SandRidge Center & Commons

[oneforone]

Unless it's a classic one-of-a-kind antique car.......

Antique is classy talk for junk in my eyes. If am not going to greatly increase the value of an item by putting money into it forget it.

There is no reason in spending money on something that will be worth less than what you put in to it.

[Popsy]

Antique is classy talk for junk in my eyes. If am not going to greatly increase the value of an item by putting money into it forget it.

There is no reason in spending money on something that will be worth less than what you put in to it.

You have brought up a concept that will very hard for numerous folks in the forum to grasp. But why should they grasp it as they would not be the ones putting money into it anyway. Seems to me this is a capitalist/socialist debate more than a preservationist/common sense debate.

[lasomeday]

I just love the Sooner I mean Sandridge Employees coming on here with their propaganda.

The people of Oklahoma City are tired of having their historic buildings torn down and their skyline replaced with parking and plazas. These buildings have potential to be reused for residential/mixed use. If Sandridge can refocus their money and efforts on these buildings they can improve their corporate image and the city. Their employees could live in the buildings and walk to work. I don't think they realize that not everyone wants to live in Edomond and commute to work.

This is a chance for Sandridge to step up and become and urban leader for the city not an urban destroyer.

[Architect2010]

Corporations live by the standards set forth by the laws of this great land - just like you and I do. Public perception has nothing to do with private property laws. You just wish that it did, as that would better serve your argument.

I could paint my house (or my place of business) a pukey-green color, which would probably be ill-perceived by the public, but I have the right to paint it that pukey-green color because it is my private property, and I can do with it what I please.

Not if an over-seeing committee such as a historical preservation district said other wise. And guess what little wise one? Sandridge Campus lies under the regulations of the Downtown Design Review Committee, unto which the public can alter a private organizations aesthetic plans. Which is exactly why there was an appeal.

This company CAN NOT do whatever it wants with it's campus because frankly: It's regulated. So why do you keep bringing up the same redundant argument that "they are a private organization; they can do what they want."

There are tons of laws and legislation that keep private companies from doing just that everyday. There is no such thing as truly-private in this country. And the citizens of Oklahoma City that actually have the mindset of preserving their city against this catastrophe of urban design [which I can't believe you think is justified, just because they are a private organiztion] plan on combatting this company because they too are entitled to do so by the "laws of this great land" if they wish.

Grasp that.

[ronronnie1]

Not if an over-seeing committee such as a historical preservation district said other wise. And guess what little wise one? Sandridge Campus lies under the regulations of the Downtown Design Review Committee, unto which the public can alter a private organizations aesthetic plans. Which is exactly why there was an appeal.

Nothing is truly private.

Bingo!

And I'm gonna laugh when Sandridge tears down all those buildings, then gets bought out and moves to Houston.

[Soonerus]

Tear them down, they are blighting the downtown area...

[SuzHat]

Regarding vacant buildings just sitting there...the Skirvin sat empty for how many years? Look at the old girl now--gorgeous!

If anyone would like to help Preservation Oklahoma fund the appeal, go to this link:
Become a member

and join and/or donate online. Tax deductible!

[Rover]

So, if I have a junker in my front yard and want to get rid of it, the neighborhood has the right to not only not let me get rid of it but force me to pay huge amounts to repaint it when it will never be worth anything in the future?

So if these are really "treasures" we are telling them to keep and fix up, shouldn't they be worth more? So please, someone step up and buy them and prove SR wrong. What.....no takers?

Only other option is for the city to take by domain issues and then develop them themselves. Yeah, let's ask the taxpayers to make that kind of investment...LOL.

[lonestarstatesux]

Some people keep mentioning how we have the right to do whatever, its private property... what bubble have you been living in? Have you ever heard of zoning and building code ordinances? I dare you to go build on to the front of your house without a permit or zoning variance approval, I double dog dare you.

[Spartan]

Based on Doug's post.. I'm going to guess that there is a new group interested in redevelopment of the KerMac bldg.

Redeveloped KerMac bldg -----------> Windswept corporate plaza

[lonestarstatesux]

I think the descision came down to costs and practical use. It's kind of like owning a car that is need of $3000 of repairs and the car is only worth $1000 and it is paid for. Your better off taking the $3000 and buying another car.

No... it's like selling the car, keeping the $3000 and buying a backyard garden. Buying another car would be them building new buildings.

[Doug Loudenback]

Based on Doug's post.. I'm going to guess that there is a new group interested in redevelopment of the KerMac bldg.

Redeveloped KerMac bldg -----------> Windswept corporate plaza

No, not that. But, still, be prepared for an unexpected development before Thursday ... Jack Bauer can and does work in mysterious ways ...

[Rover]

So that would be the best of both worlds.

[Spartan]

Well we already KNOW there are groups interested in rdeveloping the Braniff and KerMac bldgs. If only SandRidge knew what they were really sitting on..

[Doug Loudenback]

As I already alluded to in replying to Spartan/Nick, above, the possible new development I referenced hasn't got anything to do with new people in the wings who are willing/able to develop parts of the SandRidge properties ... maybe they are present, I don't know, but my own remark has nothing to do with such a possibility.

[Spartan]

Oh, right. Well I wasn't attempting to correct you or anything, Doug--just attempting to take this revelation in the full context of the SandRidge demolitions. Beyond the KerMac bldg I can't begin to predict what this new development might be..so I'll just stick to what I can reasonably extrapolate on.

[Doug Loudenback]

Well, then, extrapolate on a name that has not (as far as I'm aware) been heretofore mentioned in this thread.

[Spartan]

Anthony McDermid. Maybe Marva Ellard. Dick Tanenbaum. Narrowing it down to a name is a lot harder to pinpoint than the general fact that the Robinson bldgs possess a ton of redevelopment potential.

[Doug Loudenback]

Without further comment, keep in mind what I earlier said,

As I already alluded to in replying to Spartan/Nick, above, the possible new development I referenced hasn't got anything to do with new people in the wings who are willing/able to develop parts of the SandRidge properties ... maybe they are present, I don't know, but my own remark has nothing to do with such a possibility.

[oneforone]

I can always tell the difference people that work for their money and the silver spoon crowd. The silver is always caught up in movements like this one.

The working class crowd agrees with concept of private property. When something is private property the owner has the right to do whatever they wish provided it does not create a safety/health hazard or a logical nuisance to the people who own property adjacent to the property.

OKC is not NYC. I would prefer to see some green space downtown. The highrise district always seems to look dirty to me everytime I am downtown. It reminds me of the floor of a mechanics garage or a ballpark bathroom.

My question is What happens to the buildings if they are destroyed by a Tornado, Fire or Explosion. Do we go back and sink millions into them to save them? NO. We tear them down.

To me as long as something attractive takes its place I do not see a problem with it. Those that have a problem with should rally together, pony up the cash and offer to buy the buildings for market price.

I just can't wait until the time comes when we are saving old Big Box stores.

"No, You can't tear down the old Best Buy..... I bought my kid their first PC in there not to mention Toby Keith used the mens room during an autograph signing, He wrote a litte less talk a lot more action while he was using the toilet in stall 2."

[soonerguru]

I can always tell the difference people that work for their money and the silver spoon crowd. The silver is always caught up in movements like this one.

The working class crowd agrees with concept of private property. When something is private property the owner has the right to do whatever they wish provided it does not create a safety/health hazard or a logical nuisance to the people who own property adjacent to the property.

OKC is not NYC. I would prefer to see some green space downtown. The highrise district always seems to look dirty to me everytime I am downtown. It reminds me of the floor of a mechanics garage or a ballpark bathroom.

My question is What happens to the buildings if they are destroyed by a Tornado, Fire or Explosion. Do we go back and sink millions into them to save them? NO. We tear them down.

To me as long as something attractive takes its place I do not see a problem with it. Those that have a problem with should rally together, pony up the cash and offer to buy the buildings for market price.

I just can't until the time comes when we are saving old Big Box stores.

"No, You can't tear down the old Best Buy..... I bought my kid their first PC in there not to mention Toby Keith used the mens room during an autograph signing, He wrote a litte less talk a lot more action while he was using the toilet in stall 2."

This is ridiculous, self-defeating, and condescending. Yuck.

[mireaux]

wow, if they demolition FOUR buildings downtown our skyline would look pretty silly with huge gaps in it.

[Spartan]

I can always tell the difference people that work for their money and the silver spoon crowd. The silver is always caught up in movements like this one.

The working class crowd agrees with concept of private property. When something is private property the owner has the right to do whatever they wish provided it does not create a safety/health hazard or a logical nuisance to the people who own property adjacent to the property.

OKC is not NYC. I would prefer to see some green space downtown. The highrise district always seems to look dirty to me everytime I am downtown. It reminds me of the floor of a mechanics garage or a ballpark bathroom.

My question is What happens to the buildings if they are destroyed by a Tornado, Fire or Explosion. Do we go back and sink millions into them to save them? NO. We tear them down.

To me as long as something attractive takes its place I do not see a problem with it. Those that have a problem with should rally together, pony up the cash and offer to buy the buildings for market price.

I just can't until the time comes when we are saving old Big Box stores.

"No, You can't tear down the old Best Buy..... I bought my kid their first PC in there not to mention Toby Keith used the mens room during an autograph signing, He wrote a litte less talk a lot more action while he was using the toilet in stall 2."

I give you.. Myopia.

[Doug Loudenback]

OneForOne,

Do you not have a sense that there might be something different involved when comparing a Best Buy shop (in any part of town) with a downtown 1902-oldest-remaining-downtown-building-which-served-as-the-Oklahoma-legislature-from-1913-until-1917?

I understand and appreciate the position you are expressing. Boiling it all down to street speech and posturing an example of the other side of your position, though, the Skirvin was closed and downtrodden from 1989 until it reopened 2007 in large part due to our city's (and that means our citizens') collective will that it not be destroyed but be renewed.

Was that a mistake, or, if not, how does the Skirvin fit into your description.

Are you saying that it would have been just fine for the intervening owners to raze the building and let this city landmark pass away?

[blwarch]

I would like to make one thing clear regarding the law. SandRidge purchased the property which has laws (called zoning ordinances), that control the use of the land. This law is in place in part to keep compatible uses clustered, and to provide value to both the owner, the adjacent property owners, and the public, who pay the taxes that provided the infrastructure, including streets, water, and other utilities. Zoning keeps landfills and other less desireable legitimate uses from occurring next to downtowns, hazardous waste recyclers from next to hospitals, and so forth. The zoning ordinance in downtown encourages mixed use, high density developments, not an wide open "campus". The law is against the SandRidge proposal, the body that approved the demolitions made a decision that was based on incomplete information, which will hopefully be rectified Thursday.