Low-end ilk? Seriously?

A lot of people just need a bed to sleep on, and a clean room to come "home" to.

When I travel (if I'm not using AirBNB) I stay in a cheap low-end ilk room (your words) because I am there to visit that city, not spend all my time in a hotel.

Low-end ilk? Seriously?

A lot of people just need a bed to sleep on, and a clean room to come "home" to.

When I travel (if I'm not using AirBNB) I stay in a cheap low-end ilk room (your words) because I am there to visit that city, not spend all my time in a hotel.

Catch22, no need to take what I was saying out of context or as some sort of attack. I was simply alluding to the fact that the limited service hotels in Bricktown shouldn't affect the success of a boutique hotel in First National. As for the demand for a convention center hotel like a full-service Marriott being cannibalized, that could be debated.

Yes, but low-end ilk?

ilk?

ilk?

ILK?

I L K?

They may not be full service, but they are hardly roach motels or pay by the hour joints, which I would say are ilk.

Doesn't OKC currently have fewer full-service hotels than most cities its size? Most of the hotels that have been built are of the low-end ilk such as Staybridge and Homewood Suites.

Almost all the downtown hotels are full-service.

Of the 18 built, under construction or proposed, 12 of them are full-service which represents 78% of the rooms.

Only SpringHill, Staybridge, Hampton, OK Kids Korral, Holiday Inn Express and Hyatt Place are the exceptions and are generally much smaller than their full-service counterparts. BTW, Hyatt Place may also turn out to be full service, meaning it may contain a restaurant/bar, offer room service, etc.

Yes, but low-end ilk?

ilk?

ilk?

ILK?

I L K?

They may not be full service, but they are hardly roach motels or pay by the hour joints, which I would say are ilk.

ilk - simply means "type." Saying "low-end ilk" means the same thing as low-end type or kind.

Ilk | Define Ilk at Dictionary.com (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ilk)

ilk - simply means "type."

Ilk | Define Ilk at Dictionary.com (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ilk)

It's a negative term.

It's a negative term.

My apologies. I have used the word my entire life, but never in a derogatory way.

Everytime I have heard or used the word ilk, while not an offensive word, has been used to put things down.

The homeless and their ilk.

The rich and greedy and their ilk.

etc.

Look at all of those wonderful monuments and their ilk. I have never heard.

Everytime I have heard or used the word ilk, while not an offensive word, has been used to put things down.

The homeless and their ilk.

The rich and greedy and their ilk.

etc.

Look at all of those wonderful monuments and their ilk. I have never heard.

The last one would still be appropriate. It's an archaic word though and I will refrain from using it since obviously it means something negative to some people. Sorry man.

I hope the property is bought by someone who appreciates it's art deco charm. Seeing the Great Banking hall converted into a lobby (while a great idea) would make me sad as the space is now used for private events. I just had my wedding reception there and it was fabulous.

I hope the property is bought by someone who appreciates it's art deco charm. Seeing the Great Banking hall converted into a lobby (while a great idea) would make me sad as the space is now used for private events. I just had my wedding reception there and it was fabulous.

A lot of Lobbies can be rented out too, possibly more so with corporate buildings which are essentially shut down after five or six plus weekends but if they have any interest in doing it the buildings design would make that fairly easy to plan for. Having that option is a way to draw people to stay in the hotel, though it might cost more if the event was not going to be bringing in people to rent rooms.

^

Right, in the case of FNC they would probably have a small reception desk on the ground level then use the Great Banking Hall as a restaurant / bar / lobby which could still be used for private events.

If the Great Banking Hall were a piano lounge/upscale bar....MAN. Talk about awesome.

Also, most people don't realize that the skylight above the GBH is open to the sky above.

The tower actually splits into two wings on either side but I know the light was neglected for a long time and no longer brings in natural light.

But, that could be resolved through a quality renovation and it would completely change the feel of that space.

If the Great Banking Hall were a piano lounge/upscale bar....MAN. Talk about awesome.

I agree. No matter what though it needs to be in use and not in limbo.

^

Right, in the case of FNC they would probably have a small reception desk on the ground level then use the Great Banking Hall as a restaurant / bar / lobby which could still be used for private events.

Pete, Is there anything where the original Beacon Club was?

Pete, Is there anything where the original Beacon Club was?

No, I believe that's been empty since they relocated to Oklahoma Tower in 1997.

Would make a *great* bar, ala O Bar at the Ambassador.

This is a relatively recent photo of the sad current state of the old Beacon Club:

http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/102786369.jpg

Also, most people don't realize that the skylight above the GBH is open to the sky above.

The tower actually splits into two wings on either side but I know the light was neglected for a long time and no longer brings in natural light.

But, that could be resolved through a quality renovation and it would completely change the feel of that space.

That is very cool.. I am still trying to wrap my mind around how that works exactly..lol

No, I believe that's been empty since they relocated to Oklahoma Tower in 1997.

Would make a *great* bar, ala O Bar at the Ambassador.

Absolutely! I've wondered about that. There are so many things about that building that are just so appealing and to think of much of it just wasting away is incredibly sad.

looking at floor plans.. NOW I got it..lol I am slow today

BUT...imagine it redone...what views! That photo makes my heart ache.

^

It also tells you all you need to know about the current owners.

You used to be able to access the old Beacon Club fairly easily using a combination of getting off of the the elevator on certain floors and walking up back staircases. Last time I tried a few years ago they had shut that avenue down though.

When you look at that photo of the Beacon Club you get a glimpse into how much work has to be done to the tower.

21c is taking 173,000 SF at the old Fred Jones building and spending more than $50 million to renovate it.

The tower alone is more than 3 x that size (451,000) and that doesn't include the center and east sections.

The tower would likely need well over $100 million, and then you still have to do demo, build a parking structure, re-do the arcade... Plus the purchase price.

This project could end up being second only to Devon in terms of total cost.

Definitely with Sid on that one. We have spent Tax dollars on far less noble causes.

They will be eligible for 20% federal and state credits on the renovation, though I'm not sure if the state credit is capped at some point.

With you Sid, I don't think this thing is going to happen without city dollars. It's a mirror image of the Skirvin situation.

Well, there are some differences. The Skirvin had been abandoned for 20 years, was open to the elements in places, and faced the legitimate possibility of demolition. FNC has been continuously occupied and continues to have paying tenants, though without question it is grossly underutilized and requires heavy infusion of capital to be competitive regardless of the eventual use.

Also, at the end of the day the taxpayer dollars were mostly the aforementioned historic tax credits combined with loans backed by the City, which ended up being a very safe risk on the City's part. It's not like a substantial amount of OKC taxpayer dollars were transferred to the project. I think the same approach would be very appropriate for FNC, which is incredibly iconic for OKC and should be a protected landmark.

^

I would just hope that the Great Banking Hall and Arcade are renovated and preserved as semi-public spaces.

In fact, whenever government resources are used for a real estate project -- either OCURA brokering or tax and other incentives provided -- it should be required that there be some space for general public use, since the general public is putting millions in.

This has always been my huge gripe with The Hill. OCURA (a government agency) spent a lot of time and tax dollars buying the property and soliciting bids then awarded the sale and grant money for a completely private residential community. Unless you buy one of their expensive units, there is absolutely nothing there for the community -- not even retail space or a park.

I would hope any urban developer would try to integrate their development with the larger community and to draw people in as much as possible, but those aspects should be absolutely required when public agencies and money are used.

Also, most people don't realize that the skylight above the GBH is open to the sky above.

The tower actually splits into two wings on either side but I know the light was neglected for a long time and no longer brings in natural light.

But, that could be resolved through a quality renovation and it would completely change the feel of that space.

IIRC, the skylight is actually roofed over and there is artificial lighting above the glass in the hall. But I agree that it would be simply stunning to remove the roof and install clear glass in the skylight.

I don't think the glass was ever clear; more translucent:

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/1stnational/1st50/1nb_50yearsforward_56l.jpg

IIRC, the skylight is actually roofed over and there is artificial lighting above the glass in the hall. But I agree that it would be simply stunning to remove the roof and install clear glass in the skylight.

Did it always have a roof or did it at one time actually allow for natural light in through the huge skylight?

Did it always have a roof or did it at one time actually allow for natural light in through the huge skylight?

It was specifically built to allow for natural light into that otherwise windowless space.

Would love to see that feature returned -- it would make a huge difference.

It was specifically built to allow for natural light into that otherwise windowless space.

Would love to see that feature returned -- it would make a huge difference.

Very cool. and yes it would make a huge difference. changing the light amounts throughout the day and night would make for a dramatic change in the space.

I decided to try Cafe 7 today and this is my first time visiting the Great Banking Hall. Wow...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/williamhider/sets/72157645439516687/

I don't think the glass was ever clear; more translucent:



I didn't say it was, but that clear glass would really be interesting.

I decided to try Cafe 7 today and this is my first time visiting the Great Banking Hall. Wow...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/williamhider/sets/72157645439516687/

Wow is right, that is such a fantastic building. Thanks for the photos!

I decided to try Cafe 7 today and this is my first time visiting the Great Banking Hall. Wow...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/williamhider/sets/72157645439516687/

It's amazing isn't it? Hard to believe we have something like that here. Love your pictures, by the way.

What's sad is that people like Will who truly love OKC have never seen the Great Banking Hall.

Just goes to show how such an incredible asset is going largely to waste and has been for decades. Even back when it was the bank lobby, most people never knew it was there.


Really, really hope it becomes a place that welcomes the public and invites them to linger.

It might be the most beautiful space in the entire state.

I decided to try Cafe 7 today and this is my first time visiting the Great Banking Hall. Wow...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/williamhider/sets/72157645439516687/

Well, for your first visit you made it a memorable one! What wonderful pictures, Will. Really. Thanks for taking the pictures ---- and sharing with us!

The two escalators going up to the Hall said "not for public access" but the steps were open. One other guy came up briefly while me and my girlfriend went up. There are people walking by and going in and out constantly down the hallways on the first floor. It's just eerie and the sounds echo like you're in a church. It's also pretty dark. The only natural light comes through the two doors and center revolving door at the entrance, and the artificial light from the skylight and ornate hanging lamps. Save for the State Capitol, this is the most awe-inspiring space I've ever been in. Every bit of what you see is marble/stone. Built to last hundreds of years. I didn't stay long since all the parking nearby on the meters is one hour only.

When you step up to the teller windows, your feet settle into impressions in the marble floor made by generations of people doing their banking there. You can LITERALLY stand in the footsteps of our forefathers.

It seems the “dream team” of local developers are very much in the picture for gaining control of First National Center.

My understanding is this group includes Mark Beffort, Andy Burnett, and Don Karchmer – and others as well.

There had been talk about them withdrawing but I was told by a reliable source that they came in with a strong, late bid and are one of the potential groups of buyers that were asked to make “final bids” by July 31st.

It may come down to them versus the previously-mentioned Alterra of Philadelphia.

No matter who may come out on top, it's a certainty they will need to work with Cathy O'Connor and the Alliance of Economic Development to obtain various incentives, grants, credits and financing. Cathy very successfully spearheaded a similar effort for the Skirvin Hotel.

The Skirvin was about a $50 million project; this will be 2 to 4 times that amount.

We probably won't know more until early next month.

It seems the “dream team” of local developers are very much in the picture for gaining control of First National Center.

My understanding is this group includes Mark Beffort, Andy Burnett, and Don Karchmer – and others as well.

There had been talk about them withdrawing but I was told by a reliable source that they came in with a strong, late bid and are one of the potential groups of buyers that were asked to make “final bids” by July 31st.

It may come down to them versus the previously-mentioned Alterra of Philadelphia.

No matter who may come out on top, it's a certainty they will need to work with Cathy O'Connor and the Alliance of Economic Development to obtain various incentives, grants, credits and financing. Cathy very successfully spearheaded a similar effort for the Skirvin Hotel.

The Skirvin was about a $50 million project; this will be 2 to 4 times that amount.

We probably won't know more until early next month.

I know FNC needs some work but $200 million to fix it up. Wow.

I would love to see this building shine again though.

It seems the “dream team” of local developers are very much in the picture for gaining control of First National Center.

My understanding is this group includes Mark Beffort, Andy Burnett, and Don Karchmer – and others as well.

There had been talk about them withdrawing but I was told by a reliable source that they came in with a strong, late bid and are one of the potential groups of buyers that were asked to make “final bids” by July 31st.

It may come down to them versus the previously-mentioned Alterra of Philadelphia.

No matter who may come out on top, it's a certainty they will need to work with Cathy O'Connor and the Alliance of Economic Development to obtain various incentives, grants, credits and financing. Cathy very successfully spearheaded a similar effort for the Skirvin Hotel.

The Skirvin was about a $50 million project; this will be 2 to 4 times that amount.

We probably won't know more until early next month.

This is huge. Great info Pete

Seeing the pictures of the First National Lobby reminded me how awe-inspiring it was to come up the stairs (or the escalator?) from the "Underground" during one of the first Opening Night Festivals. I had never had a reason to go into the bank and I had no idea that a space like that existed in downtown OKC. Unlike certain other--ahem--"structures" downtown, this one is definitely worth preserving. No matter what the immediate cost.

Unlike certain other--ahem--"structures" downtown, this one is definitely worth preserving. No matter what the immediate cost.

Ding, ding, ding, ding! Johnny, we have a winner!

Not to get sidetracked, but I have a feeling the public financing thing will come in to conversation with this and the possible convention center hotel. I could see this being a downer for the convention center hotel if FNC is turned in to some sort of hotel/other.

Not to get sidetracked, but I have a feeling the public financing thing will come in to conversation with this and the possible convention center hotel. I could see this being a downer for the convention center hotel if FNC is turned in to some sort of hotel/other.

Hopefully it's some combination of hotel, for sale housing, and / or apartments so that it won't be an issue. We should then still need the large convention center hotel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Make no mistake, if demolition were ever honestly floated, there WOULD be people who would come out of the woodwork rabidly pro-demo and extremely irritated by the pro-preservation crowd. It happens every time a notable structure is threatened. The important thing here is that something be done before the situation devolves to the point where demolition becomes a defensible option.

Make no mistake, if demolition were ever honestly floated, there WOULD be people who would come out of the woodwork rabidly pro-demo and extremely irritated by the pro-preservation crowd. It happens every time a notable structure is threatened. The important thing here is that something be done before the situation devolves to the point where demolition becomes a defensible option.

The problem with freedom of speech is that some people are dumber than a bag of hammers, and they love to open their mouths and prove it.


Edit: I was not talking about Urbanized in this post, just for clarification. :)

Make no mistake, if demolition were ever honestly floated, there WOULD be people who would come out of the woodwork rabidly pro-demo and extremely irritated by the pro-preservation crowd. It happens every time a notable structure is threatened. The important thing here is that something be done before the situation devolves to the point where demolition becomes a defensible option.

The only way I could ever see the public being in any way supportive of demolition is if a HUGE taxpayer subsidy is required with no opportunity for economic development or direct $ return and it is for a private owner...maybe in the way that many on here are upset the city subsidized Bass Pro. I think the biggest danger is still for it to be a dead hole in the middle of downtown if no one can make it work financially for the foreseeable future. I think the City would not approve demo, but may not be amenable to exorbitant subsidy.

Rover, I am not saying "the public." I don't think "the public" is "supportive" of the Stage Center demo. Most of them are simply "meh," which by the way is the entire problem with SC. As far as FNC is concerned, you would DEFINITELY have a much more pronounced and passionate public outcry if demo were proposed, but if, for instance, the place were allowed to empty out (it's surprisingly not as far from that as many would think), and - for instance - the skylight being talked about here were vandalized and the place were open to the weather, whatever, there would definitely be an ACTIVE outcry from a small segment of people to tear it down, immediately. And truthfully, the people demanding/rooting for demo of SC are also a small segment.

The same thing happened during the SandRidge demos. People emerged from the woodwork to blast the preservation view, or at the very least say demo was a great idea. In retrospect many who were then dispassionate would now agree (based on the Braniff) that maybe some of those demolitions were ill-advised and a missed opportunity, especially along Robinson. Of course, you can't get a do-over there.

I'm just saying that no matter the building there will always be a contingent that equates "old" and "difficult" and "preservation" with "anti-progress," "obstructionist," "crazy," or whatever. If the FNC becomes publicly difficult to find a solution for, the demolition drumbeat will begin to sound.

I think many times it has to do with the building itself and how people relate to it. I don't believe anyone wanted the Skirvin demolished even though it was vacant for many years, and there was broad support for subsidizing it's revival. People didn't have so much of a personal relationship with the SR demos, for instance. Even people without vision can envision something good in the FNC. Public opinion will be WAY in favor of preservation and support. Unlike the SC which only a much smaller segment could relate to, and apparently no one with clout or money could either.

I think some of us look at preservation as a philosophy, but most look at it on a case by case basis per building and must be convinced of the value.

I'm re-posting this because 1) I think it got missed due the to dreaded page break, and 2) to emphasize we have at least two groups with deep pockets and great experience vying for this beautiful property, and there is absolutely no reason to be discussing demolition:

*************

It seems the “dream team” of local developers are very much in the picture for gaining control of First National Center.

My understanding is this group includes Mark Beffort, Andy Burnett, and Don Karchmer – and others as well.

There had been talk about them withdrawing but I was told by a reliable source that they came in with a strong, late bid and are one of the potential groups of buyers that were asked to make “final bids” by July 31st.

It may come down to them versus the previously-mentioned Alterra of Philadelphia.

No matter who may come out on top, it's a certainty they will need to work with Cathy O'Connor and the Alliance of Economic Development to obtain various incentives, grants, credits and financing. Cathy very successfully spearheaded a similar effort for the Skirvin Hotel.

The Skirvin was about a $50 million project; this will be 2 to 4 times that amount.

We probably won't know more until early next month.

No matter who wins the bid it will be a huge step up from the current ownership.

From everything I've read on here about the current ownership, a clown winning the bid would be a huge step up.

Yes, and there is a lot that will come out about the current owners once this happens. there is a lot of tension around there.

...I don't believe anyone wanted the Skirvin demolished even though it was vacant for many years...

Actually, you're incorrect on this point. There were household names who were pushing behind the scenes for its demolition, but fortunately sanity prevailed. It was a much closer call than most would ever know. If Steve participated with regularity he would back me up on this, as he covered the story and was aware of the names. Luckily, that building resonated with far more people and mayor Humphreys - as he stated behind closed doors at the time - didn't want to be the mayor on whose watch the Skirvin was demolished. Many leaders had given it up as a lost cause, trust me.