For regular buffoons with no understanding of planning, architecture, and construction, I would agree that they should hold their judgment until the finished product. In hindsight, they were likely anticipating a winter blast at some point even if it was late, that just never came - so the landscaping was all evergreens to begin and they staged the deciduous varieties later just to be safe, not that landscaping sequencing is that important.

My concern is still that cedars in general are more appropriate for rural interstage frontage than downtown, and kinda concedes (or con-cedars?) the point that after they tore those buildings, they realized they needed wind-breaks, massing, etc.

Instead of getting piled on (before anything more is said), I just wanted to pass along the positive compliment on the work that's happened more recently, that is all.

What about for those of us that are educated and know how horrible it is in the design and build phases? Can we continue to criticize them?

While I appreciate the investments Sandridge has made in restoring their areas and breathing new life into their campus, that vacant gap south of the Braniff Building is ugly as **** and it's unfortunate that corner sits empty right in the middle of downtown.


Don't worry, just thing about the future money they will need to spend to fix it when they realize they made a mistake (which will be in about 4 years).


Don't you know that's for future expansion.....? JK, but it really could be some year, or a great place for another resturant.


When the streetcar goes by there and the Sandridge Execs see that no one is using their suburban style garden except homeless people taking a wiz (wearing or not wearing Greek togas) they will realize their mistake. Until then it will make a great Zuccotti Park.


But they are planting thousands of trees to replace the historic buildings. They are a green company that cares about the city! LOL


What about for those of us that are educated and know how horrible it is in the design and build phases? Can we continue to criticize them?

All of this...what a waste of prime DT real estate. Can't wait to get my toga out and ponder with the homeless and other philosophers in this "great" new public space.

All of this...what a waste of prime DT real estate. Can't wait to get my toga out and ponder with the homeless and other philosophers in this "great" new public space.

Those dense cluster of shrubs and trees will also be great habitat for rats as well! They have a new place to mate downtown!

You guys should move on.

All this regurgitated chatter reminds me of the high school would-be jock who keeps retelling to anyone within earshot how they lost the big game in 1972 but if the coach would have been smart enough to put them in they would have won big. Sometimes you have to let the hate go.

I still contend we are truly 2-5 years from seeing a semi-mature vision of what the plans are, if they all become real, and how the execution effects that section of town. It may be the unmitigated stupid disaster some on here want it to be, or a vibrant re-do of the area as some hope. My personal opinion is that it is improving the area immeasurably whether or not is is 100% new urbanism compliant. Yes, there is a tragic loss there, but the tow truck has removed the wrecked cars and we need to move on.

You guys should move on.

We did move on. We are 4 years into the future.

The aerial shots really don't do it justice - since the landscaping is not filled in yet. However, from the lobby, and looking down from the lower SD offices, it really is starting to look good. The sidewalks are coming together, cool looking lighting systems and handrails are getting installed and the flower beds are being developed. There is also what looks to be a fountain or some other type of water feature being built north of the tower. Don't recall seeing any renderings of this, but it looks promising.

I am an SD employee and a downtown resident, and like to think I am not biased. Just very optimistic about all the new developments. Sure time will tell, but I love the idea behind it and hope for the best.

We did move on. We are 4 years into the future.

Hmmmm, I woulda guessed closer to eight.

I'm *really* trying to keep a positive attitude about SandRidge Commons but this just looks terrible.

Not only is it a massive hole, it was made in our only true urban canyon and has the unintended and very unfortunate effect of highlighting those horrible AT&T buildings which look doubly bad in relation to the SR Tower.

You notice the architect never shows this perspective but it's the one that will be seen by more people than any other:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8425/7762385856_9b41a3a0b7_b.jpg

I think it may be possible to eventually see some sort of development on that corner. I assume SR will want to maintain the plaza area with the shade structure, so the anything built there would not be very deep. What might fit in such a location / building? I can see an 'L' shaped structure wrapping around the corner and leaving a small alley between it and the Braniff building fo access. Residential over retail/commercial for lease? Corporate apartments for Sand Ridge? Speculative small commercial? I hope SandRidge continues to grow and possibly something like this might happen.

...it was made in our only true urban canyon...

Park Avenue is another one, and in my opinion the best one. There's also Harvey from 4th St. south to Devon's rotunda.

I'm *really* trying to keep a positive attitude about SandRidge Commons but this just looks terrible.

Like I said earlier, it won't take long for them to realize their mistake and then they will have to fix it.

Like I said earlier, it won't take long for them to realize their mistake and then they will have to fix it.

At least there more likely to have the money to do that unlike that energy company that built a college campus along 63rd. lol

Here's another rendering that shows the expansion of the Broadway/Kerr parking garage to the north, taking the site now occupied by a Chase drive-in bank:

http://video.aia.org/aiaawards/2012/2012-regionalurbandesign/SandRidge/i/photo5.jpg

That's east

I meant the garage would be expanded to the north of the existing Broadway / Kerr parking.

Here's a couple more from different perspectives.

The second one shows outdoor seating for Kitchen No. 324 outside the Braniff Building:



http://www.radiiinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/OKC3.jpg

http://www.radiiinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/OKC1.jpg

The first rendering here really illustrates what a poor decision it was to tear down the building on the SW corner of that block. It just looks terrible. I hope they have to add something to that corner sooner rather than later, but I'm not optimistic.

The first rendering here really illustrates what a poor decision it was to tear down the building on the SW corner of that block. It just looks terrible. I hope they have to add something to that corner sooner rather than later, but I'm not optimistic.

Indeed. That forest is a pathetic choice of urban design.

So will the Braniff really have a green roof or is it just conceptual?

I believe all the SandRidge buildings will have green roofs:

http://video.aia.org/aiaawards/2012/2012-regionalurbandesign/SandRidge/i/photo3.jpg

What are the realistic possibilities for something on the SW corner? Obviously, a multi floor mixed use building is what everyone (here) would want, but that doesn't seem to be too likely. Perhaps a 7-10 floor spec built office building, used primarily for Sandridge contractors?

SandRidge has absolutely no plans to build on the corner where they tore down three buildings.

Their plan is for it to stay the way it's depicted here.

http://www.radiiinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/OKC6.jpg

What are the realistic possibilities for something on the SW corner? Obviously, a multi floor mixed use building is what everyone (here) would want, but that doesn't seem to be too likely. Perhaps a 7-10 floor spec built office building, used primarily for Sandridge contractors?

That sounds sustainable.

Call me country bumpkin, but I don't think that looks near on as bad as some folk here do. While it's true it's not an urban canyon, i.e., a right pretty name for tall city buildings butting up against each other, it's not at all pathetic to provide some green space for the worker bees and others to to enjoy when they are outside the hive. Sure, someone could put a CVS and a dress shoppe on floor one, a few floors of office above that and a floor or seven of residential above that, but that's one option, not the only option.

Guys, they are NOT going to build anything on that corner!

They've said as much several times and all their long-range plans show it staying a plaza / forest.

I know they're not planning on putting anything there, which means it will be a forest for at least 10 years. I was just speculating on what might eventually wind up there. SR may eventually outgrow their planned buildings; they might sell the whole complex; who knows? This would be a very different looking city if everyone's long-range plans worked out exactly as they thought.

I hear you.

Just wanted to be clear that SandRidge has shown their plans for the next 10-15 years and they all include that corner staying wide open, and have said that is their express purpose.

Not surprising given the massive amount of work and money going into that area.


There is as much chance of SR building on that corner as there is Devon building something in their grassy open park.

Call me country bumpkin, but I don't think that looks near on as bad as some folk here do. While it's true it's not an urban canyon, i.e., a right pretty name for tall city buildings butting up against each other, it's not at all pathetic to provide some green space for the worker bees and others to to enjoy when they are outside the hive. Sure, someone could put a CVS and a dress shoppe on floor one, a few floors of office above that and a floor or seven of residential above that, but that's one option, not the only option.
Country bumpkin! I kid, I kid

Like I said earlier, it won't take long for them to realize their mistake and then they will have to fix it.

What makes you think that?

What makes you think that?

Because in the end - economics will win out. It always does. Some times it takes a long time for that happen, but it eventually happens. When the era of cheap gasoline is over, and the government can no longer support cheap government backed home loans and when the massive public funds it requires to allow people to drive 30 miles to work every day are no longer available, true market economics will once again exert itself. The condition the US has found itself in since the end of WWII is an illusion economy - all built on massive public and private debt. Sure the Fed is currently trying to create new debt (money only exist if there is debt) with QE3 but all they are doing is delaying the inevitable.

I was watching a TED talk earlier this week conducted by a Georgia Tech urban planning professor. In 2005 (latest numbers available) the average person in Atlanta spent 29% of their income on housing, and 31% on transportation. I don't think OKC is much different in those percentages and in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if people in OKC spend an even higher percentage of income in transportatioon costs. That trend simply can't go on forever.

James Kunstler pretty much summed it up right here. "We're going to have to downscale, rescale, and resize ... and we can't start soon enough to do it." Parts of his presentation screams "Sandridge Commons", not as a solution, but as a cartoon version of a solution. I happen to believe him.

Q1ZeXnmDZMQ

In this instance I would set the over/under at 50 years.

Because in the end - economics will win out. It always does. Some times it takes a long time for that happen, but it eventually happens. When the era of cheap gasoline is over, and the government can no longer support cheap government backed home loans and the massive public funds it requires to allow people to drive 30 miles to work everyday are no longer available, true market economics will once again exert itself. The condition the US has found itself in since the end of WWII is an illusion economy - all built on massive public and private debt. Sure the Fed is currentley trying to create new debt (money only exist if there is debt) with QE3 but all they are doing is delaying the enevitable.

I was watch a TED talk earlier this week conducted by a Gergia Tech urban planning professor. In 2005 (latest numbers available) the average person in Atlanta spent 29% of their income on housing, and 31% on transportation. That trend can't go on forever.

James Kunstler pretty much summed it up right here. "We have to downscale, rescale, and resize ... and we can't start soon enough to do it."

Q1ZeXnmDZMQ


what does any of that have to do with trees on a corner instead of a building ...

what does any of that have to do with trees on a corner instead of a building ...

Because the answer to bad urbanism isn't nature, it is good urbanism. Building a forest in downtown OKC isn't a solution to revitalizing a rundown part of downtown. Creating a vibrant urban district is the answer. Sandridge will figure out, and since they are smart people, they will figure it out pretty fast. I bet less than 10 years. The only real question is how long do they plan to stay committed to a bad idea.

Anyhow, it isn't worth arguing about. I have time to wait.

In this instance I would set the over/under at 50 years.

Maybe, it took about that long for the Stage Center owners to wise up.

Sadly, 50 years seems about right. I'm not opposed to trees, I just wouldn't put that many on a corner in the middle of a business district.

Because in the end - economics will win out. It always does. Some times it takes a long time for that happen, but it eventually happens. When the era of cheap gasoline is over, and the government can no longer support cheap government backed home loans and when the massive public funds it requires to allow people to drive 30 miles to work every day are no longer available, true market economics will once again exert itself. The condition the US has found itself in since the end of WWII is an illusion economy - all built on massive public and private debt. Sure the Fed is currently trying to create new debt (money only exist if there is debt) with QE3 but all they are doing is delaying the inevitable.

I was watching a TED talk earlier this week conducted by a Georgia Tech urban planning professor. In 2005 (latest numbers available) the average person in Atlanta spent 29% of their income on housing, and 31% on transportation. I don't think OKC is much different in those percentages and in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if people in OKC spend an even higher percentage of income in transportatioon costs. That trend simply can't go on forever.

James Kunstler pretty much summed it up right here. "We're going to have to downscale, rescale, and resize ... and we can't start soon enough to do it." Parts of his presentation screams "Sandridge Commons", not as a solution, but as a cartoon version of a solution. I happen to believe him.

Q1ZeXnmDZMQ

OKC and similar cities will defy economics. We got where we are by creating our own economic rules. Fads always trump economics in urban design.

Kunstler has some great columns btw. Rec reading..

Fads always trump economics in urban design.

Not when the fad isn't subsidized.

You think OKC is about to stop subsidizing a way of life??

I'm not trying to be the pessimist I just say lets keep these discussions on the ground level with what we know and can reasonably assume.

You think OKC is about to stop subsidizing a way of life??

Yep. Not tomorrow, or even next year, but soon enough.

There are a crap ton of things I've been waiting for, for a very long time...when they seemed like solid inevitabilities 10 years ago.

Yep. Not tomorrow, or even next year, but soon enough.

There's a decent chance that the paradigm shift doesn't fully take hold during your lifetime. Think about that for a minute.

There's a decent chance that the paradigm shift doesn't fully take hold during your lifetime. Think about that for a minute.

Barring an untimely death, not only will occur in my lifetime, I will still be young enough to benefit from it. It is actually happening right now before our very eyes, we are just living it in real-time so it seems slower. The good news is that it has serious momentum and is picking up speed. Soon it will be a runaway.

Anyhow - we seemed to have strayed a bit from the topic so back to Sandridge Urban Forest.

The downtown core has some nice momentum, but I would guess that about 99% of the metro population has no concept or idea of new urban principles. This board is an echo chamber. Even in the urban core, suburban buildings are still getting proposed along canal. I think you vastly underestimate people's commitment to the suburban lifestyle, and ignorance of urbanism. No?

The downtown core has some nice momentum, but I would guess that about 99% of the metro population has no concept or idea of new urban principles. This board is an echo chamber. Even in the urban core, suburban buildings are still getting proposed along canal. I think you vastly underestimate people's commitment to the suburban lifestyle, and ignorance of urbanism. No?

I think they average suburbanite is going to get a serious dose of economic reality over the next 5 to 8 years. I suspect that will get their attention. You are correct though, several of the latest proposal around downtown are just as suburban in design as if they were built in Norman, Moore, or Edmond. That's okay though because they are also cheaply constructed so tearing them down and starting over won't be a big deal (nearly all of lower Bricktown) or can be solved with a chainsaw (Sandridge Forest).

Mods: Any chance we can move the last several posts to the general development section? I hate to sidetrack the Sandridge thread.

Washinton DC is about as urban as it gets. You can take off from the White House and walk about 5 blocks North, then cut back to the East 5 or 6 blocks. You'll find out there are trees and several pocket parks all over everywhere in 8 or 10 square blocks there. I see this as no different. It may change when the street cars tracks start getting use, but probably not until then.

Because the answer to bad urbanism isn't nature, it is good urbanism. Building a forest in downtown OKC isn't a solution to revitalizing a rundown part of downtown. Creating a vibrant urban district is the answer. Sandridge will figure out, and since they are smart people, they will figure it out pretty fast. I bet less than 10 years. The only real question is how long do they plan to stay committed to a bad idea.

Anyhow, it isn't worth arguing about. I have time to wait.

the sandridge mission wasn't to find a "solution to revitalizing a rundown part of downtown" .. or to create an urban district

the sandridge mission wasn't to find a "solution to revitalizing a rundown part of downtown" .. or to create an urban district

Actually, it was. Their mission was to revitalize the urban, rundown, downtown properties they purchased in a manner that is conducive to a healthy, vibrant, and forward-thinking corporate environment (Obviously, there are different opinions on how that can be accomplished). Hell, their "district" even has a name: Sandridge Commons. Also, they didn't really have a choice with it being urban or not since those properties were located in such an environment already. As if their urban design wasn't already precluded in the package of acquisition... their uniqueness in comparison to the rest of our city should have been the focus, not the back-burner. That uniqueness just so happened to be their urbanity.

Okay done with that now. I know we're over it but lord, I don't know how you can say their mission wasn't to revitalize a rundown part of downtown or to create an urban district, when THEY PURCHASED RUNDOWN PROPERTY IN AN URBAN DISTRICT!

is there a plan for the lighting on Sandridge main building? The recent additions of Continental and Enorgex? have helped brighten up downtown tremendously.
Sandridge is such a large building that is basically hiding in the dark. Basic outline lighting along with Sandridge logo at the top would do wonder to the building and downtown at night time.

I really liked back when the building was illuminated.

I really liked back when the building was illuminated.

I agree - hopefully there is a plan to add lighting to the exterior and something at the top. I think overall their complex is going to be pretty decent once complete. I think the Braniff building will be my favorite by far though.

I agree, it will look good in 5 years, but I am with Kerry, Pete, and the others pointing out that the hideous AT&T bldg is going to loom large over this.

Maybe AT&T will eventually remove the decommissioned equipment and it will better screen the rest. The "big box" is going to be a reality to be worked around though - I see those buildings in nearly every city.

As mentioned before, a great temporary solution to that AT&T building would be to put out an RFP to the local art community on a large painted mural. Even a fake facade with fake windows would probably be an improvement to at least make that wall a little more human.

As mentioned before, a great temporary solution to that AT&T building would be to put out an RFP to the local art community on a large painted mural. Even a fake facade with fake windows would probably be an improvement to at least make that wall a little more human.

A mirrored glass facade would be the best solution. Of course, ATT isn't going to pay for that.

This is a newer rendering of Sandridge Commons, as you can see they've now added the green roof to the Amenities Building and have a more accurate depiction of the huge metal canopy.

But what's really interesting are changes to the building to the east of the tower; looks to be 11-12 floors.

We all know SR is still trying to decide how much space they will need and that will influence the building size, but this is a new image and it seems to communicate they don't want it to overshadow the Tower, which is the centerpiece of their development:



http://archrecord.construction.com/features/2012/American-City/Oklahoma/sandridge-commons.jpg

Here is the previous version:
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/sandridgecommonsoldsm.jpg

that would be great ..

The new version does not make it look like it is pushed out all the way to Broadway.

I noticed the new tower is set back pretty far from Broadway. The old rendering had it pushed out to the sidewalk. I hope this footprint change isn't approved.

I believe there will still be retail along Broadway, as that has always been a part of their plan.

They plan to add retail to the expanded Broadway/Kerr garage as well.


If you look really close at the lower right-hand corner of the new rendering, it looks like the new building might extend to the east on the lower level.

I believe there will still be retail along Broadway, as that has always been a part of their plan.

They plan to add retail to the expanded Broadway/Kerr garage as well.


If you look really close at the lower right-hand corner of the new rendering, it looks like the new building might extend to the east on the lower level.

I was trying to figure out if that was what I was seeing. I hope you are correct. City code doesn't permit large set backs in the CBD.