Yeah, but that's a common developer tactic to get their proposal passed. Let's hope this building gets sold to someone who will invest in it.

Well I'm guessing the price just went up.

How about the city buying it for the agreed upon price with Braums and then put it out for re-development proposals?

The city outright or OCURA? Does OCURA have to stay in certain boundaries (asking because I don't know). If not this is a GREAT idea that I totally support.

OCURA can purchase property anywhere but has to date only targeted downtown and the near NE side.

Thanks good to know. I didn't know if the U(rban) in the name somehow restricted where or what they could buy.

http://newsok.com/braums-withdraws-zoning-request-that-would-have-taken-out-the-donnay-building/article/5567015

The firm working for Braum's specialize in pushing agendas of those who can afford it, and their methods aren't always very savory. There's absolutely nothing keeping them from keeping the purchase contract, the current owners dozing and clearing the lots, braums can likewise demolish the duplex on the lot it already owns. And see how everyone feels about the deal after the entire 3.5 acre site sits as a dirt plot after several months. As sad as it sounds, entirely plausible.

Braum’s withdraws rezoning application for Donnay Building

By: Molly M. Fleming The Journal Record October 6, 2017

OKLAHOMA CITY – The Donnay Building will get to stand, but possibly not for long.

The building is home to the HiLo Club, The Drunken Fry, and Charlie’s Jazz-Rhythm & Blues.

Braum’s Ice Cream and Dairy Stores had filed an application to rezone the property, which would have led to the site being cleared. The neighboring Classen Grill is in a separate building, but was also on the rezoning application.

Braum’s withdrew its rezoning application on Friday, the city confirmed.

Red Oak Properties LLC owns properties that would have been demolished. Attorney David Kennedy said during the Sept. 28 Planning Commission meeting that the owners won’t keep the building much longer. He said the owners were under contract to sell the property to Braum’s.

“If we do not sell it to Braum’s, we’ll redevelop and demolish (the Donnay Building) next spring,” Kennedy said.

Kennedy and Red Oak representatives could not be reached by publication time to confirm whether plans had changed. David Box, who represented Braum’s at the Planning Commission meeting, did not return requests for comment Friday.

The Planning Commission was expected to review the application again at its Oct. 14 meeting. At the September meeting, the commission did not have the five votes required to make a recommendation on the application. The commission did have four votes against approving the application.

The commission’s main concerns were traffic around the property – which is nearly a triangle in shape – and a single Braum’s not fitting with the city’s planning guidelines. The guidelines call for density, and Braum’s design doesn’t fit that idea, said Asa Highsmith, Planning Commission member.

Braum’s executives planned to rezone six lots from R-1, residential, to a simplified planned unit development. The remaining NW 50th Street and Classen Circle site is zoned C-4, general commercial. This zoning allows for multiple commercial uses, including a gas station and a truck stop. It is considered not compatible with residential zoning, said Sarah Welch, program planner in the city of Oklahoma City Planning Department.

Welch said if Red Oak wanted to demolish the Donnay Building, there would not be a public hearing. The building is not in a design district. But if owners wanted to do something on the property that is outside the R-1 zoning, then the rezoning process would be public.

Who owns Red Oak Properties Llc ?

I just can't believe that demolishing the building out of spite could be a good business move. There's already been a ton of backlash for Braum's about this. Now that they've withdrawn their zoning app, for the owners of the building to go ahead and doze it would be stupid. Who would be dumb enough to buy it? No one wants to be known as the business that resides where a historic building was leveled against the citizens' will.

Braum's. Braum's would be dumb enough to buy it.

I just can't believe that demolishing the building out of spite could be a good business move. There's already been a ton of backlash for Braum's about this. Now that they've withdrawn their zoning app, for the owners of the building to go ahead and doze it would be stupid. Who would be dumb enough to buy it? No one wants to be known as the business that resides where a historic building was leveled against the citizens' will.

Who would be dumb enough to buy and demolish the last original block of original downtown OKC to conduct demolition by neglect and then build a skyscraper? Or for that matter an architectural landmark and cultural center and then build nothing?

Braum's. Braum's would be dumb enough to buy it.

If Braum's were to buy it then any goodwill they receive from pulling their application would be gone.

Have they actually received goodwill for withdrawing? I'm personally still very skeptical of this whole situation. I'm probably not alone. Until the property is truly "safe" I'm not sure much goodwill is out there. I mean, I suspect a bunch of Braum's hold outs said "oh thank god" and bought an ice cream the day of the announcement, but other than that I'm not sure anyone is comfortable about this just yet.

Have they actually received goodwill for withdrawing? I'm personally still very skeptical of this whole situation. I'm probably not alone. Until the property is truly "safe" I'm not sure much goodwill is out there. I mean, I suspect a bunch of Braum's hold outs said "oh thank god" and bought an ice cream the day of the announcement, but other than that I'm not sure anyone is comfortable about this just yet.

Will this property and set of buildings ever *really* be safe? Seems like they're headed down the path of purposeful-deferred-maintenance to tenant-eviction to condemnation, but I hope I'm wrong...

Have they actually received goodwill for withdrawing? I'm personally still very skeptical of this whole situation. I'm probably not alone. Until the property is truly "safe" I'm not sure much goodwill is out there. I mean, I suspect a bunch of Braum's hold outs said "oh thank god" and bought an ice cream the day of the announcement, but other than that I'm not sure anyone is comfortable about this just yet.

No, I don't think anyone is comfortable yet. But if things transpire in a way that the property is sold as is to an owner that rehabs the place and it becomes a historic property that is not only saved but given new life, I think Braum's could reap some benefit for pulling out of it. People would see Braum's as a good guy now and not boycott them.

I don't disagree with that.

Until it gets sold and not demolished I'll keep boycotting Braums. It's not like they put out a statement saying sorry guys didn't know you loved this building. All they said was we pulled out.

Until it gets sold and not demolished I'll keep boycotting Braums. It's not like they put out a statement saying sorry guys didn't know you loved this building. All they said was we pulled out.
Rue enough, but the root of the problem is the current owner. Until pressure is applied there, serious uncertainty exists. Sure, Braum's mis-read the situation pretty badly, but all they really did was say yeah, I'll take it. The real villain (if there is one) is the owner.

I'm not 100% sure that's true. The owner seems to want to ditch the property, that's certainly not evil. The owner is also ignoring the property and letting it rot, that's a little evil. But imagine a buyer came in and said hey, I'm going to buy it, I'm going to fix it up, and I'm not going to hassle the current businesses. People would have no problem with that. Heck, tis buyer would be seen as the hero/savior of the story. Now imagine another restaurant, name doesn't matter. They're going to buy it, knock it down, and build one of their restaurants. Hell, just for fun let's go with In N Out. There's going to be the exact same outcry as with Braum's. All the owner did was sell a property, it's the buyer that makes the situation different. It's not that people didn't want a Braum's, it's that they didn't want the buildings knocked down. If this board is any indication, people DO want an In N Out, but I highly doubt they would tolerate one being built at that location.

Braum's did far more than say yeah, I'll take it. They had multiple opportunities to back out without being dicks, they chose not to accept any of those opportunities. They're the dicks. If there's anyone who did nothing more than say "yeah I'll take it" it's the owner, to the buy offer.

I'm not 100% sure that's true. The owner seems to want to ditch the property, that's certainly not evil. The owner is also ignoring the property and letting it rot, that's a little evil. But imagine a buyer came in and said hey, I'm going to buy it, I'm going to fix it up, and I'm not going to hassle the current businesses. People would have no problem with that. Heck, tis buyer would be seen as the hero/savior of the story. Now imagine another restaurant, name doesn't matter. They're going to buy it, knock it down, and build one of their restaurants. Hell, just for fun let's go with In N Out. There's going to be the exact same outcry as with Braum's. All the owner did was sell a property, it's the buyer that makes the situation different. It's not that people didn't want a Braum's, it's that they didn't want the buildings knocked down. If this board is any indication, people DO want an In N Out, but I highly doubt they would tolerate one being built at that location.

Braum's did far more than say yeah, I'll take it. They had multiple opportunities to back out without being dicks, they chose not to accept any of those opportunities. They're the dicks. If there's anyone who did nothing more than say "yeah I'll take it" it's the owner, to the buy offer.

I don't know that I would label the owner of the building as evil but there certainly aren't without blame.

Unless I've misunderstood what's been said in this thread, other people have tried to buy this property before Braum's with the intent of rehabbing it and the owner wasn't interested in selling. Then Braum's came along and because the owner apparently has a personal relationship with Braum's ownership, they decided to sell. Now that Braum's has pulled out, the owner is threatening to go ahead and knock down the building anyway. That would just be spite.

All that makes the current owner of the building look like a bad and petty person to me.

I don't know that I would label the owner of the building as evil but there certainly aren't without blame.

Unless I've misunderstood what's been said in this thread, other people have tried to buy this property before Braum's with the intent of rehabbing it and the owner wasn't interested in selling. Then Braum's came along and because the owner apparently has a personal relationship with Braum's ownership, they decided to sell. Now that Braum's has pulled out, the owner is threatening to go ahead and knock down the building anyway. That would just be spite.

All that makes the current owner of the building look like a bad and petty person to me.

He is not tearing it down out of spite.

He's tearing it down because it will be easier to rezone if there is no building on the site anymore. There won't be community meetings to save the building because it's already gone. It's just a bait and switch.

I don't know that I would label the owner of the building as evil but there certainly aren't without blame.

Unless I've misunderstood what's been said in this thread, other people have tried to buy this property before Braum's with the intent of rehabbing it and the owner wasn't interested in selling. Then Braum's came along and because the owner apparently has a personal relationship with Braum's ownership, they decided to sell.

All that makes the current owner of the building look like a bad and petty person to me.

Thank you! .. all this vitreol towards Braum's has been misdirected IMHO, and a little old.. The owners are the ones picking the direction for the property.

There is no reason to give Braum's a pass on this, they are the ones who want to replace a historic structure with a cookie cutter fast food joint and a parking lot. There is blame to spread around.

There is no reason to give Braum's a pass on this, they are the ones who want to replace a historic structure with a cookie cutter fast food joint and a parking lot. There is blame to spread around.
+1

Thank you! .. all this vitreol towards Braum's has been misdirected IMHO, and a little old.. The owners are the ones picking the direction for the property.

Especially when they say they plan to turn out paying tenants and demolish completely independent of Braum's.

He is not tearing it down out of spite.

He's tearing it down because it will be easier to rezone if there is no building on the site anymore. There won't be community meetings to save the building because it's already gone. It's just a bait and switch.
When Braum's pulled out the owners said they could go ahead and tear it down anyway. People in the past have offered to buy the building and the owners apparently won't deal with them. I call that spite.

Those who attended the public meeting can have plenty of vitriol for Braum's. The management present, and the lawyer, had zero regard for anything other than "we're doing this, get over it".

When Braum's pulled out the owners said they could go ahead and tear it down anyway. People in the past have offered to buy the building and the owners apparently won't deal with them. I call that spite.

Braums didn't pull out. Don't take that at face value.

Braums didn't pull out. Don't take that at face value.

I was typing quickly and trying to be succinct and not go into all the details. The point of my post was, the owners said that even if the Braum's thing didn't go through that they would still tear it down. When they've had offers, even before Braum's was interested in the property, and they were offers to buy and save the building and they weren't interested in selling to any of those parties. To me that says they would be tearing it down out of spite.

To me that says they would be tearing it down out of spite.

is spite really the only possible motivation? i'm all for options that save the building... but unless we know that these other offers had similarly favorable terms as the braum's one, i don't think it's right to assume that spite is the only possible motivator.

Braums didn't pull out. Don't take that at face value.

Can you expound on this?

I was typing quickly and trying to be succinct and not go into all the details. The point of my post was, the owners said that even if the Braum's thing didn't go through that they would still tear it down. When they've had offers, even before Braum's was interested in the property, and they were offers to buy and save the building and they weren't interested in selling to any of those parties. To me that says they would be tearing it down out of spite.

That was before Braums pulled out, created a choice between nothing or a Braums.

You're using the word spite wrong. Spite implies you do something that hurts you just as much as others. They tear it down, and Braums will be back. They both know that. It's not out of spite because they'll be just fine.

Can you expound on this?

Because they hired lawyers who don't lose. Braums lost that battle, they likely won't lose the war. Just wait and see.

That was before Braums pulled out, created a choice between nothing or a Braums.

You're using the word spite wrong. Spite implies you do something that hurts you just as much as others. They tear it down, and Braums will be back. They both know that. It's not out of spite because they'll be just fine.
Wrong. Spite means doing something just to hurt others. Takes five seconds to educate yourself on that.

Because they hired lawyers who don't lose. Braums lost that battle, they likely won't lose the war. Just wait and see.
Yes, I agree with this. Would not be at all surprised if they pulled out to so as no longer to be the flashpoint of the discussion, with plans to resume the rezoning and development attempt after the still-planned demolition. If they wait until the building is gone and then resume their plans, few will care at that point and the controversy will be minor. Very good chance that this was a strategic withdrawal.

Braum's would still have to get the residential lots rezoned and the Planning Commission already deadlocked on that issue.

They may very well still plan on going forward, but once the buildings are demolished, they will be viewed as the ones who orchestrated the whole thing and you have to believe that the PC and City Council will not be happy about that when it comes time to get their rezoning approved.

Braum's would still have to get the residential lots rezoned and the Planning Commission already deadlocked on that issue.

They may very well still plan on going forward, but once the buildings are demolished, they will be viewed as the ones who orchestrated the whole thing and you have to believe that the PC and City Council will not be happy about that when it comes time to get their rezoning approved.

There are
Pretty much no grounds to not rezone the other lots. And this would likely already get approved at council

There are
Pretty much no grounds to not rezone the other lots. And this would likely already get approved at council

It didn't get through the Planning Commission on the only vote on this matter, so they seemed to think they had plenty of grounds not to recommend the rezoning to the City Council.

Braum's would still have to get the residential lots rezoned and the Planning Commission already deadlocked on that issue.

They may very well still plan on going forward, but once the buildings are demolished, they will be viewed as the ones who orchestrated the whole thing and you have to believe that the PC and City Council will not be happy about that when it comes time to get their rezoning approved.

Braum’s withdrew before a decision was rendered. There would be much less public scrutiny and interest after demolition, and it would probably be more likely to pass at that point. If nobody cares anymore there’s a chance it will sail through.


There are
Pretty much no grounds to not rezone the other lots. And this would likely already get approved at council

Of course there are. Traffic impact to the neighborhood from a high-volume commercial application with a drive-through window was and is the most compelling reason to deny. HP/architecture/culture might be what brought the torches and pitchforks to the yard, but traffic impact is the most solid argument, since those other protectetions aren’t addressed by ordinance in this part of town.

Braum’s withdrew before a decision was rendered. There would be much less public scrutiny and interest after demolition, and it would probably be more likely to pass at that point. If nobody cares anymore there’s a chance it will sail through.

The Planning Commission has said in the past that public opinion does not affect their decisions.

They've made that point several times, even after OKCTalk helped organized a big petition in support of the liquor license for Guyutes. Basically tossed it aside in the meeting in fact.

And to the extent there is a human element coming into this -- as there always is -- I stand by my previous points. Braum's owns one of the residential lots that needs to be rezoned so they would have to be involved in that process if it comes up again.

And I’m saying that with less public scrutiny and controversy it would be more likely to pass. Especially if the buildings are demolished and the lots sit empty for a year or two. It’s very possible that this is a strategic decision. Braum’s would of course have to be involved but there would not be the same level of public fight.

“Public input doesn’t affect our decisions” is the thing that you say when you are for whatever reason going against public opinion.

If the buildings are demolished and sit empty for a period of time, that would represent a substantial loss because now they have several paying tenants and they put exactly zero money or effort into managing those properties.

Of course they could do it, but they would be throwing a lot of money away and it's not like anyone is going to pay them millions for that bare land.

^^^^^
If as has been stated above the rents are well below market, just how big would that “substantial loss” be? Only playing devil’s advocate here. So property sits empty a year, and lost rent totals what? A hundred grand? Less? Not a lot in the grand scheme of this development. If it has already been agreed to by both parties that Braum’s would circle back, it would be a minor expense. This scenario is certainly the opposite of what I want to happen. But you seem to be suggesting the idea is ludicrous. I think it’s entirely possible.

Wrong. Spite means doing something just to hurt others. Takes five seconds to educate yourself on that.

This right here.

And too many others are getting hung up on the word spite and semantics and its definition. My point was that the owners of the building had a deal with Braum's pending the rezoning. Braum's received a lot of backlash about tearing down the unique (to OKC) building just to put up a fast food joint. Braum's pulled out or said they wouldn't move forward or whatever word you want to use there. Don't get hung up on the semantics of it. The owner of the building said "We're going to demolish it anyway. We have every right to." That to me reads as "If I don't get what I want, then no one gets what they want."

They've had offers to buy and refurbish the building before and since Braum's came into the picture. They said no. They currently have paying tenants in the building. To them it's gonna be Braum's or nothing. If they go ahead and demolish it and Braum's comes back into the picture and builds on the lot, Braum's is still going to be seen as the ones that caused yet another historic building to be demolished in this city. The only clean way out of this for Braum's, as far as the public is concerned, is to completely walk away from this property.

Braum’s withdrew before a decision was rendered. There would be much less public scrutiny and interest after demolition, and it would probably be more likely to pass at that point. If nobody cares anymore there’s a chance it will sail through.





Of course there are. Traffic impact to the neighborhood from a high-volume commercial application with a drive-through window was and is the most compelling reason to deny. HP/architecture/culture might be what brought the torches and pitchforks to the yard, but traffic impact is the most solid argument, since those other protectetions aren’t addressed by ordinance in this part of town.

The commercial application with a drive through was not under discussion and was not up for vote

Thank classen circle buildings were not up for rezoning So non of that really had/has and relevance

The simple rezoning of R vacant lots to commercial when they are agacent to c4 zoning is a simple and not controversial matter. And there not really a reason to deny it

^^^^^
Which only reinforces my point that there IS a human element. Regardless of whether PC is supposed to consider proposed use when considering re-zoning, it is obvious that they do. The fact that PC was waffling is mostly due to controversy and anticipated neighborhood impact, regardless of what they say. Take away the controversy and it probably breezes through. The only non-touchy-feely case anyone can make against the Braum's would be based on traffic.

The properties to be rezoned are on 50th and nothing on that street is zoned C-3 or C-4.

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

The hilo and drunken fry are on 50th and are C4. (As is the rest of that block) And both across military and across 50th is a bunch of O-2 which is fully compatible with the C-2 base zoning they were requesting

Classen Circle property under contract to new buyer; renovations planned (http://www.okctalk.com/content.php?r=433-Classen-Circle-property-under-contract-to-new-buyer-renovations-planned)

The historic Donnay Building near the old Classen Circle may get a reprieve, as just weeks after Braum's Ice Cream and Dairy Stores withdrew its rezoning application that would have seen the property demolished, a purchase contract has been signed with local buyer who hopes to save and renovate the structure.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/classencircle102717c.jpg

In July, OKCTalk was first to report (http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=43482&p=1000119#post1000119) that Braum's had filed an application with the Planning Commission that included a site plan showing the company's intention to raze everything on the triangle of property that contains the Donnay and the structure housing Classen Grill.

The news set off a shockwave in the community including the formation of several groups in social media and on-site protests, petitions and a heated public meeting between citizens and representatives from Braum's and the current property owners.

After the Planning Commission deadlocked on the Braum's decision on September 28th, the company sent a letter to the city on October 4th asking for their application be withdrawn. OKCTalk has confirmed that Braum's also canceled their pending purchase contract about the same time, which had been contingent or receiving the necessary zoning.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/classencircle102717b.jpg


Now, we can report a new buyer has the property under contract apart from the one small house which has been owned by Braum's since 2015.

In an exclusive interview with OKCTalk, local investor Josh Thomas confirmed that he placed the property under contract earlier this week and is today commencing inspections as part of a due diligence clause.

Thomas said he approached the current owners when he first read the news about the plans by Braum's then their withdrawal. Thomas describes himself as an investor with a passion for local, independently owned businesses and someone who cares about Oklahoma City's historic structures.

Thomas will have at least 30 days to determine the extent of any needed repairs and then will have the option of proceeding with the purchase.

The preliminary plan is to repair then perform a larger scale renovation while hopefully retaining the current tenants which include the HiLo Club, The Drunken Fry and Charlie's Records.

All tenants are on a month-to-month term except for the HiLo which has a lease set to expire on February 28th, 2018. HiLo's proprietor Chris Simon told OKCTalk that the property manager for the current owners could not promise him that they would be allowed to stay at the end of their lease term but would also not confirm they would have to leave at that time.

In the recent community meeting, the attorney for the owners Red Oak Properties LLC said the Donnay and other structures would likely be demolished even if Braum's did not receive the requested rezoning.

Thomas credits experience gained by working with Dr. Sam Coury – who is planning a renovation of Bricktown's old Spaghetti Warehouse building -- on various other real estate projects as being instrumental in this process with Classen Circle.

OKCTalk will continue to provide updates as Thomas steps through his inspection process and formulates renovation plans.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/classencircle102717a.jpg

Great work Pete! This is exciting news and I hope that the Josh is able to move forward with this to keep these buildings around.

Awesome win for OKC!

So many layers of awesomeness about this story.

Could prove to be a big turning point in many ways.

So many layers of awesomeness about this story.

Could prove to be a big turning point in many ways.

Not to be a Debby Downer but many of us also thought this when the picketers prevailed and BankOne dropped plans to demolish the Gold Dome, instead selling it to John Belardo and Irene Lam. Not to mention that there have been so many other incredible back-from-the-dead success stories over the past 10 years (Skirvin, Plaza Court, Plaza DISTRICT, 9th Street, pretty much anything done by Pivot) that the whole demo-in-favor-of-crap argument shouldn't even gain traction on great old buildings, yet it still does, and still will.

That said, this is very exciting news and I will be holding my breath until it is secured and renovated.

^

The difference is this building is outside any design review area and I believe the whole thing will cause the Planning Department to start a process to inventory ALL important buildings in OKC.

I'm certainly going to do my part in helping to make that happen as it just makes plain sense and has been a completely overlooked issue.

^^^^^
The Gold Dome was also outside of design review but I agree with your point that it will hopefully drive creation of a list of local structures worth protecting, regardless of location. Founders is of course next on the firing line. I remember not long ago that NYC had created a trust that could buy threatened buildings and even businesses deemed important to NYC's heritage. I am trying to find an article about it now, but I believe this was very recently and perhaps partly driven by the loss of the Carnegie Deli.

^^ if I am not mistaken, Jacqueline Kennedy had a role in this agency/commission. It has been a thing for quite sometime, starting in the 60's or early 70's.

Big congrats on breaking this big news story. Way to go, Pete!

^^ if I am not mistaken, Jacqueline Kennedy had a role in this agency/commission. It has been a thing for quite sometime, starting in the 60's or early 70's.
Not arguing at all but I do remember reading about some additional protection that was enacted in the past year or so, and it was driven by the closing(s) of several notable landmark businesses that were fundamental to the character of their neighborhoods in Manhattan.

At the very least, each restaurant and bar on the site should have an item on their respective menus in honor of Pete, when all is said and done. This is a top-quality effort that will, by all indications so far, leave a lasting and positive legacy. Many thanks, sir.

I, for one, will not only make an effort to patronize each business at least monthly, but I'll even go back to Braum's! Except for the shakes, burgers, and possibly the hand-dipped ice cream; that will be a game-time decision. And apparently the fries now have made an appearance on the undercard.