First of all, we addressed the possibility that permits can be partial, second of all fault the system for allowing partials, third of all this is all unwarranted from someone who makes their living off of our interest. Steve has gone into open war against OKC Talk because he's angry over how urban pioneer and soonerguru treated him in the transit thread (which was also unwarranted).

That said, I will stand up for anyone who is bold enough to challenge our abysmally low development standards. It wasn't even me criticizing this project.

Nick that's just silly. Your making this unnecessarily personal. If that's true, it's not my problem. I certainly did not "mistreat" Steve.

Wow. Quite the discussion here.
I'm not at war with OKC Talk. And there was no personal attack or mistreatment by Urban Pioneer against me. I will let Soonerguru's actions speak for themselves.
OKC Talk does a lot of great things, I have high regard for Pete and for many members of the board. I've seen this board make a difference. It was an important part of the boulevard discussion, and it directly influenced the design changes with the Staybridge Suites. But I answered the chat question honestly. I've seen a lot of words put in my mouth that I never uttered. I never suggested this project not be discussed, that questions and concerns should not be shared. The person who asked the question in the chat perceived this discussion in this thread as being a "backlash" against the project based on the building permit. I suggested a backlash and rush to judgment is premature based on lack of information.
There are downsides to message boards, not just this one. One downside is the rush to judgment without facts. Which is what happened here. And it has happened before (can anyone remember when TAP Architecture and Anthony McDermid were accused of taking bribes in the downtown school thread?). I've always worked hard to get information about big projects out sooner than just two days before a design meeting, and will continue to do so.

I'm taking a break from OKC Talk. I'm buried with work, and quite frankly, there is a point where the uninformed don't want to be informed. I'm not saying that is true for all of the OKC Talk members, or even the majority, but there are enough folks who seem to get insulted and hostile when presented with information that conflicts with their view of the world.
And that, my friends, is that. Sid, Doug, Pete, Nick - I have the highest regard for all of you, and I'm sure our conversations will continue elsewhere. Soonerguru, take your best shot. Just know I won't be reading any of what you say - I'm putting you on my ignore list. I'm logging off now, and will be continuing my break for the foreseeable future.
- Steve

I think Doug is right. I think we all need to take a collective deep breath. But, Pete willing, short of libel (accusing anyone of taking bribes without proof sounds like libel to me, although I do not remember that happening), I see nothing wrong with expressing concern and keeping watch. I saw no judgement, but rather anxiety that is justified, given prior events.

Well this has all gone very well. :D

The vilification of Steve on this forum is pretty worn. The dude is not anti-OKCTalk and I get the impression that his biggest problem with OKCTalk is the constant discord going on between him and a variety of posters that is driven by over-the-top rhetoric and proves to be anti-conversational. How about someone, you know, ask Steve why he thinks certain things (again, w/o unnecessary sharp rhetoric) and let him expound when you disagree. No need to call him out...just ask questions.

He's not perfect but he's given way more than enough to deserve the benefit of the doubt and a charitable approach to disagreement. Certainly, trying this approach being used against an established, prominent OKC journalist in a public forum behind (for most here) an anonymous screen name is a great way to get him to be less active in the valuable discussions that go on in this forum. At some point, you get tired of defending yourself.

Called it.

Wow. Quite the discussion here.
I'm not at war with OKC Talk. And there was no personal attack or mistreatment by Urban Pioneer against me. I will let Soonerguru's actions speak for themselves.
OKC Talk does a lot of great things, I have high regard for Pete and for many members of the board. I've seen this board make a difference. It was an important part of the boulevard discussion, and it directly influenced the design changes with the Staybridge Suites. But I answered the chat question honestly. I've seen a lot of words put in my mouth that I never uttered. I never suggested this project not be discussed, that questions and concerns should not be shared. The person who asked the question in the chat perceived this discussion in this thread as being a "backlash" against the project based on the building permit. I suggested a backlash and rush to judgment is premature based on lack of information.
There are downsides to message boards, not just this one. One downside is the rush to judgment without facts. Which is what happened here. And it has happened before (can anyone remember when TAP Architecture and Anthony McDermid were accused of taking bribes in the downtown school thread?). I've always worked hard to get information about big projects out sooner than just two days before a design meeting, and will continue to do so.

I'm taking a break from OKC Talk. I'm buried with work, and quite frankly, there is a point where the uninformed don't want to be informed. I'm not saying that is true for all of the OKC Talk members, or even the majority, but there are enough folks who seem to get insulted and hostile when presented with information that conflicts with their view of the world.
And that, my friends, is that. Sid, Doug, Pete, Nick - I have the highest regard for all of you, and I'm sure our conversations will continue elsewhere. Soonerguru, take your best shot. Just know I won't be reading any of what you say - I'm putting you on my ignore list. I'm logging off now, and will be continuing my break for the foreseeable future.
- Steve

I will hold you to that, and I will continue to comment when I think it is appropriate, such as the times you've made broad generalizations about "transit advocates," accused posters here of lying, and denigrated the entire message board for being uninformed.

Because I'm now on ignore, I guess you still will not be explaining the "name calling" you alleged I did against you, a bald-faced and wholly unsubstantiated charge.

Steve, I hope you are able to return to this forum sooner rather than later. You are the voice of reason we need here and ARE way more informed and less emotional than others. This is an important medium that NEEDS you to keep supplying real information in real time....things you just may not be able to do in the paper. I believe THAT is part of being a new generation journalist.

Thanks for all you do for this city.

but there are enough folks who seem to get insulted and hostile when presented with information that conflicts with their view of the world.
- Steve


pot, kettle

Can we just discuss this project and quit trying to pick fights?

Anybody on here know anyone associated with Patel's firm that might give us REAL insight into what to expect?

I'm taking a break from OKC Talk. I'm buried with work, and quite frankly, there is a point where the uninformed don't want to be informed. I'm not saying that is true for all of the OKC Talk members, or even the majority, but there are enough folks who seem to get insulted and hostile when presented with information that conflicts with their view of the world. ¶ And that, my friends, is that. Sid, Doug, Pete, Nick - I have the highest regard for all of you, and I'm sure our conversations will continue elsewhere. * * * I'm logging off now, and will be continuing my break for the foreseeable future.
- Steve
You are quite correct in what you said, Rover, "Can we just discuss this project and quit trying to pick fights?", but under the circumstances of Steve's post, above, I'll take personal privilege to say these things, even though off-topic, to Steve, as well as to anyone else who may be interested in hearing my remarks to Steve.


Steve, we have gone down a long road together which began before I even heard of OkcTalk.com, many years ago. Some of the rhetoric here is tiresome to me, as well, and I understand. Others who were once important contributors in this forum, such as the Old Downtown Guy, are long gone ... gone so long that most current forum members probably don't even know who I'm talking about even though he was a well-informed mainstay in this forum's earlier years as well as one who was steeped in Oklahoma City's history and who was personally involved with preservation efforts dating back to the attempted but failed survival of the destroyed YMCA building following the Murrah bombing and who carried forward similar efforts at least through the successful saving of the Gold Dome.

Even though I still retain bits and pieces of a long memory as well as a short one, both are increasingly taxed and dimmed. I will be 70 years old in July, and, given my paternal genealogical history, that is longer than I expected to be around as this message is written ... particularly given my fondness for sipping the heavenly nectar of W.L. Weller's fine Kentucky bourbon and the smoking of very fine and tasty cigarettes. I'm guessing that my longevity has something to do with my latter vices. I am enjoying both vices as this message is written.

Probably none here but you know that it was you, and only you, that resulted in me staying here in this forum a very long time ago, years before Pete's time. That story, if ever it be told, will be reserved for a later day, until you allow that it be told. You served as a mediator in that time so long ago. Following that, because of your encouragement that I do so, here I have remained, but only because of your conciliation efforts in those days many years gone by. Otherwise, I'd have been gone from this forum many years ago, as well.

I hope that you are only taking a temporary leave of absence, but, if not, you know what? ... it's really not that big of a deal. I mean, it doesn't really matter when you get down to the bottom of stuff, does it? This is just a place to talk, and nothing more, but it is certainly not the only. Life goes on, either way.

As for me, the anti-Shadid sentiment expressed in other fairly recent threads, also permeated with premature expressions and conclusions in my opinion, brought me close to the breaking point, but I'll stick around here for awhile yet. I don't make changes very quickly.

As for you and me, personally, I'm sure that I will see you soon. Don't forget that we still need to hoist a toast to John Belt in the Paseo, in case you've forgotten.

Wow. Quite the discussion here.
I'm not at war with OKC Talk. And there was no personal attack or mistreatment by Urban Pioneer against me. I will let Soonerguru's actions speak for themselves.
OKC Talk does a lot of great things, I have high regard for Pete and for many members of the board. I've seen this board make a difference. It was an important part of the boulevard discussion, and it directly influenced the design changes with the Staybridge Suites. But I answered the chat question honestly. I've seen a lot of words put in my mouth that I never uttered. I never suggested this project not be discussed, that questions and concerns should not be shared. The person who asked the question in the chat perceived this discussion in this thread as being a "backlash" against the project based on the building permit. I suggested a backlash and rush to judgment is premature based on lack of information.
There are downsides to message boards, not just this one. One downside is the rush to judgment without facts. Which is what happened here. And it has happened before (can anyone remember when TAP Architecture and Anthony McDermid were accused of taking bribes in the downtown school thread?). I've always worked hard to get information about big projects out sooner than just two days before a design meeting, and will continue to do so.

I'm taking a break from OKC Talk. I'm buried with work, and quite frankly, there is a point where the uninformed don't want to be informed. I'm not saying that is true for all of the OKC Talk members, or even the majority, but there are enough folks who seem to get insulted and hostile when presented with information that conflicts with their view of the world.
And that, my friends, is that. Sid, Doug, Pete, Nick - I have the highest regard for all of you, and I'm sure our conversations will continue elsewhere. Soonerguru, take your best shot. Just know I won't be reading any of what you say - I'm putting you on my ignore list. I'm logging off now, and will be continuing my break for the foreseeable future.
- Steve

Steve, I appreciate your regard as I always have, and the feeling is more than mutual. Do what you must, but I look forward to you harnessing the power of online and social media even more. It makes you very susceptible to blowback, including undue hostility, but its also repositioned you as a news brand all your own, perhaps even mostly independent of the Jokelahoman (keep in mind most of your readers prob hold the Dark Tower's political waxing in extreme disdain, like I do).

I remember the first time we met in person at the Buzz in FNC back when I was first entering college at OU and you were very apprehensive of all the changes journalism was going through then. Now consider that you not only have your job still (and I hope your family is doing well), but you truly have a brand identity and a place in the community that you didn't quite have back then due to your proactive outreach in the last few years. You should keep building on that! :)

Nick, appreciated your history with Steve. Good stuff (even though still off topic, as was my previous post).

In thinking a little more about the role of this board, of which you'll find no bigger believer than Steve, keep in mind we're frustrated. At a certain point it's not about a crappy Patel hotel. When you have a "citizen's" subcommittee with Gary Marrs, the chamber junta, and their ilk - at a certain point you gotta start asking WHERE ARE THE "CITIZENS?" and DEFINE "CITIZEN."

The citizens are pissed off and there is a growingly hostile sentiment that keeps building. Right now I think that anger is getting close to pop, so it's little tremors are becoming wildly erratic and the slightest provocation will set that off. But this forum isn't angry about Steve's comment or the excellent architect, Anthony McDermid. We're angry about SandRidge, decades of Brewers, dozens and dozens of historic demo's, the Boulevard (which ODOT did win), and House of Bedlam, and countless other ordeals and now we might lose the streetcar? It's collectively like in the Network, I'm madder than he'll and I'm not gonna take it anymore!!

Granted, I've become a lot more diplomatic and fair-minded lately, but I'm sensing everyone is about to explode. UP is worn out after years of transit leadership and fighting the good fight. As for the development front, we used to have low building standards, now we just don't have building standards anymore apparently so that takes care of that. I'll make a prediction that this anger at City Hall will explode soon if there's not a new tower announced to keep everybody's focus away from being angry. If there's not a new skyscraper announced by the year's end, it will be on.

Right now the guillotine is sharpening, but I just want everyone to remain level-headed and not put Robespierre in charge.

Nick, I think that you just taken off-topic stuff to a new level, and I'm as much at fault in that if not more that you. Probably you should start a new thread ... Robespierre or something appropriate.

Doug, you're right, and I don't really want to be a thought leader on that topic, but I just wanted to respond to a lot of the pent-up rumblings in this thread. And then again, like I said that sometimes a crappy motel proposal isn't about the motel, conversely sometimes it really is about the motel project at hand.

Nick, you are right and I was impressed by the kettle that you were brewing. I think that you should take the lead but brew the kettle in another thread. I'll see you there.

You are quite correct in what you said, Rover, "Can we just discuss this project and quit trying to pick fights?", but under the circumstances of Steve's post, above, I'll take personal privilege to say these things, even though off-topic, to Steve, as well as to anyone else who may be interested in hearing my remarks to Steve.


Steve, we have gone down a long road together which began before I even heard of OkcTalk.com, many years ago. Some of the rhetoric here is tiresome to me, as well, and I understand. Others who were once important contributors in this forum, such as the Old Downtown Guy, are long gone ... gone so long that most current forum members probably don't even know who I'm talking about even though he was a well-informed mainstay in this forum's earlier years as well as one who was steeped in Oklahoma City's history and who was personally involved with preservation efforts dating back to the attempted but failed survival of the destroyed YMCA building following the Murrah bombing and who carried forward similar efforts at least through the successful saving of the Gold Dome.

Even though I still retain bits and pieces of a long memory as well as a short one, both are increasingly taxed and dimmed. I will be 70 years old in July, and, given my paternal genealogical history, that is longer than I expected to be around as this message is written ... particularly given my fondness for sipping the heavenly nectar of W.L. Weller's fine Kentucky bourbon and the smoking of very fine and tasty cigarettes. I'm guessing that my longevity has something to do with my latter vices. I am enjoying both vices as this message is written.

Probably none here but you know that it was you, and only you, that resulted in me staying here in this forum a very long time ago, years before Pete's time. That story, if ever it be told, will be reserved for a later day, until you allow that it be told. You served as a mediator in that time so long ago. Following that, because of your encouragement that I do so, here I have remained, but only because of your conciliation efforts in those days many years gone by. Otherwise, I'd have been gone from this forum many years ago, as well.

I hope that you are only taking a temporary leave of absence, but, if not, you know what? ... it's really not that big of a deal. I mean, it doesn't really matter when you get down to the bottom of stuff, does it? This is just a place to talk, and nothing more, but it is certainly not the only. Life goes on, either way.

As for me, the anti-Shadid sentiment expressed in other fairly recent threads, also permeated with premature expressions and conclusions in my opinion, brought me close to the breaking point, but I'll stick around here for awhile yet. I don't make changes very quickly.

As for you and me, personally, I'm sure that I will see you soon. Don't forget that we still need to hoist a toast to John Belt in the Paseo, in case you've forgotten.Hey man, just a quick question. . .you come after me, for going off topic, and then you turn around and do the same thing?????? I'm not trying to start anything, just wondering if you got the wrong idea from my post. I like Steve works a lot and I think he is right about this subject and I think he was right in the transit thread. So far, there is really nothing that I know of that he's written and I've disagreed with. Just a quick a little note.

Sorry, Panda. Like I said, I was taking personal privilege due to Steve's content.

Oh, it's no problem what so ever. I was just curious. I thought maybe you had misinterpreted my post and thought I was against Steve. I really have a huge amount of respect for Steve. No worries at all though :)

Panda, I had no such thought in mind. None at all. I was just waxing poetic as influenced by my good friend W.L. Weller. But, of course, I do the same thing when not so influenced. Go figure.

I've heard from someone who has seen the detailed plans for this project and am told there is very good reason for concern.

As in, this could be every bit as bad as we have feared.


Hope to have more details by the end of the week.


This is slated for the 6/20 Downtown Design Review Committee meeting.

Also, the on-line information has been updated:


Case Item Summary: construct 6-story hotel clad in brick and EIFS and including a porte cochere at northeast corner; install dumpster enclosure; install 5' concrete sidewalks along portions of Russell Perry Ave and NE 1st St; install exterior light bands along parapet; install exterior vertical light strip along control joints from first floor through sixth floor level; install 12" led light band at porte cochere; install signage ??; install landscaping and irrigation??; install street trees along frontages????; install surface parking lot.

If the street trees are installed in a colonnade they will look very good. The surface parking is only like 20 spaces and is located behind the building. And I like idea of the light bands. So far I see nothing to be concerned about.

http://blog.sevenponds.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Street-Trees.jpg

Here are photos of the three SpringHill Suites in the OKC area; the second one is atrocious.

Airport:
http://cache.marriott.com/propertyimages/o/okcaw/okcaw_photo_gallery.jpg


Moore:
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/springhill1.jpg


Quail Springs:
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/springhill2.jpg

just the second one? they both aren't very inspiring. -M

I added the one for QS.

SpringHill seems to be the cheapest of the Marriott offerings, a step below even their Fairfield brand.

We already know it won't look like any of those.

We already know it won't look like any of those.

Actually, the photos of Steve's blog look a lot like the one in Moore, just with some brick (and still plenty of fake stucco).

Actually, the photos of Steve's blog look a lot like the one in Moore, just with some brick (and still plenty of fake stucco).

From what I saw it is all built close to the street and the porte cochere cuts diagonal across the intersection similar to the Aloft. There is no parking between the sidewalk and the building.

^

True, but the materials and design look to be very similar to the location in Moore.

Being close to the street is far from the only consideration.

The site plan might look good but I agree with Pete that we need to be looking at materials, overall appearance, and construction quality.

I have no problem going after exterior finish but from a site plan perspective it looks pretty darn good. Between this and the Staybridge we could make one really good urban hotel and one really good suburban hotel :).

Well crap.

Here's one I stayed at earlier this year in Denver when I flew up for a Thunder game. They CAN be done well:

http://cache.marriott.com/propertyimages/d/densd/densd_home01.jpg

http://www.tnetnoc.com/hotelimages/181/932181/2631759-SpringHill-Suites-Denver-Downtown-Lobby-6.jpg

http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/3d/47/3d4773e33aebae7e0246939dfc5f3c30.jpg?itok=zLEfebvn

http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/03/c2/ed/55/king-suite-corner-view.jpg

Again, I'm hearing the plans submitted depict a very low-end project.

Should have more to post soon.

:congrats: Take note Patel group^^^^^^^^^^

Another view. This is right across the street from the Pepsi Center. It's on a bit of an island, but that is the fault of traffic engineers, not of the hotel. It is built to the street everywhere it can be.

http://romococo.com/litcon/wp-content/uploads/SpringHill-pic-1.jpg

The one in Denver was obviously built for way more than $64 a foot. They are using a central AC system and better interior and exterior materials. As I have stated, so much is the option of the franchisee. It can be made better or worse, at their discretion.

This is a cheap brand and a low budget. We will see how bad as we know more. But to defend it because it is close to the street and not be concerned about quality of building says a lot about the lack of substance to new urbanism if that is the criteria of good or bad.

I hope you're not confusing me with a new urbanist, or someone who defends stuff built on the cheap. And while I have no idea if this is going to be a quality structure or not, I will eat my hat if it is built for $64 a foot.

This is a cheap brand and a low budget. We will see how bad as we know more. But to defend it because it is close to the street and not be concerned about quality of building says a lot about the lack of substance to new urbanism if that is the criteria of good or bad.

Contrary to what some people on this forum suggest, I think you know that that is not the only criteria for good or bad development for 'New Urbanists'. I agree with a lot of things that JTF posts, but his insistence that this is a good development is somewhat worrying, being a so-called New Urbanist myself.

No, I was referring to a previous post defending the project on the basis of it being close to the street and ignoring the concern with building quality. Your post shows how much influence the owner and franchisee have in the project. It is not the fact that it is a SpringHill, but concern over the developer possibly putting a building in that will be a problem in 20 years or less. People have to quit thinking only of the cosmetic appearance of a real urban center and demand substance and sustainability.

No, I was referring to a previous post defending the project on the basis of it being close to the street and ignoring the concern with building quality. Your post shows how much influence the owner and franchisee have in the project. It is not the fact that it is a SpringHill, but concern over the developer possibly putting a building in that will be a problem in 20 years or less. People have to quit thinking only of the cosmetic appearance of a real urban center and demand substance and sustainability.

I think we are saying the same thing.

No, I was referring to a previous post defending the project on the basis of it being close to the street and ignoring the concern with building quality. Your post shows how much influence the owner and franchisee have in the project. It is not the fact that it is a SpringHill, but concern over the developer possibly putting a building in that will be a problem in 20 years or less. People have to quit thinking only of the cosmetic appearance of a real urban center and demand substance and sustainability.
I don't disagree.

These were taken today at the planning office.

Some things of note:

1) This is just a rectangular box with no architectural detail other than different colors. Yellowish and blue are EIFS (synthetic stucco) and the remainder is brick.
2) There are no sidewalks on the corner. Not sure how they were hoping to put in cross walks at the intersection.
3) Steve's blog referenced an indoor / outdoor pool. These plans clearly only show a very small indoor pool.
4) The lobby / common area is quite small.



http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/springhill6513a.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/springhill6513aa.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/springhill6513b.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/springhill6513c.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/springhill6513d.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/springhill6513e.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/springhill6513f.jpg

Lord have mercy.

Remember too that this will be facing new under construction units at The Hill directly across Perry.

The design and build quality of this project versus that -- or even the DD Apartments directly north -- is horrible.

Ugly, tacky and extremely cheap looking.


The only good thing is that it is pushed to the street at both 1st & Perry.

Really trying to give these folks the benefit of the doubt, but wow that looks bad.

The design review board has been pretty good lately in showing some backbone. Let's hope they don't waiver this time.

:ohno:, this is why I don't get excited about developments when they are announced anymore. We keep digging ourselves deeper in a hole, it's almost shameful.

Yes, paging Bill Canfield, Aubrey McClendon and the rest of The Hill developers.

And the new owners of the DD Apartments, the Davis law firm (formerly Calvary Church), Rick McKown, Ron Bradshaw and everyone else with a stake in Deep Deuce, or downtown for that matter.

That's just... Dang...

This is crap. Everything possible needs to be done to stop this. The people who just spend a million dollars on houses at The Hill should be made aware of this.

After seeing this, Midtown might be our only saving grace.

What is that blue and gold stuff? How is it prototypical?

If you know people in Deep Deuce, I hope you are sending them a link to Pete's post.

These renderings make Steve's comments even more confounding. It seems that the collective intelligence of OKCTalk was dead on about this development being questionable, but Steve wanted us to wait until official information is out? I don't get it because it doesn't seem like Steve.

I hope people on this board show up to voice opposition to this development. Maybe this could serve as a way to let the City know that these types of cheap developments are no longer acceptable and will meet opposition.

After seeing this, Midtown might be our only saving grace.

Or... Go do something about it.

http://www.okc.gov/planning/planning_library/drc/agenda.pdf

Here's the list of the members of the DDRC. I don't know if any discussions can be had prior to the meeting. I remember public outcry has had some effect on Bricktown construction.

These renderings make Steve's comments even more confounding. It seems that the collective intelligence of OKCTalk was dead on about this development being questionable, but Steve wanted us to wait until official information is out? I don't get it because it doesn't seem like Steve.

As much as I love Steve & all he does, I agree with this. One of those "scratch your head as you're tilting it to the right" kind of things.

What is that blue and gold stuff? How is it prototypical?

That blue seems to be an approved SpringHill color, as it's featured on several of their hotels.


But regardless of color scheme, it's hard to imagine a plainer, cheaper-looking design.

I'm beginning to believe he can build this for $62 a square foot.

The letter says they "strived" to use as much brick as possible? I know of no reason an entire building cannot be brick.

Looks to be less than 50% brick.

Even with more, it's so incredibly plain and boring, it would still look super cheap-o.