Campus Corner

[Pete]

Other than the Boomer Theater (which has been under-utilized since even my college days and has been radically modified) what exactly is historic about surface parking lots and a bunch of non-descript 1-story buildings which have all been remodeled and changed many times?

Might be a good idea to start thinking about how this could turn into something fantastic.

[dankrutka]

I generally agree with you, Pete, but I just don't find your arguments compelling. Using three bad businesses and a move to the SEC as an excuse to raze Campus Corner feels like a trojan horse.

First, many of the "new" issues you're describing are, in fact, as old as time in this area. Business owners of places like the Meatball shop (which I found a hard sell for the location when I first heard about it) have always been saying these same things. As you mentioned, Iron Star was great, but failed to find an audience. Blackbird did much better. Just think about the history of the Cross Cannon location... it's constantly changed over pretty good concepts over the years. That's life on Campus Corner. I don't think scraping buildings would do one thing to change this situation. It would just rip out any sense of urban history in a metro that has a terrible history of scraping buildings and then not replacing them or putting something worse there. Yes, there should be a way to address the shady business owners of the 3 out of like 100 businesses. But scraping one of the best walkable districts in the state seems like a terrible, and completely unrelated, solution. I make trips to Norman just to go to these crappy buildings and businesses you're dismissing (shout out to Emilio and Pepe's). There's a charm to them that you will lose with a rebuild. And there's plenty of room in the area for great urban development if that's needed. PhiAlpha's post shows that Campus Corner has dramatically changed is factually incorrect.

Second, how do we get from a move to the SEC + three bad business owners out of hundreds = raze Campus Corner? This SEC thing keeps getting mentioned without any detail or explanation. Did other SEC towns raze their historic districts and build anew? Even if they did (which I'm sure they didn't), does this somehow mean Norman should do the same? The argument doesn't make any sense. The idea that OU needs to move mountains to assimilate to the perceived interests of a couple thousand extra people for the 3-4 SEC home games a season is quite the overreaction.

[Pete]

I generally agree with you, Pete, but I just don't find your arguments compelling.

These are not "my arguments" it's merely the forces at work that have led us to this point and why things may drastically change.

Not trying to convince you or anyone else and I understand the concern.

[dankrutka]

Fair enough. Here's a follow up question then: Are there any barriers to owners demolishing large swathes of Campus Corner aside from public pressure?

[Pete]

Fair enough. Here's a follow up question then: Are there any barriers to owners demolishing large swathes of Campus Corner aside from public pressure?

In talking to people involved in Norman development, I don't believe so.

Think about it... Many small buildings have been completely razed over the years and sometimes something new is built and sometimes not. Also, every single one of those buildings has been heavily modified over the decades.

There have been a bunch of new structures built with no regard for height or style.

[Pete]

Does it look like there has been any real preservation or even design review in any of this?

[PhiAlpha]

I guess my main concern is knocking a bunch of successful businesses down before developing a bunch of vacant land. But from a historical perspective, I’d say at minimum keep the corner buildings on asp and Boyd as they’ve been minimally changed and have been the gateway to that area for 100 years, the boomer theater, Othellos and the buildings on the corner just south of it, the building Yo Pablo! is in which has been minimally altered, the Buchanan bike building, the building Pepe Delgados is in, the Blackbird building and the maybe the old Harold’s buildings. I don’t know if I’d save them because they are newer but I’d avoid knocking down Logies or the Porch in the first wave since they’ve both been recently rebuilt to add a second floor.

Also maybe keep the deli.

[Pete]

However this unfolds, there will be tons of input and the developer would have to get buy-in from the community.

I suspect the project would be done in multiple phases allowing for the continuation of some businesses, with several of them moving into new construction.

The Boomer has been completely bastardized apart from the marquee. The rest you mention have been changed many times over the decades.

[jdross1982]

Keeping a bunch of non descript 1 story buildings instead of building street level retail (replacing the retail that is already existing) and adding 3-5 stories of residential on top does everything this district needs. Continues to be very walkable, adds mass in having more student/residential housing next to the retail to sustain them throughout the year. Encourages more businesses and land owners to improve their properties adding significant growth and money to an area that is in major need of it. It would also bring much more legitimacy to building a new arena NE section of campus instead of building on I-35.

[Pete]

Researching this more, the buildings along Boyd - both corners of Asp and west through the old Harold's structures -- were all built in the 1930s.

They've all been changed quite a bit and not sure if they could be restored.

To me, the only thing that would make sense is to keep them and then build up behind them. Maybe just the two corner buildings on Asp.


But that might not be feasible in order to do this on a scale that would warrant hundreds of millions in investment.

[PhiAlpha]

However this unfolds, there will be tons of input and the developer would have to get buy-in from the community.

I suspect the project would be done in multiple phases allowing for the continuation of some businesses, with several of them moving into new construction.

The Boomer has been completely bastardized apart from the marquee. The rest you mention have been changed many times over the decades.

All of the buildings I mentioned have maintained enough of their historic architecture to be considered historic despite how much they’ve been changed over the decades. That’s why I specifically referenced them.

[Pete]

All of the buildings I mentioned have maintained enough of their historic architecture to be considered historic despite how much they’ve been changed over the decades. That’s why I specifically referenced them.

Not even remotely true on Blackbird or Boomer. And there is nothing special about the old Harold's buildings which have been heavily modified from whatever 1-story facade they once had.

And the Yo Pablo building is just a 1-sided, 1-story facade in the middle of a bunch of junk. Not reasonable to try and save it, especially set so far back into what would be new development.

[Pete]

[PhiAlpha]

Not even remotely true on Blackbird or Boomer. And there is nothing special about the old Harold's buildings which have been heavily modified from whatever 1-story facade they once had.

And the Yo Pablo building is just a 1-sided, 1-story facade in the middle of a bunch of junk. Not reasonable to try and save it, especially set so far back into what would be new development.

that’s why I said “maybe the old Harold’s building.” Looking back at the boomer, you’re right other than the marquis. We’ll have to agree to disagree on the rest.

[Pete]

And you think this building should be preserved in the middle of a $200 million mixed-use development?

[baralheia]

I don't think it really matters how much of the original architecture has been altered or removed, personally - all buildings contribute to the character of a given area in my book, regardless of their documented history (or lack thereof). Obviously some buildings contribute more character than others - and I'm not crying over those that contribute the least. But the idea of wiping everything and starting anew? There is just not a compelling reason to do so, full stop - not when there is still plenty of unrealized opportunity in empty parking lots. None of the arguments made in this thread have swayed me in that either. If people are the problem, do what you can do to correct that part of the equation. Yes change is necessary and even good in many instances, but wiping the slate clean here is change for the sake of change and I'm not here for it. It reeks of "Oh we're a SEC school/town now so we need something new and flashy to show we've arrived!"

Pretty much the only plan I'd be in favor of would be one that rehabs the existing building stock and adds to that existing character through considerate additions on underutilized land. For buildings that have little in the way of original architecture left, use what exists as a base to expand and/or modernize the structure. Be creative and build upon what's there - razing everything and starting anew is the lazy man's way out, in my opinion.

[Just the facts]

What does "historic" even mean? I think what people mean by historic is that they find the architecture and walkability historic, in the sense that developers don't build that way anymore. All of that is easily recreated if the desire is there.

https://newtrad.org/

[dankrutka]

The irony is that if this development happened, OU’s marquee area on gameday—Campus Corner—would be a construction site for the first several years OU is in the SEC. It would make a far worse impression and gameday experience for visitors than, say, just developing vacant lots or naturally continuing projects, or just buying out crappy landlords. This is why the SEC angle makes no sense.

[soonerguru]

I heard a rumor that a development group from Texas wants to pretty much buy all of Campus Corner and build a huge multi-use retail/residential complex. The rumor says with OU going to the SEC, the game day revenue should increase substantially (They said Tuscaloosa has a $30 million revenue per game day and Norman is $10 million). Pretty wild stuff - anybody hear anything about this?

Oh gee. Not sure how I missed this.

First thought: this sounds like an unfolding disaster.

If anything, I agree we need more hotel rooms adjacent to campus, but leveling Campus Corner would -- if indeed that's what's even being suggested -- extinguish every last drop of hope I have for that city.

Hopefully this rumor is wildly off the mark. There is more developable space in the Campus Corner district, not only by plugging parking lots but also by building height. Norman should densify from Main to the northern edge of Campus and large parking lots should be consolidated into functioning public / private garages with mixed use including retail and residential.

But please don't destroy arguably the best entertainment and retail district in Central Oklahoma.

[Just the facts]

The irony is that if this development happened, OU’s marquee area on gameday—Campus Corner—would be a construction site for the first several years OU is in the SEC. It would make a far worse impression and gameday experience for visitors than, say, just developing vacant lots or naturally continuing projects, or just buying out crappy landlords. This is why the SEC angle makes no sense.

One things for sure, whatever they do they will have to do it quickly if they want to be Day 1 ready. It can be done but it would be costly and I don't think $400,000,000 can build it that fast if they are truely going to 'scorch earth' Campus Corner. Just think what it would cost to buy out all the businesses, property owners and settle the lawsuits.

[Rover]

But please don't destroy arguably the best entertainment and retail district in Central Oklahoma.

I don’t know if you’ve been there in a while. It’s a pretty sad selection of businesses these days. Not the same as back in the day. It doesn’t seem very busy even when school is in session and there isn’t any real energy there. It isn’t charming, stylish, or even a good urban center. Something needs to happen. IMHO

[soonerguru]

I don’t know if you’ve been there in a while. It’s a pretty sad selection of businesses these days. Not the same as back in the day. It doesn’t seem very busy even when school is in session and there isn’t any real energy there. It isn’t charming, stylish, or even a good urban center. Something needs to happen. IMHO

I'm quite aware, and of course I've been there. Campus Corner ebbs and flows but it still presents uninterrupted urban fabric. Some of my favorite neighborhoods in other cities are funky and may have shops that don't interest me, but they facilitate foot traffic.

Without naming names, a real estate person whom I otherwise like decided to to put their heavy hand on CC back in the aughts, with mixed results. There are very few vacancies.

All I'm saying is don't allow widespread destruction without a clear plan in place to replace the leveled properties. Its funkiness is its charm. There are too many sports bars and late night clubs in my opinion, so you and I won't disagree there.

Personally there are very few establishments that would draw me to Bricktown -- and even fewer retail outlets than Campus Corner -- but I would take the same stance about widespread demolition of Bricktown.

[Pete]

Spent all morning in Norman and I photographed every single building on Campus Corner; I'll post all of them later.

[dankrutka]

I don’t know if you’ve been there in a while. It’s a pretty sad selection of businesses these days. Not the same as back in the day. It doesn’t seem very busy even when school is in session and there isn’t any real energy there. It isn’t charming, stylish, or even a good urban center. Something needs to happen. IMHO

If you go back to PhiAlpha's post you'll see this is quite an exaggeration considering how many businesses have been there for a long time. It's not near as different as people are making it out to be.

[GoGators]

Of course campus corner is going to feel like it has less to offer now than whenever it was the person was in college. That’s because it’s an area geared toward college students. The area has not changed but the person has..