Preftakes Block

[Rover]

I seriously doubt ANYONE believes the Pei plan was a success.

It should also be no surprise that the closer in areas would be first choice to build on.

It is time for people to step up and actually rebuild and re-use these older structures. Keep in mind that we are asking them to take an economic hit and to get less revenue than they could get. Most businesses do not choose to do that. The structures there have very limited opportunities to create cash flow and income, or at least as compared to a 40 story building. So, we need some selfless white knights with substantial money and want no say in the city or area functioning or politics (don't want to be part of a conspiracy). Maybe we on this board can identify who those people might be. It will take more than philosophies and hopes...it takes money. So, let's hope.

[Lafferty Daniel]

If you think it's conspiratorial to say that, you are the most clueless person in OKC. And you don't know your history.

I truly believe that these people calling the shots right now think that I.M. Pei was a big success, and I don't think any of them care about the old Critereon or Majestic or Midwest or the countless historic treasures that were raised in the name of progress. They gutted Main Street east of Hudson, now they're coming across Hudson to gut Main when in all directions there are plenty of vacant lots left over from the first time we attempted this kind of wholesale urban renewal and historic demolition.

If you truly believe that, then you are the most clueless person in OKC. (Wait, you don't even live in OKC, do you?)

[Spartan]

I seriously doubt ANYONE believes the Pei plan was a success.

It should also be no surprise that the closer in areas would be first choice to build on.

It is time for people to step up and actually rebuild and re-use these older structures. Keep in mind that we are asking them to take an economic hit and to get less revenue than they could get. Most businesses do not choose to do that. The structures there have very limited opportunities to create cash flow and income, or at least as compared to a 40 story building. So, we need some selfless white knights with substantial money and want no say in the city or area functioning or politics (don't want to be part of a conspiracy). Maybe we on this board can identify who those people might be. It will take more than philosophies and hopes...it takes money. So, let's hope.

I'm sorry, but the economics for a 40 story building on every street corner in OKC just don't pan out. So that isn't exactly a valid argument in terms of needed cash flow to justify a development expenditure in OKC. That's why we HAVE focused more on historic preservation typically.

[Rover]

I'm sorry, but the economics for a 40 story building on every street corner in OKC just don't pan out. So that isn't exactly a valid argument in terms of needed cash flow to justify a development expenditure in OKC. That's why we HAVE focused more on historic preservation typically.

If this is THE corner they want to build on, then yes it is a valid argument. Not every location is of equal value and in equal demand.

[bombermwc]

i don't really feel like the Preftakes corner is going to pan out for a tower either. The demo costs would make doing anything there FAR more expensive than several of the other options downtown. There are plenty places (surface lots or otherwise) that have a good sized footprint available for vertical growth. In order to build on the Preftakes land, just look at what all would have to come down first. And talk about NOT being part of the central core. It something is built there, then it's going to be an island in and of itself. It may not seem like a huge distance since it's across from Devon, but i challenge you to take a look and see what sort of negative space that would create when you look downtown from somewhere like the south/north.

[metro]

i don't really feel like the Preftakes corner is going to pan out for a tower either. The demo costs would make doing anything there FAR more expensive than several of the other options downtown. There are plenty places (surface lots or otherwise) that have a good sized footprint available for vertical growth. In order to build on the Preftakes land, just look at what all would have to come down first. And talk about NOT being part of the central core. It something is built there, then it's going to be an island in and of itself. It may not seem like a huge distance since it's across from Devon, but i challenge you to take a look and see what sort of negative space that would create when you look downtown from somewhere like the south/north.

To a multi-national corporation, what's an extra million dollars on a multi-HUNDRED million dollar tower? Answer: NOTHING. If Nick is building this proposed tower for a "Mystery Corporation Tower", I'm sure LOCATION is equally important and worth something. If I'm building a $100+ MILLION tower or much more, I'd want to be across from the city's nicest building too, and not a vacant lot.

[Bellaboo]

+1

[BoulderSooner]

To a multi-national corporation, what's an extra million dollars on a multi-HUNDRED million dollar tower? Answer: NOTHING. If Nick is building this proposed tower for a "Mystery Corporation Tower", I'm sure LOCATION is equally important and worth something. If I'm building a $100+ MILLION tower or much more, I'd want to be across from the city's nicest building too, and not a vacant lot.

this ... and i will add that it is very possible that the new tower would have a sky bridge connecting it to the new "public space in the devon garden wing .. and thus the rest of down town ....

and that sight is also very close to the MGB

[metro]

Not a fan of the sky bridge idea. We need more foot traffic on street level. Two steps forward, one step back.

[Spartan]

If this is THE corner they want to build on, then yes it is a valid argument. Not every location is of equal value and in equal demand.

Well, here's the problem, is that our city planning is not grounded in reality. Do we base our intentions on what IS or would COULD be? Here you've switched your argument from what IS (arguing against the economics of preserving what exists there now) and now you've switched your argument to COULD be, with the operative point being that this is THE corner they want. I think we have to focus more on reality, and show more concern for what IS, including what IS good, and what IS bad--and I think we come up with a lot better development sites that way.

This is also beginning to mirror the convention center site location process. Those consultants only considered what is the best site for a convention center, and indeed, they went out and found the best site--for anything. They never considered what was the best development for that site, however. Same thing here, compounded by basing our focus on visions rather than reality.

Instead of demanding the best site for a new tower and for a new convention center, why has nobody considered where those things would instead fit in best with the existing scheme and set-up downtown? What I mean is to plan downtown from a general perspective, rather than from the perspective of a convention center or a new tower. As it is right now, I feel like these planning processes are happening in a vacuum that is arguably oblivious to anything other than their tower, or their convention center. That's dangerous.

[Rover]

I understand what you are saying Spartan, but this is a commercial venture, not a city planning venture. And it is subject to the desires and judgement of those who have the money to do something with it, within the parameters of what the jurisdiction allows. All I am saying is that from a pure economic standpoint, more revenue can be generated from a new tall office building than from what is currently there. What you suggest is that the city dictate what goes where and that we then trust the judgement of the bureaucrats over the judgement of the marketplace. What I am saying is that there needs to be moneyed people/companies that have as their objective the preservation of the buildings and the (though somewhat objective) improvement of the city over their own financial considerations. That is asking a lot. What is preservation worth to a company? We have no real financial incentives to save the buildings which offset the loss of revenue. We just want people to automatically forego profit for the greater good of the city...and that rarely happens.

The cc is a different matter. The problem is, we don't know what would go on that site and that it would be any better than a cc. There are a lot of assumptions about an ideal development, but we have not seen evidence that there were any plans for anything there or anyone offering an alternative development there now.

In an academic sense, I agree with you. In reality, it is difficult to force what you suggest.

[Spartan]

What you suggest is that the city dictate what goes where and that we then trust the judgement of the bureaucrats over the judgement of the marketplace.

What I am actually suggesting is that we enforce the city codes that are supposed to protect historic structures, prevent corporate plazas, and so forth. We could stand to lose our designation as a Certified Local Government if we allow for the clear precedent of historic demolition (which, if these buildings go, there's no question that OKC isn't valuing HP and is back in demo mode, picking up right where we left off in the 70s).

We became a CLG by saying that we would enact certain codes and then enforce them, including specifically HP. By being a CLG, this is one of the things that benefits OKC (especially in competitive processes) when we apply for federal and state funds for projects. For example, the East Bricktown hotel/housing project, which is going to need incentive funding from a grant.

So yes, I am proposing the radical notion that city planning take precedence over commercial ventures. Developers have their concerns, obviously. But the city has every right to have their concerns, as well. In fact, that would be a "normal due process" on these kinds of developments, but lord knows such a process doesn't exist in OKC right now.

[Rover]

I agree with you Spartan. We need to enforce what we have until we can strengthen the codes. The question is, how many of these buildings are actually classified historic buildings and are codes going to be violated if they are razed?

[Spartan]

Well, codes relating to HP may or may not use the National Register as a standard, but in OKC that is not the case, and even in those communities, it is usually "on or probably eligible for" the National Register. Here most preservationists will mention "Section 106" as a vital reference that usually sets a standard that includes "probably eligible."

But what it all boils down to is that buildings can be historic for a number of reasons, but obviously not simply because they're old. Structures protected by HP ordinances should be significant for some reason, which can either be on the local, state, or national level. Comprising OKC's very last authentic section of its Main Street alone more than qualifies as locally significant using consistent HP standards, and with these structures you could also argue significance for architecture (being a great example of early 20th Century urban architecture) and local history (department store? etc).

[UnFrSaKn]

Here's some new photos. Yeah I know nothing changes on this block...

March 1 2012

http://www.flickr.com/photos/william...th/6945009367/























Looks like work started back up at the Coney Island corner.

[UnFrSaKn]

March 2 2012

http://www.flickr.com/photos/william...7629139966776/











Notice how it's all done except for this one part.

[Spartan]

That part of Main has without doubt been torn up the longest of any stretch of road.

[jbrown84]

That part of Main has without doubt been torn up the longest of any stretch of road.

Gives credence to your conspiracy theory...

[CaptDave]

I was finally able to have lunch at Coney Island today. There was a pretty decent crowd when I was there. Hopefully they will make it through this extended construction.

[UnFrSaKn]

Developer Nicholas Preftakes produces Main Street surprise in downtown Oklahoma City

Downtown leasing agents were surprised last week when they received an email advising properties along the 400 block of W Main Street acquired by Nicholas Preftakes are available for lease.

http://newsok.com/developer-nicholas...rticle/3659122

[Pete]

Wow, that's interesting.

But none of those properties are in rental condition so this could just be yet another evasive ploy.

[G.Walker]

The potential skyscraper that we thought was planned for this location must didn't come to fruition or it moved to different location, so now Preftakes is leasing the spaces.

[MDot]

The potential skyscraper that we thought was planned for this location must didn't come to fruition or it moved to different location, so now Preftakes is leasing the spaces.

Yeah, guess so.

[mcca7596]

Glad to see the historic streetwall is safe for the foreseeable future!

[Joe Kimball]

March 2 2012

I do wonder what type of space is below the skylights? Every time I'm down there, I'm intrigued by the contrast.