I do know this is an old building, and I don't enjoy seeing them come down. (As much as Urbanized and Spartan think I do)

But at what point during this does this become the legend of the old shovel, passed down generation to generation. Where the grandfather explains it's been in the family for 60 years and he replaced the handle 3 times, the shaft twice, and the head/blade 4 times. Instead of pretty much replacing every part of this building, would it be more economical to just start from scratch?

It's funny; I would not have been at all opposed to demolition of these buildings assuming they were replaced by the same massing at zero setback. They had been so fundamentally altered that any notion of "historic" is long gone. This is clearly higher and better use. I WILL include the caveat that now that the wonderful historic facade of the Pizzeria Gusto structure has been revealed, I sincerely hope they explore restoring the front of that building.

But I am hardly a knee-jerk preservationist. See my repeated posts, for instance, regarding support for Aloft replacing the historic Finley building in Deep Deuce.

I think the reason they are retaining these structures and working from that position must be that they pencil-whipped it and found that in this case it was less expensive to do, whatever the reason. I will trust their judgment.

How are they going to "complete this on schedule?" Their sign says they were supposed to open "Fall 2013." They're already way behind schedule and things look to be moving slowly.

In the end, it's more important that they do it right. This is an exciting project.

Although not entirely to blame (especially if they were projecting last year) , this winter has not been the most builder friendly weather. It has us behind schedule also.

It's funny; I would not have been at all opposed to demolition of these buildings assuming they were replaced by the same massing at zero setback. They had been so fundamentally altered that any notion of "historic" is long gone. This is clearly higher and better use. I WILL include the caveat that now that the wonderful historic facade of the Pizzeria Gusto structure has been revealed, I sincerely hope they explore restoring the front of that building.

But I am hardly a knee-jerk preservationist. See my repeated posts, for instance, regarding support for Aloft replacing the historic Finley building in Deep Deuce.

I think the reason they are retaining these structures and working from that position must be that they pencil-whipped it and found that in this case it was less expensive to do, whatever the reason. I will trust their judgment.
Wasn't calling you out :) was just making a point that I am not a pro-demolition it's due to my views of the Stage Center.

By the way, as long as they aren't having to shore up the walls or do any other engineering heroics, I fail to see how this would be more expensive than building new. They would be paying for demolition ether way (and this way have less of it), they would be paying for a roof either way (and it looks like on a couple of the buildings they are repurposing the existing), and they would be installing new windows on the front and side either way.

What they will now be left with is essentially a white box, with large portions of existing masonry built and paid for a couple of generations ago. Sounds like a win to me.

Wasn't calling you out :) was just making a point that I am not a pro-demolition it's due to my views of the Stage Center.

Meh. I don't think anybody on here actually understands my position on Stage Center. I definitely think it was worth saving, but in retrospect it should have been done decades ago with the creation of a foundation dedicated ONLY to the preservation of the building - regardless of tenant - relieving some poor theater nonprofit du jour from the responsibility. I mostly said all along that the recent effort to force its preservation were an exercise in futility. The decision on it was unconsciously made many years ago, and consciously made when it wasn't included in MAPs 3 or P180. I mostly just think it's a bummer.

Anyway, this thread is about The Rise.

By the way, as long as they aren't having to shore up the walls or do any other engineering heroics, I fail to see how this would be more expensive than building new. They would be paying for demolition ether way (and this way have less of it), they would be paying for a roof either way (and it looks like on a couple of the buildings they are repurposing the existing), and they would be installing new windows on the front and side either way.

What they will now be left with is essentially a white box, with large portions of existing masonry built and paid for a couple of generations ago. Sounds like a win to me.
Good points.

Contrary to popular opinion, renovation is very rarely more expensive than new construction. Usually only in cases where the new use necessitates significant structural modifications.

More often than not "too expensive to renovate" is just way of overcoming the unwelcome objections of those who would like to see a building retained. Also, it sometimes DOES require a little more creativity, specialized knowledge and critical thinking, all of which we know are often in short supply these days. It's usually a shortcut; a crutch.

What do you mean? It's cheaper to demolish than it is to renovate. :p

(Now...what you do with the cleared site will probably cost more)


I do know this is an old building, and I don't enjoy seeing them come down. (As much as Urbanized and Spartan think I do)

But at what point during this does this become the legend of the old shovel, passed down generation to generation. Where the grandfather explains it's been in the family for 60 years and he replaced the handle 3 times, the shaft twice, and the head/blade 4 times. Instead of pretty much replacing every part of this building, would it be more economical to just start from scratch?

I didn't realize we had a demolition debate here?

What do you mean? It's cheaper to demolish than it is to renovate. :p

(Now...what you do with the cleared site will probably cost more)



I didn't realize we had a demolition debate here?
We don't. I was just curious as to the difference in cost of such an extensive rehab vs building new. :)

The Retro arcade people were on Twitter last night bemoaning yet another delay in their opening.

^^^^

Land Run people will lose some of the already lined up tenants on this deal, no doubt...how long can you sit idle with your business and wait on your spot to finish before you go to plan b?

^^^^

Land Run people will lose some of the already lined up tenants on this deal, no doubt...how long can you sit idle with your business and wait on your spot to finish before you go to plan b?

That's been my concern with all this delay nonsense. They're going to start losing some of the more unique tenants that can't afford to wait on their indefinite opening delays.

^^^^

Land Run people will lose some of the already lined up tenants on this deal, no doubt...how long can you sit idle with your business and wait on your spot to finish before you go to plan b?

Many leases spell out the landlords delivery date and in some cases allow the tenant to back out of lease if there are significant delays. Thing is though, there really arent many other choices in that area at the moment so they are all probably going to stick it out.

The cost is unlikely the case. In my dealing with HP and the city I've learned loads...like for instance: You knock a building down and rebuild now you have to deal with new code: sight triangles, setbacks, right of way, revocables, the list goes on. All having to be approved by the UDC (if they decide to let you knock down the historic overlay site) BEFORE the city can even look at it for a SPUD. It's easier (not cheaper) to gut and rebuild.

In my situation at the pump. There's no way HP would let me raze that piece of junk from 1929 and build it back to look exactly like it was, using the same metal panels even. It's a non starter, even though it would be a better building. Instead I have to furr out walls to insulate it, replace lentels, re-pour the finished floor, build additions, even tint new concrete to look 70+ yrs old(which is needed to shore up a man made lake of water held by poorly engineered concrete). The masonry is so poor, as it sits now I can see daylight through many of the joints.

I might be venting a bit, I'm not mad, but I'm in the same boat as landrun. The money spent in building cost less than the time to make a change. Every time you run into that needs to pass through committee, it takes 30-60 days.

At any rate, landrun is competent and I have faith in their ability and skill to get this done as fast as they're allowed. No one is deliberately dragging their feet on this project.

Landrun just received design approvals to rework many of the storefronts, utility placements, parking configuration and even added two new staircases to the back.

I'm sure this was all necessitated once they got deeper into the renovations.

I'm also sure they largely had to stop work while they figured this out and waited for the necessary approvals. As Ian noted, there is a timing cycle every time you make these sort of changes.


I've been told that Landrun has been very good about communicating with the tenants, and I think they largely remain committed.

And credit should be given to them for renovating these structures and doing things the right way.

These are the changes I mentioned...

Both staircases and almost all the window and storefront openings have changed for various reasons:

http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/7066d1395246260-rise-rise031814.jpg

A surprise at The Rise.

http://www.oklahoman.com/article/3947335?embargo=1


A building once slated for demolition and considered one of Uptown’s worst eyesores has caught its owner and future tenants by surprise as they tore off green-painted brick from the front of the former nightclub and discovered an intact art deco cast stone original facade.

It makes me wonder what's hiding beneath other garishly covered properties-- namely that neon-colored asian store across the street to the east.

Steve's update.

http://www.oklahoman.com/article/4012195?embargo=1


Uptown developer Johnathan Russell will never look at old buildings the same way after discovering another historic facade hidden for decades by awnings and “modern” touches added more than 40 years ago.
Russell is set to unveil yet another rediscovered facade Thursday night for the main building at The Rise, which once was home to a used hotel furniture and equipment store. The granite, streamline-modern style facade, stretches across the western three-fourths of the building.

Very cool about uncovering the original facade! I hadn't even seen photos of it... It was obviously covered very early on.

Credit to Land Run for doing this project right. Sometimes it's better to be methodical, especially when it comes to renovation/preservation projects.

Will, do have a link to the mobile version? :)

Will, do have a link to the mobile version? :)

Here's the magic formula for all embargoed links:

http://www.oklahoman.com/article/4012195?embargo=1

1 - replace www with m
2 - replace oklahoman with newsok
3 - remove question mark and all that follows

Construction on NW 23 project again unveils historic facade covered for decades in Oklahoma City | NewsOK.com (http://m.newsok.com/article/4012195)

Here's the magic formula for all embargoed links:

http://www.oklahoman.com/article/4012195?embargo=1

1 - replace www with m
2 - replace oklahoman with newsok
3 - remove question mark and all that follows

Construction on NW 23 project again unveils historic facade covered for decades in Oklahoma City | NewsOK.com (http://m.newsok.com/article/4012195)

I thought it was something similar to that, but wasn't sure.

It's pretty cool the stuff they keep uncovering. The Rise is going to be really cool when the get it finished.

Nice find for them. They keep saying they will be open this summer and I don't buy it...Again, Thanksgiving at best.

Nice find for them. They keep saying they will be open this summer and I don't buy it...Again, Thanksgiving at best.

My friend that owns a business that's going into the rise said that his opening date will likely be September or early fall so if it is going to be summer, it will be very late summer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They knew what was under the ugly awning. Compare their rendering with the actual photo.7543
. Look at the far left end of the illustration.

7544They knew what was under the ugly awning. Compare their rendering with the actual photo.7543
Photo by Todd Fraser, The Oklahoman. Look at the far left end of the illustration.

ish

They did not know for sure until they got the awning covering off. They did not know prior to buying the building.
As for the photo, please do not post Oklahoman photos without getting permission. Thank you.

Yes, upon further investigation this whole story is very misleading.

When the original renovation plans were approved on 3/27/13 -- more than a year ago and long before they started construction -- the plans clearly show the original facade in detail with plans for "existing stone veneer to remain" and to paint the original awnings. This has not changed in any way since then.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/rise032713.jpg

Yes, upon further investigation this whole story is very misleading.



http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/rise032713.jpg

Whatever. I already said, he didn't know before he bought the building, and didn't know whether it was intact.
Now unless you received permission, please remove the photos Pete.

Wow

What photos are being requested to be removed? That seems kind of messed up...

I already removed the one Steve was concerned about.

It just showed the exposed stone.

I'll go take one here in a minute...

edit: Let's please not get into this. Thanks.

- Pete

Steve, I enjoy the hell out of your articles and downtown OKC coverage, but what is the problem? You used to be a valued contributor to this community and it was always great to see your posts here. But you've become so defensive regarding OKCTalk. I understand you got your feelings hurt on here sometime ago, but you slight this forum regularly and you're upset about a small photo that was attributed to the guy who took it. What's the deal man?

I'm no longer a participant in OKC Talk. I have no issue with most of its members. I'm not defensive - I am simply asking that work we create be respected and not treated as public domain. These photos can be seen at NewsOK. Pete knows this. That's pretty much all I've got to say.

Back to the actual development...

Just to be clear, I did not personally post the photo and I promptly removed it.

Let's move on.

All conspiracies aside, the facade is pretty rad.

Pete - what is the exterior finish planned for the corner of 23rd and Walker, where the granite stops?... EIFS, stucco, or otherwise?

EIFS on the corner and around the east side.

The backside (north facade) is all brick.

EIFS on the corner and around the east side.

Now that this original façade is being preserved, I'm interested in how they will keep the EIFS portions from looking super cheap next to this stonework.

Here is the design application they submitted on 3/11/13 for the 3/27/13 urban design review meeting:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/rise032713b.jpg

Interesting that they new about the south stone facade over a year ago. And today it is reported a a recent find

Please let me apologize to Steve and Pete. You can see by my low number of posts that I am not up to speed on all the forum rules. I love this forum and Steve's work and would never do anything to upset either one.

Please let me apologize to Steve and Pete. You can see by my low number of posts that I am not up to speed on all the forum rules. I love this forum and Steve's work and would never do anything to upset either one.

Absolutely no worries.

Please don't let it discourage you from posting more!

From TAP's Twitter feed (https://twitter.com/TAParchitecture):

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BldWYwOCcAAZxil.jpg:large

It's incredible how that facade completely changes to look of the building and the entire look of that section of 23rd Street.

Makes me curious to see what's under the awning on the Planned Parenthood Building. Both buildings had a similar style of metal awning.

It's incredible how that facade completely changes to look of the building and the entire look of that section of 23rd Street.

Are you saying you didn't like the the look of the HOTEL / MOTEL Liquidators?

Are you saying you didn't like the the look of the HOTEL / MOTEL Liquidators?

Lmao

I'm saying I didn't know what to expect when that old awning completely came down. I had heard that the original facade might be there, but had no hopes of it being fully intact. What's been revealed has completely changed my thoughts on what the most important building in this area might be, since the Tower doesn't seem to have hope of being restored under the current ownership.

I know, I was just trying to make a funny.

:)

I know, I was trying to be more elaborate with my statement. I'm glad that crusty looking thing is finally gone.

So glad that the old facade is in good shape, but the photos are awful. Can't believe they were posted by an architectural firm.

The Urban Land Institute has organized a free tour of The Rise tonight from 5:30 to 7:00.

Would be great if someone from OKCTalk could go and snap photos.

Register (for free) here:

ULI Oklahoma Site Tour: The Rise - ULI Oklahoma (http://oklahoma.uli.org/event/uli-oklahoma-site-tour-rise/)

The Urban Land Institute has organized a free tour of The Rise tonight from 5:30 to 7:00.

Would be great if someone from OKCTalk could go and snap photos.

Register (for free) here:

ULI Oklahoma Site Tour: The Rise - ULI Oklahoma (http://oklahoma.uli.org/event/uli-oklahoma-site-tour-rise/)

Will the tour take place in a boat?