design-review-in-bricktown/)

It really is ridiculous considering the crap that has been approved. This project is high quality and some of the comments were ridiculous. I loved that they pointed out that they weren't trying to create a fake Disney Land atmosphere.