The Two West proposal would be awesome on the other side of the park to wrap a garage that would service the future Strawberry fields district. Boulevard Place seems to accomplish the stated goals of the project better compared to the other options. The daycare will be a huge asset for downtown, I have several employees that it would benefit. The addition of residents, retail, and restaurants will hopefully bring a more significant "downtown" vibe to the area over time.

Bradshaw can take his proposal to another part of downtown, I propose just across the street to 'cover up' the Courtyard garage, make it at least 8 floors and there you go. If not there, he can build 2-west in A-Alley, Film Row, or SoSa/Midtown - plenty of locations for his very nice proposal, just this isn't the best location for it. ...

Anyway, I am ELATED by the choice of OCURA selecting Blvd place; it seems like they are finally getting it. I am not saying that because they selected my choice; im saying that because OCURA finally stuck to their own guidelines Core-2-Shore developments need to be: [8-floors or taller, retail on the ground, steel or steel/concrete construction, etc]. This might be a game changer for the city but also for OCURA to demand better development for our city (instead of settlling for second best and saying, well better than what was there before. Too bad OGE is taking so long to relocate their data center. I wish there was a way to keep it downtown (cough cough Kerr McGee Tower) but also expedite so that we can have most/all of this construction finished by 2020.

Nevertheless, OKC will again be a very different city in 2020; I am so excited AND impressed!

What's Oklahoma City apartment vacancy rates like?

I am glad to see this project chosen, however, not going to get too excited until ground is broke. The NewsOk article states construction won't start until October of 2019, a lot can happen between now & then.

I am glad to see this project chosen, however, not going to get too excited until ground is broke. The NewsOk article states construction won't start until October of 2019, a lot can happen between now & then.

Remember the garage has to happen as part of the contract with Omni.

I'm not too worried about this not happening.

And Pete, along those lines - you know any TIF or other funding assistance -if requested- has already been approved as well.

And Pete, along those lines - you know any TIF or other funding assistance -if requested- has already been approved as well.

They haven't made a formal request but have said their expectation is they would get a TIF grant.

And I'm sure they know that ranges from 6-10% of the developer's total investment.

The rooftop pool on this development will be amazing. Great stuff. I do, however, wish they’d find a better name BLVD place is extremely boring.

Would love to see the other proposals built somewhere in downtown/midtown. Especially Bradshaw’s proposal.

The rooftop pool on this development will be amazing. Great stuff. I do, however, wish they’d find a better name BLVD place is extremely boring.

Like some of the stupid names these developments have in other cities? Skyvue, Epic, Skyhouse, etc. I actually like this name. We know where the name comes from, not just random letters thrown together.

Like some of the stupid names these developments have in other cities? Skyvue, Epic, Skyhouse, etc. I actually like this name. We know where the name comes from, not just random letters thrown together.
I do agree with you that the name makes sense. But in my opinion, it just seems kind of generic or bland.

I mean, "Century Center" is not generic (blandness is probably a matter for debate), but hardly anyone local, much less any visitor, has a clue what that means, so it's a bit of a two-sided coin how we name it.

https://newsok.com/article/5599604/expansion-eyed-for-garage-serving-convention-center-and-omni-hotel-in-oklahoma-city

City wants to expand the capacity of the garage apparently. Would this change require any sort of design change for Boulevard Place?

It probably depends on what the design looks like. If all they're really looking to do is add a floor or two I can't imagine that it would require much change to Boulevard Place, and might be good way of matching the its increased height compared to the other proposals.

https://newsok.com/article/5599604/expansion-eyed-for-garage-serving-convention-center-and-omni-hotel-in-oklahoma-city

City wants to expand the capacity of the garage apparently. Would this change require any sort of design change for Boulevard Place?

And what are the addtional costs?

We had to beg, borrow and almost steal just to fund the garage as originally proposed.

Almost reads like there's another tax surplus coming and they know it so they want to get that money obligated.

They've gotten smarter by overestimating these costs; lesson learned from previous MAPS projects.

Take the surplus money, apply it as a perk to enhance another project. You may get that riverfront amphitheater after all.

History repeats again and again. Via Oklahoma Historical Society and The Oklahoman Archives.

15029

15030

15031

15032

History repeats again and again. Via Oklahoma Historical Society and The Oklahoman Archives.

15029

15030

15031

15032

So...those buildings are still there with the original facades behind or was this torn down for the Omni and CC?

So...those buildings are still there with the original facades behind or was this torn down for the Omni and CC?

Phew. I thought I was the only one who completely failed to see whatever point was being made.

So...those buildings are still there with the original facades behind or was this torn down for the Omni and CC?

Those original buildings are still there. Directly east of the Omni site on what will become the mixed-use residential and garage project.

Demo won't happen until OG&E completes a new facility east of the Broadway Ext on Wilshire, which should be this spring.

WOW...no idea that beautiful building was under there :(

Lol... WTF?! Why spend money to make a building look terrible from the outside? Was it a 60's-70's thing?

Reminds me of something the PEE plan would have done.

Lol... WTF?! Why spend money to make a building look terrible from the outside? Was it a 60's-70's thing?

An unrealistic desire to become the Jetsons.

Oh, it continues today. The desire to modernize on the cheap any building over 30 years old will never stop. We could start a new thread devoted to post Y2K commercial “remuddle” throughout Oklahoma County.

From Pete's drone shots...looks like the put a new roof on the buildings also in addition to the gold skin.

http://www.okctalk.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=15029&d=1543052244

Surprised to see what was underneath that gold frame facade--IMO a structure with potential; maybe a few modifications OG&E could have elevated it to a building that complemented the scene of many of the buildings in that area.

Look what I found.
15033

Looks like the two remodel photos are two sides instead of just Broadway. Three buildings. Number 3 is gone now. Looks like another historic building demo to watch next year. Any chance the developers will reconsider the current renderings they have so far?

I would love to think the developers would reconsider. These types of buildings add character to a city. Clearing them all is short-sighted, bad planning. But, I expect them to go down. The chamber should rebrand - Oklahoma City: The city without a past. /s

I would love for these to be saved, but because a parking garage is going here, one that is very much wanted by all the parties in that neighborhood (CC, Omni, park, etc) I think we should prepare ourselves accordingly.

No offense, but what is so special about these buildings? Why is the past so important? Im not a big fan of tearing buildings down. Im not a fan of keeping them based only on their age either. Just a question for whomever. Maybe it will open my eyes to something new (or old).

No offense, but what is so special about these buildings? Why is the past so important? Im not a big fan of tearing buildings down. Im not a fan of keeping them based only on their age either. Just a question for whomever. Maybe it will open my eyes to something new (or old).

*THESE* buildings? Absolutely nothing. The problem stems from OKC having no regard to historical buildings, so the objection to tearing those down overflows into a sense of unwillingness to tear anything down, even if there is no historical value. Some people are somehow convinced, despite the piles of evidence, that there's no need for a parking garage there. They'd cry about it if it were a field.

Unless, of course, it's the U-Haul building, and then the song changes for some reason. And the Myriad/Cox Center. Although interestingly, there they split. Half of them want it restored to a street grid (which they will then cry is boring), some want it to remain as a backup convention center, or be rebuilt. A couple people think a soccer stadium could work there.

By the way, I’m all for whatever they were planning to do here, just incorporate the facades into the design. We all know no one has that kind of foresight for that kind of thing though. What is the draw to Bricktown honestly? Need I remind everyone that “Bricktown” was “what’s so interesting about those buildings”. The majority wanted to bulldoze the whole area also. I don’t need to tell you what a bad idea that was. It took one businessman putting his money where his mouth was and great sacrifice, going against the crowd, that gave us our most popular and mature district everyone enjoys.

Just so everyone understands, the Omni required the garage as part of their deal with the city, so the demolition is already quaranteed.

Just waiting for OG&E to move to their new facility in the spring.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/conventiongarage112418.jpg

How many people knew these buildings were behind this facade before this weekend? Basically nobody.

The deal has been done for months and months. Construction has already started. It's far too late to say "hey wait, maybe there's something cool here".

By the way, I’m all for whatever they were planning to do here, just incorporate the facades into the design.

Exactly how would this work for a garage?

I'm all for historic preservation, but it's ridiculous to put these buildings in the same category as basically any other demolition. The Boulevard Place proposal that is going in this spot has met with almost universal praise and approval on this very website (in this very thread, in fact). People have been rooting for this ugly gold building to get torn down and replaced. Nobody knew there was anything valuable under the facade. If they did know, they sure as hell didn't say anything about it.

The new building is clearly a higher and better use. The garage is a requirement for the Omni hotel, and the apartments that will wrap around it are very impressive. This is the exact kind of development that we've been asking for. 8+ floors, concrete construction, lots of retail. This is very high quality stuff. I'll quote Hot Rod from earlier in the thread.

Anyway, I am ELATED by the choice of OCURA selecting Blvd place; it seems like they are finally getting it. I am not saying that because they selected my choice; im saying that because OCURA finally stuck to their own guidelines Core-2-Shore developments need to be: [8-floors or taller, retail on the ground, steel or steel/concrete construction, etc]. This might be a game changer for the city but also for OCURA to demand better development for our city (instead of settlling for second best and saying, well better than what was there before. Too bad OGE is taking so long to relocate their data center.

and then from Pete:

I'm not too worried about this not happening.

Until UnFrSaKn's post on 11/24/18, the only real criticism appears to be that this building won't get torn down fast enough. And now, based on two photographs of what was there in what looks to be the 1970s, we are lamenting how this city doesn't respect its history. We get complaining post after complaining post talking about how short sighted the city is. But that attitude actually makes it harder to fight for historic preservation. Because everyone and their dog understands that 1) nobody knew this was here until like two days ago, 2) we don't know how much of the original structure remains (OG&E may have gutted those buildings), and 3) what is going in its place is of exceptionally high quality.

When you complain about a project like this, it makes people not take historic preservation seriously. It makes them think you are crazy, and they become less willing to listen to you in the future.

^

Just because people didn't know about these buildings doesn't mean they aren't worth saving. In fact, the city orchestrated this entire purchase from OG&E and then an RFP for the housing that will surround a garage, and never once mentioned there were historic buildings involved, and that in itself is troubling.

The deal is done, the buildings can't be saved, but that absolutely does not mean there shouldn't be a dicussion about what has become an absolute rash of demolitions of late, all in aid of urban renewal.

Everyone is on the same page as far as this development goes. Yet I’m a preservationist compelled to bring this to everyone’s attention. Whether something is hidden away or there in plain sight, it doesn’t really make much difference with how the city goes about things. This is very well known as you have said.

However your views sound straight out of 50s-70s urban renewal “better and higher use” mentality. Fill in the blanks replacing “Omni Hotel” with “Galleria”, “Century Center”, “Myriad Convention Center” (same story with that one). Next thing you know there’s no Main Street anymore along with whole other square blocks. Did you skip over the part where I agree that the development should happen here, just that I have an issue that Pete pointed out? There was a missed opportunity to do everything they required for the Omni and make it work with what was here hidden away. The problem is always with folks who design things in an studio somewhere (probably not local) with the “clean slate” way of doing things. In this case nobody knew, assuming them as well, yet we know it doesn’t make any difference anyway. Was demolishing Founders Bank for just another fast food joint better and higher use? Wouldn’t you be the same guy with the same attitude pushing for the warehouse district to be demolished for “better and higher use”? Seriously, imagine you’re there looking at deteriorating, abandoned structures and there’s an oil boom going on and a majority trend to “demolish it and they will come” roadmap. Would you say, “Hold on just a minute.”?

Nobody knew about it until I randomly stumbled upon it and now nothing can be done. Nobody can “make people take historic preservation seriously” either. I resent the notion that bringing it to people’s attention makes someone “sound crazy”. You can’t deny, again like Pete has said, the way things happpen in OKC never changes. Bringing a chainsaw to do brain surgery. Read through the Stage Center thread again for a reminder. Im not here to cause controversy, just again pointing out how the same things repeat themselves.

Great post; appreciate the fine points; preservation may be something that gives developers indigestion--a hard core case of constipation is worth a 2nd look.

I don't know what the number of "historically significant buildings" is in OKC, but let's say it's 12 just for the sake of this conversation. So does that mean all other buildings except those 12 are fair game for destruction no matter the circumstance? That's the issue here. I don't think anyone is saying that, but that's how it comes across. It's a case by case thing, and we shouldn't have an "automatic" reaction regarding destroying a building (ANY building, not just old ones). And I'm not saying every old building must be saved at all costs. Just that we take an honest, thorough look at why we're destroying it, if there's a reasonable alternative, etc. Due diligence. That's it. A few years ago I was in Seattle and saw a sign posted on a tree. A TREE. The sign said the tree was scheduled to be cut down by the end of the month and gave a public hearing date for those wanting to object to the cutting down of the tree. This may seem ridiculous, but I don't think there's anything wrong with taking a moment to think about these things (whether tree or building, but I realize we're along way from either here in OKC) and discussing them in a public forum.

I’m constantly immersed in old photos that I reference or uncover pretty much all day so you may call me biased. The deeper down the rabbit hole(s) you go, the conviction for preservation is stronger. The attitude Shawn experienced in that city has literally never existed in OKC as far as I can tell. The Historical Society has been around since the beginning however. The idea that this is just an empty prairie where demolishing the old for the new has never been challenged and it’s deeply ingrained.

No offense, but what is so special about these buildings? Why is the past so important? Im not a big fan of tearing buildings down. Im not a fan of keeping them based only on their age either. Just a question for whomever. Maybe it will open my eyes to something new (or old).

Walk through a neighborhood of all new urban construction and one with a mix of old and new buildings and tell me which is preferable. There's a real aesthetic difference to urban areas with old buildings, even the insignificant ones. Old buildings add a grit, substance, and history that is hard to put into words. For example, think of the West Village without the Jones Assembly or 21C buildings. That whole area would lose any character. Those old buildings define that area. And there was certainly nothing special about the Jones Assembly building before renovations. Now, it's one of the best places in OKC.

Very good points and excellent reply. This is a very sticky topic depending on your taste. For every person that likes grit and substance; I can show you one that doesn't. I love the museum 21 project. I love the Omni project even more. A lot of people might like the buildings in Philly. Me, I like the buildings in Dubai. All in all, I like good construction. Just because its old doesn't make it good. We all have our preference and I respect either side.

When is Blvd Place supposed to be completed?

When is Blvd Place supposed to be completed?

The plan is for OG&E to move out of that property this spring and into a new facility they have under construction.

Then, the current buildings would be demolished and construction would start on Boulevard Place and the parking garage.

Everyone is on the same page as far as this development goes. Yet I’m a preservationist compelled to bring this to everyone’s attention. Whether something is hidden away or there in plain sight, it doesn’t really make much difference with how the city goes about things. This is very well known as you have said.

However your views sound straight out of 50s-70s urban renewal “better and higher use” mentality. Fill in the blanks replacing “Omni Hotel” with “Galleria”, “Century Center”, “Myriad Convention Center” (same story with that one). Next thing you know there’s no Main Street anymore along with whole other square blocks. Did you skip over the part where I agree that the development should happen here, just that I have an issue that Pete pointed out? There was a missed opportunity to do everything they required for the Omni and make it work with what was here hidden away. The problem is always with folks who design things in an studio somewhere (probably not local) with the “clean slate” way of doing things. In this case nobody knew, assuming them as well, yet we know it doesn’t make any difference anyway. Was demolishing Founders Bank for just another fast food joint better and higher use? Wouldn’t you be the same guy with the same attitude pushing for the warehouse district to be demolished for “better and higher use”? Seriously, imagine you’re there looking at deteriorating, abandoned structures and there’s an oil boom going on and a majority trend to “demolish it and they will come” roadmap. Would you say, “Hold on just a minute.”?

Nobody knew about it until I randomly stumbled upon it and now nothing can be done. Nobody can “make people take historic preservation seriously” either. I resent the notion that bringing it to people’s attention makes someone “sound crazy”. You can’t deny, again like Pete has said, the way things happpen in OKC never changes. Bringing a chainsaw to do brain surgery. Read through the Stage Center thread again for a reminder. Im not here to cause controversy, just again pointing out how the same things repeat themselves.

If you'll look at any of my previous posts on historic preservation, you'll see that I'm almost 100% on the side of preserving our existing urban buildings.

I was for preserving Stage Center.
I posted suggestions on how they could realign the BOk building to preserve the Hotel Black.
I pointed out that Sandridge was lying about the India Temple building having been unoccupied for decades when they wanted to tear it down (it had people in it as recently as 2007).


I've cheered every (rare) victory and lamented every torn down gem. I'm a devoted brickhugger through and through. But this is nuts. It's clearly nuts.

You've got some old photos that indicate that there are some buildings behind that facade that may be worth preserving. However we don't know anything about the condition of those buildings today. Likely they were gutted by OG&E 40 years ago when they put up that ugly gold covering. This reduces their historic value significantly. But we really don't know. Plus they're literally building the convention center and the hotel right now. You wouldn't win this preservation argument in any city in the country. To take it as proof that OKC hates its history is ridiculous.

Now I'm not going to argue that this is a great city for historic preservation. We tear stuff down far too frequently, and there aren't enough protections for buildings that deserve protection. But this isn't an example of callously tearing down our history. Nobody even knew it was here.

We know it’s there now. The building still exists. It hasn’t been torn yet! I’d gladly accept a year or even two delay in this project to see the building be incorporated into the new project. It’s very easy to retain facades and is don’t all the time. Toronto has 80+ story skyscrapers built into century old buildings.

We know it’s there now. The building still exists. It hasn’t been torn yet! I’d gladly accept a year or even two delay in this project to see the building be incorporated into the new project. It’s very easy to retain facades and is don’t all the time. Toronto has 80+ story skyscrapers built into century old buildings.

Once again I ask, what is the proposal to do this with a garage/apartments? How much money are you willing to spend to fix whatever OG&E did to them, if nothing other than sheer neglect? You say it hasn't been torn yet, but do we know that? I believe it's been said several times we have no idea what OG&E did. You say we know it's there now...but we don't.

I've cheered every (rare) victory and lamented every torn down gem. I'm a devoted brickhugger through and through. But this is nuts. It's clearly nuts.

You've got some old photos that indicate that there are some buildings behind that facade that may be worth preserving. However we don't know anything about the condition of those buildings today. Likely they were gutted by OG&E 40 years ago when they put up that ugly gold covering. This reduces their historic value significantly. But we really don't know. Plus they're literally building the convention center and the hotel right now. You wouldn't win this preservation argument in any city in the country. To take it as proof that OKC hates its history is ridiculous.

Now I'm not going to argue that this is a great city for historic preservation. We tear stuff down far too frequently, and there aren't enough protections for buildings that deserve protection. But this isn't an example of callously tearing down our history. Nobody even knew it was here.

Isn't the fact that there's been no investigation of the state of these buildings proof that there's not even a faint interest in historic preservation by most decision makers? That's not to say whether these buildings are worth saving. It seems no one even checked. And the reason it's fair to label OKC as a city that doesn't care about it's history is because of it's long track record of tearing down historic buildings. It's astouding what OKC tore down with the Pei Plan. You'd think priorities would change. But, as you point out, they didn't and incredible buildings like the Indian Temple came down anyway. OKC desreves that label and keeps proving it.

We know it’s there now. The building still exists. It hasn’t been torn yet! I’d gladly accept a year or even two delay in this project to see the building be incorporated into the new project. It’s very easy to retain facades and is don’t all the time. Toronto has 80+ story skyscrapers built into century old buildings.

FYI, this is what you get when a city takes its preservation seriously. Toronto.

https://i.imgur.com/40MWllu.jpg

Look a little closer:

https://i.imgur.com/zwuvOch.jpg

If they can do it with one of their tallest buildings, it shouldn't be the same old OKC way of "how much money do YOU want to provide for it." Have some f@cking pride in your city and demand better from developers. Damn. Every other city seems to do it.

Cities like Toronto, Dallas, Kansas City (to name a few)... have moved more toward preservation--they get it.

Don't want to cry over spilled milk; however think about some of the gems we've demolished--old 600 room downtown Biltmore, Black Hotel, Criterion Theater, Baum Building & Stage Center among the most notable, if they were apart of our downtown setting today; jJust imagine the Biltmore much like the Skirvin mixed in as our convention center conference hotel; we could have added a modern wing to it.

https://assessor.oklahomacounty.org/PhotoGallery/5/Biltmore%20Hotel%201950s%201.jpg https://www.picclickimg.com/d/l400/pict/382564392119_/c1910-The-Baum-Building-Oklahoma-City-OK-Postcard.jpghttp://2.bp.blogspot.com/-fLzoJkAIR9g/VE6zGkJ-TlI/AAAAAAAAJ1w/fvipjcuEC1I/s1600/doge%2B1.jpg
Modeled after the Doge’s Palace in Venice, Italy (bottom picture), the Baum Building sat at the corner of Robinson and Grand (Sheridan) in downtown Oklahoma City. This was the work of Layton and Smith, the same firm that designed the Oklahoma State Capital building, and was completed in 1910. This structure was demolished in 1973 as part of the urban renewal movement--Brent Wilkins (Blog five)--Monday, October 27, 2014., Oklahoman

600-room Biltmore Hotel & the historic architecture of the Baum Building.

Don't mean to preach to the choir--would be great if our city could devote a portion of future MAPS funds for preservation; much like we did with Taft Stadium.

I miss the Stage Center as much as the next guy, in fact probably more. I loved the Tinker Toy building when people were crapping on it like crazy and have some fond memories there. That said, wasn't it pretty much destroyed BEFORE it was knocked down? I'm not entirely sure holding it up as something that "could have and should have" been saved is the best choice if it couldn't have. The whole "work of art replaced by boring office building and then even that didn't happen" narrative is cool and all, but it doesn't repair the damage left by flooding.

It takes money to repair the flooding. It could have been repaired. World class cities get world class structures which are often historic buildings that preserve character. You have to spend more money on those like developers in world class cities do. That’s one of the things that make cities great.

The only problem is that the Stage Center wasn't world class to begin with.

Yes it was.

I had no clue the Stage Center even existed until it was torn down.

It was an internationally renowned piece of architecture.