development
|category1=Parking
|category2=Midtown
|category3=
|category4=
|
|project=
|address= 4th & Harvey
|status= expansion underway
|owner= Rick Dowell
|cost=
|architect=
|start= Summer 2013
|finish=
|contractor=
|height=
|sq. feet=
|acerage=
|other=
|
|image=http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/dowellgaragewiki1.jpg
|


Information & Latest News
Gallery

TibMRLqG8dU

Hey is one of the few developers downtown that has improved the area and stuck around. I really love his little area of town. The creative reuse should be done more to downtown. If only Sandridge would have talked to him about the buildings they destroyed.

You know what, a few weeks ago I was doing video right in front of the Legacy apartments and saw this building. I had never noticed it before and never mentioned it to Steve. It looked old, but I couldn't tell if the structure on top was original. I know now it was recently added. I do like the art deco look to it.

That's also a handy map of downtown buildings.

I feared for years that oneday I would drive by there and see it had ben bulldosed and the ornamental parts were all crushed in the rubble. Seeing this is a relief.

Hey is one of the few developers downtown that has improved the area and stuck around. I really love his little area of town. The creative reuse should be done more to downtown. If only Sandridge would have talked to him about the buildings they destroyed.

Rick Dowell is very good at some of the things he does, and that does include preservation.

I wouldn't characterize that as great HP. The cool midcentury facade of the old FJ Lincoln-Mercury dealership was chopped up and re-configured as some sort of weird thing with Roman columns in the parapets, and the beautiful casement windows on the Caddilac store were needlessly torn out and replaced with aluminum, tinted windows. To see what good external preservation looks like on nearly identical buildings, check out the Midtown Renaissance projects going on at 10th and Broadway, and north of 10th on Robinson.

That said, Rick is an incredibly bright guy who is very good at adaptive re-use and breathing life back into old buildings. He definitely marches to the beat of his own drummer, but I suspect that the west edge of downtown would still be in very tough shape if he hadn't started stepping up more than a decade ago.

Rick Dowell is very good at some of the things he does, and that does include preservation.

No, but he does do reuse. Reuse to me is just as good as preservation if it saves a building and the urban environment from the wrecking ball.

Plans to expand parking structure at 4th & Harvey before the Downtown Design Review Committee:

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

But I'm sure we can all agree that what RD does not do well is this parking garage. What an even bigger piece of crap.

I can't believe they let them do this in the first place (it was a renovation) and are now allowing him to double the size with the same design.

It's basically just bare concrete block:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/dowellparking2.jpg

Not saying that it is good, it isn't, but does anyone have a picture of it before the facade when the Federal Building was around. If you think this is bad, that was apparently horrible.

I remember it was a horrible old steel structure -- they just put up the concrete blocks over the front.


But this is supposed to be a new era where the taxpayers are investing heavily into the city center, Project 180 is completely re-doing the streets, sidewalks and everything else around this property... And we allow something like this?

It's hard to imagine anything much worse.

No doubt. I don't disagree. This might be an opportunity to correct a "wrong" from the past.

If you look at the picture, it doesn't look as if this split block and mortar joints have "aged well."

But the problem the committee will probably have is that it was approved the first go-around. And my guess is that the facade meets even current exterior material mandates.

The question is, should a committee dictate the appearance or simply enforce what meets code?

Does this have staff approval on the application?

Does anyone have any ideas of something reasonably priced (without tearing the whole thing down and starting over) that could be done to make it more aesthetically pleasing?

Cool metal panel cladding with LED lighting. My friend Jame Ellison was looking into it for a St. Anthony's parking garage.

Now getting Dowell to do something modern.... crickets

Synthetic stucco (EIFS) is easily applied to concrete block.

The good news is it would be super easy to finish the exterior, but that is clearly not the plan. If Dowell ever was going to do it, surely it would be as a part of this expansion.


Also, I'm not sure there were design review standards when that garage was renovated in the late 90's or early 00's.

Does anyone have any ideas of something reasonably priced (without tearing the whole thing down and starting over) that could be done to make it more aesthetically pleasing?

Ivy? It doesn't have to cover the whole building but could be done in a pattern or design. Just get a bucket truck and prune it back a couple of times per year.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_ntYVd01Ebkk/SDL0MPVlk-I/AAAAAAAAA18/c2brZX2n9Ag/s400/IMG_8070.JPG

Guerilla ivy campaign........

Guerilla ivy campaign........

It is pretty easy to do. Just attach some metal to create the design outline, install a wire grid for the ivy to cling to, and then prune it back when it grows outside the lines. Nature will do the rest.

Or during the playoffs the whole thing can be covered with Thunder banners. Lol.

Seriously, any of these suggestions would be preferable. It does look terribly cheap.

I'm going to seriously hope this doesn't come to pass..

U

g

l

y.

It's actually not bad at all when you consider some of the garages which are painful to look at around this city. It's just that I'd hate to see this thing just kill an entire block of Harvey. We shouldn't be filling up entire blocks with huge, empty, terrible looking parking garages. We should be smarter than that. Dowell just views this site as the back yard of his Midtown Plaza project, but in reality, this is smack in the middle of downtown, and Harvey could be a beautiful street.

and Harvey could be a beautiful street.

Yeah, I honestly like the streetwall view looking south down Harvey at 4th street better than the Park Avenue streetwall.

It actually is bad, compared to anything else in the downtown area. It's not just the aesthetics on the exterior, but the interior looks like complete crap. And I mean in more than just a bare-boned garage sort of way. Granted, I don't think the original building is Dowell's fault. Yeah there are some that are worse off, but rest assured they are just company for the Dowell Garage in the eye-sore category.

I agree. But come on, nothing will ever be as ugly as the Santa Fe Parking Garage. Or the Main Street Parking Garage. Or that really bizarre one that they just repainted across from the County office building.

How about a parking garage like this?

Contemporist - Mission Bay Block 27 Parking Structure by WRNS Studio
http://www.contemporist.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/mb_310811_02-630x720.jpg (http://www.contemporist.com/2011/08/31/mission-bay-block-27-parking-structure-by-wrns-studio/)

Still dead space.

Yeah, not digging it, it's too super block looking

I wasn't talking about the size of it, just that it has a different style to it instead of Dowell's current garage or the painted concrete Bricktown garage.

I know, that's why I said looking, didn't mention the size

Do you know if this is going to be a requirement for all future parking garages, Steve?
I think this is where things are going... it was required by Bricktown Urban Design for when Harding & Shelton was looking at building a garage along Reno Avenue (the project was scrapped when the economy crashed in 2008). Not sure if Dowell was hit with the same thing on his garage planned for Hudson Avenue - I suspect he wasn't because Urban Design had previously approved his designs several years ago

The addition to the Dowell garage will definitely not have retail.

But has that addition made it through the urban design regulatory process yet? I was under the impression that it hasn't yet.

Yes, they approved that hideous structure without discussion on 8/18/11.

Not sure they really had a choice - it had been approved by a previous incarnation of the Urban Design Committee about a decade ago. There are those who say the committee was weaker than the current one, but of course, there are also those, including some on this site, who say the current committee has failed to hold up on some key cases.

He made that known a LONG time ago. Welcome to the party. ;-) lol

I've been in and out. Can't keep up with things as well anymore.


Yes, they approved that hideous structure without discussion on 8/18/11.

Is there a rendering anywhere?

Yes, they approved that hideous structure without discussion on 8/18/11.

God dammit. Wow.

The Dowell garage is just an extension of what is already there (first pic):

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/dowellparking2.jpg

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

Have we gotten that guerrilla ivy campaign going...? :doh:

Paint it bright white and it'll somewhat resemble OSP.
Paint it a bland beige and it'll somewhat resemble the new armory/training center in north norman.
Cover it in ivy and it'd be dang near tolerable

God dammit. Wow.

Yeah, my thoughts exactly.

Paint it bright white and it'll somewhat resemble OSP.


If it were painted white, it'd bear quite the resemblance to the Legacy apartments. :dizzy:

Yes, they approved that hideous structure without discussion on 8/18/11.
i prefer this to the trashy shed look it previously had.

The Dowell garage is just an extension of what is already there (first pic):

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/dowellparking2.jpg

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

Pete, I'm having trouble finding Dowell's original plans - does this extension go straight to Walker Avenue, or does it stop short of the surface parking lot?

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/dowellparking2.jpg

I would be leary parking in that garage for 2 reasons

1) It doesn't look finished.
2) It looks like a fire department training structure.

"Pete, I'm having trouble finding Dowell's original plans - does this extension go straight to Walker Avenue, or does it stop short of the surface parking lot?"

Steve, I don't think it makes it to Hudson. Rick was complaining to me that Mr. Cheek wouldn't sell... or at least sell at Rick pricing. Lol

Urban Pioneer is correct. There is a small surface lot between the garage extension and Hudson.

I suppose that is a good thing so that property will eventually be developed by someone else and hopefully much differently.

This garage is a case-in-point example of how our downtown design review process is still totally worthless. This is not a development that should have been allowed. This is absolutely insane. And we're backing down serving the Arts District with streetcar because Rick Dowell doesn't like WIRES?

This is insane: So the public good can't "clutter" his district with catenary wires, but while he builds colossal eyesores like this parking garage?

And we wonder why this city is so screwed up. It's hard to count on the design review process when it doesn't even have any clout and credibility. To bring it back on topic for this thread, why wouldn't Preftakes just look at his bottom line and realize that there's not much standing in the way of him bulldozing an entire block to replace it with all-new revenue streams if he prefers to do that??

We've already established that he's not doing this for charity. We know that the downtown design review process is worthless. How can you not worry anytime you hear rumors for big development on a historic block like this?? Alarms should be blaring.

This garage is a case-in-point example of how our downtown design review process is still totally worthless.

I think as Steve pointed out, the "precedent" was set years ago. There is quite a "back story" to Dowell's garage in downtown politics as well from the past.



And we're backing down serving the Arts District with streetcar because Rick Dowell doesn't like WIRES?

No. Not true. Rick doesn't want wires yes, but we are awaiting the verdict on the costs to do the first 4 miles (the main spine) before making a "solid" recommendation on the rest of it as of yet.


Rick does have influence. His influence is real. But many of the recent developments in the NW 4th area are the result of things that he has had in "the works" for years.

I think what happened is the old design committee allowed that first structure for whatever reason -- probably because it at least covered up the old corrugated metal -- and now it's very difficult to not allow him to expand what has already been approved.

On the other hand, they also could have told him no expansion unless he plans to finish the whole structure in appropriate materials.

The committee just turned down the owners of water chillers on EK Gaylord because they wanted to cover the ridged concrete with EIFS. That violated the mandate of no more than a certain percentage of any facade with that material... Yet they turn around and approve a massive bare concrete block structure??? I can't imagine many self-respecting cities allowing anything close to this being built and it's a shame it's still happening when there is a concerted effort to raise the standards in the central core.

This was an opportunity for the committee to say "That old structure was not approved on our watch and if you want to go forward you need to correct this blight." Especially because it's just bare block, there are lots of easy options to cover that facade. Yet now we'll have the better part of a city block covered in something you wouldn't wish on an ugly industrial area, let alone our CBD.

The irony is that all that beautiful street and hardscape will run right along this monstrosity.

And shame on Rick Dowell for even doing this in the first place. We shouldn't have to rely on these committees to force developers and major downtown property owners to be at least reasonable.

Is Rick Dowell just cheap, tasteless, or classless?

Is Rick Dowell just cheap, tasteless, or classless?

Depends on what it is. lol Arguably, he uses permanent materials such as stone, brick, and steel. Low maintenance is his thing. He has told me that he is going for a "Mediterranean" aesthetic. Undeniably, those red tiles and some of the real stonework does hearken to that aesthetic.

But the CMU spit concrete block cladding on the garage is a complete failure in my opinion. Funny enough, I think he would argue that it is undeniably an improvement above and beyond the corrugated metal. And he's probably right. Which tells you how horribly bad it was even before the CMU.

Rick does landscape nearly everything and he uses materials that are of quality. Where he fails is on aesthetics when he skimps and the fact that he is creating a district that is entirely devoted to office as of yet with no housing. If it weren't for high density developments such as the Regency, Legacy, Sycamore and developing areas such as SOSA, the place would be devoid of people after 6.

BTW, he only covered two of the four sides that had corrugated metal, as the west and south exposures were left as is, dented facade and all.

Not sure if that cheap metal roof was added by Dowell or not, but I think it was.

He's owned this place for 15 years.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/dowellparking3.jpg

He should be embarrassed. What an eyesore.

I think what happened is the old design committee allowed that first structure for whatever reason -- probably because it at least covered up the old corrugated metal -- and now it's very difficult to not allow him to expand what has already been approved.

On the other hand, they also could have told him no expansion unless he plans to finish the whole structure in appropriate materials.

The committee just turned down the owners of water chillers on EK Gaylord because they wanted to cover the ridged concrete with EIFS. That violated the mandate of no more than a certain percentage of any facade with that material... Yet they turn around and approve a massive bare concrete block structure??? I can't imagine many self-respecting cities allowing anything close to this being built and it's a shame it's still happening when there is a concerted effort to raise the standards in the central core.

This was an opportunity for the committee to say "That old structure was not approved on our watch and if you want to go forward you need to correct this blight." Especially because it's just bare block, there are lots of easy options to cover that facade. Yet now we'll have the better part of a city block covered in something you wouldn't wish on an ugly industrial area, let alone our CBD...
.

Let's back up. Need to clear up some confusion. The original garage, the one still standing, was built by John Cheek. He somehow managed to do the metal siding, etc, without there being ANY record at City Hall of him having gone through required permitting, etc. The original garage was built, btw, prior to the creation of Urban Design regulations. The facade you see now was added by Dowell in the aftermath of the bombing, and believe it or not, at that time this was a widely praised improvement over what was there. That's history. It is what it is.
The only Urban Design action on this property prior to the approval in August was a review of the VERY SAME extension when Dowell first proposed it several years ago. That was the precedent I was referring to.
Now, that said, I don't think Rick is a bad guy. He's quirky. He's got his own ideas. And sometimes he's proven to be right when everybody else was going in the totally opposite direction. And yeah, as Urban Pioneer said, there are politics at play in so much of this. And yeah, Dowell's got some sway...

The only Urban Design action on this property prior to the approval in August was a review of the VERY SAME extension when Dowell first proposed it several years ago. That was the precedent I was referring to.

Yet, it was submitted to the committee for consideration and approval.

And they did approve it at the August 18 meeting which implies that approval could have been withheld, as it often is with specific recommendations and reference to design standards.


There were lots of things built to very poor standards in the past... Does this mean that anyone that wants to double the size of an existing structure can merely tack on the exact same junk even if it doesn't come close to meeting very specific design standards?

As I mentioned earlier, the energy company that owns those chilled water structures on EK Gaylord just submitted a plan to cover that massive amount of crumbling ribbed concrete with brand new EIFS. The committee completely turned them down even though the EIFS covering would be a huge improvement over what is there now. So why does Dowell get a pass? Why aren't these painstakingly detailed standards uniformly applied?

+1!!!

Pete, you'd make a pretty good addition to the Urban Design committee.

I just read that Pete and wow that's a great point.