Plow

[betts]

Be careful not to get the demolition drumbeat started...

That said, I do think it is possible for the average Joe to envision that building renovated than say, a derelict building in the CBD, because Bricktown offers so many examples of buildings of the same type and character that HAVE been rehabilitated.

I don't think anyone is talking demolition. That would be tragic. While I would love to see the building renovated, I'd at least be somewhat satisfied to see an attempt by the owner to maintain the building's structural integrity. Put in some windows, repair anything that leaks or makes the building available to squatters of the human or animal kind.

[Pete]

There are very few completely boarded up buildings left in the downtown area, so this building deserves scrutiny.

It's located right in the middle of hundreds of millions of public investment and is allowed to sit in this condition by a family that purports to be great supporters of Bricktown and OKC in general.

And they've owned it for almost a decade.


This just simply is not acceptable, especially for such a high-visibility structure in OKC's main district for visitors.

[Pete]

If they can't afford to maintain it, they need to sell it.

[metro]

There are very few completely boarded up buildings left in the downtown area, so this building deserves scrutiny.

It's located right in the middle of hundreds of millions of public investment and is allowed to sit in this condition by a family that purports to be great supporters of Bricktown and OKC in general.

And they've owned it for almost a decade.


This just simply is not acceptable, especially for such a high-visibility structure in OKC's main district for visitors.

Not to mention this family is not hurting for money. There is no excuse for the decade of neglect.

[Pete]

BTW, Scaramucci receives income on that property in the form of paid parking.

Property taxes last year were $16,000.


If they were losing a ton of money they wouldn't have sat on this building for a full decade.

[Bullbear]

I have always loved this building. I remember probably 5 years ago they were wroking on some of the windows and I was optimistic.. then they boarded them back up. so many great things could happen with it.. residential or retail.. sad to see it in this condition just wasting away. they need to sell to someone with vision and cash to make it happen.

[onthestrip]

Definitely is a shame its remained this way for so long, especially in such a great location. It probably had millions of people walking right by it in the last year alone. I can picture in my head how great it would look with new windows and repainting the Rock Island signage at the top of the building.

[Urbanized]

I don't think anyone is talking demolition...

Not yet. It's probably just a matter of time before someone starts advocating it in this very thread. There is a certain contingent in the world that is so angered at the site of an old and currently unproductive building that they would rather see a gravel lot.

[OKCisOK4me]

I am more motivated to sneak out there tonight and swash the graffiti off.

Speaking of, hold off on swashing your cars until this rain moves past ;-)

[Fantastic]

I am more motivated to sneak out there tonight and swash the graffiti off.

I'll meet you there! Maybe we could get arrested for trespassing. Imagine the media firestorm that would come out of that. "Urban Renewal Advocates Arrested For Removing Graffiti From Ignored Building"

[CaptDave]

I'll meet you there! Maybe we could get arrested for trespassing. Imagine the media firestorm that would come out of that. "Urban Renewal Advocates Arrested For Removing Graffiti From Ignored Building"

I am not much of a scofflaw but THAT would be kind of cool....

[heyerdahl]

BTW, Scaramucci receives income on that property in the form of paid parking.

Property taxes last year were $16,000.

If they were losing a ton of money they wouldn't have sat on this building for a full decade.

Assuming 20 cars park there each day, the revenue from parking would be close to $40,000 per year. That's probably a pretty big underestimate considering there are 32 parking spaces and most cars will only stay a few hours at a time.

Even better, imagine that for 40 home Thunder games, all 32 spaces are filled for $10- this is about $13,000, or almost all of their property taxes, paid by 40 nights of the year. Not sure what the actual price in this lot is for Thunder games.

[Urbanized]

Twenty cars a day would be a bad assumption. That lot is not utilized on a daily basis, and is generally only available to parkers on event nights. I think that lot has historically been $10 on Thunder game nights, though I believe it took a somewhat controversial uptick during late rounds of the playoffs this past season. I'm not saying this to defend or attack the ownership; only to assist you in your math.

[dankrutka]

What about standing on that corner with signs saying, "Avis Scaramucci is acting douchey!" Shame is a powerful tool.

[catch22]

Can someone make a rendering (but using very realistic graphics) of this building brought back to life? Maybe we could put a sign up in front of the building on the sidewalk with a rendering of what could be, but put in clearly bold titles "THIS RENDERING WILL NOT HAPPEN WITH CURRENT OWNERS. SAME OWNERSHIP FOR 10 YEARS WITH NO IMPROVEMENTS"

[Steve]

For what it's worth ... I think the message has been heard....

[catch22]

For what it's worth ... I think the message has been heard....

Clarify?

[Urbanized]

Also - and I'm not saying I'm not disappointed the building hasn't been developed more quickly (or at all) - but it's not quite accurate to say the building has graffiti on it. I walk past that building many times a week, and as far as I recall I have never seen spray paint or marker graffiti of any kind (I'm always on the lookout and make tagging reports to the City's action line with regularity).

The only thing I have ever seen is chalk left by wedding/engagement/graduation photographers. It is a very regular occurrence for photographers to pose people in front of the building, or sitting in first floor window sills, with their name and significant date and maybe a heart written in white chalk on the red brick or red-painted plywood that covers the windows. I suppose that meets the technical definition of graffiti, but it's not the type that most of us would think of or be especially troubled by.

[jedicurt]

I am more motivated to sneak out there tonight and swash the graffiti off.

sounds like an idea... lets plan a night to go out into bricktown and remove graffiti! although i'm sure that is a crime as well... but an awesome one to get arrested for

[Fantastic]

The only thing I have ever seen is chalk left by wedding/engagement/graduation photographers.

And teenagers... example: J.L. + K.B. = <3

Whatever the case may be it's annoying... and one day, after work I'm going to scrub all that chalk and/or sharpie writing right off the walls (don't worry, Chad... I'll bring a change of clothes and a Ronald Regan mask, no one will recognize me)

[Fantastic]

sounds like an idea... lets plan a night to go out into bricktown and remove graffiti! although i'm sure that is a crime as well... but an awesome one to get arrested for

I'm telling you... let's do it!

[Urbanized]

I know it is splitting hairs, but I think J.L. + K.B. = <3 is one of the aforementioned engagement/wedding photos. Actually I always sortof enjoy seeing those photo shoots going on. Tells me that Bricktown is important/appealing enough to people for them to use it as a backdrop in memorializing one of the most important events in their lives. That said, they should do the right thing and scrub off the chalk when they finish.

[Pete]

Also, the average person would not be able to distinguish these photo chalkings from regular graffiti and thus it sill reflects badly on Bricktown and the whole community.

[Fantastic]

I know it is splitting hairs, but I think J.L. + K.B. = <3 is one of the aforementioned engagement/wedding photos. Actually I always sortof enjoy seeing those photo shoots going on. Tells me that Bricktown is important/appealing enough to people for them to use it as a backdrop in memorializing one of the most important events in their lives. That said, they should do the right thing and scrub off the chalk when they finish.

I don't disagree on any particular point, and I'm very much with you that when they are done, they should remove it. If one wants such a thing in thier wedding/engagement photos I'm acctually all for it and I think it is pretty awsome in that way. However I also believe that proper channels should be taken. Specifically, the property owner and/or manager should be approached and requested for permission, and the "decoration" should be removed afterward. Not doing so, by definition is graffiti, defacement of property and inappropriate, and while the building itself is a horrible display of a lack of civil responsibility, not to mention a monument to failure, adding these cute little "I heart so-and-so's" to the side of the building just adds to the annoyance. If "I heart so-and-so" looks stupid on a middle school student's bookcover, what idiot would think it looked awsome on the side of a building (not talking about you, Urbanized, as you established that you also advocate the removal of the writings... thought I should make that clear)

It's just irritating!

[RodH]

If people are using the building for a backdrop for romantic photos how bad can it look?