OG&E Tower

[Pete]

The DDRC can say no to a demolition or design but in the end they have very little in the way of legal rights if the developer decided they wanted to fight them.

We saw this in Bricktown (slightly different design standards but same general constructs) with House of Bedlam, where the committee kept wanting Johnson to change his design and he did make some changes, but in the end they even said in the meeting they had no legal right to deny what he had planned. A similar situation occurred between OCURA and Randy Hogan over Kd's.

These committees work more on the basis of suggestion and hope that the developer will comply in order to get quick approval. But if you watch the DDRC meetings on-line, it's a very friendly type of situation where a committee member will say something like "I'd really like to see more landscaping on the east side" and the developer will respond, "Sure, we can do that".

The developers already know the development guidelines and rarely submit plans that are way over the line in any area. The City staff writes a preliminary report about what items are in compliance and what is not, along with a recommendation to approve, approve with conditions, or not approve. But in many cases where the City suggests rejection, the committee approves anyway.

In other words, they have a lot more power to override guidelines than to affect change on any project that already meets them. And the guidelines are pretty basic stuff and in themselves do not come close to guaranteeing great development.

[Urban Pioneer]

I agree. Your right about the techical aspects and limitations of these meetings. But these are the (public) moments when things can change and be influenced. That is my point.

The dude wants approval. And to have that he will probably be there and hear the community. It is possible that the design could be influenced by opinions expressed there.

[Pete]

UP, sorry if I appeared to be arguing against your points as that was not at all my intention.

Just trying to provide some insight on how the process usually works.


I agree that public participation and feedback is starting to have a strong influence on how some of these decisions are made and I see that trend only picking up steam.

It was only a couple of years ago where it was almost impossible just to get the OCURA minutes, and then only a full month after the meeting.

[zookeeper]

Got the new SLICE magazine yesterday. Great little mag by the way, they do a super job with feature articles. This is on page 26.



I wanted to protect the work of the writer, so if you want to read it - pick up a copy! It's very pro-Stage Center.
The magazine has a great article about Honey Springs too (the largest Civil War battle in Oklahoma).
http://www.sliceok.com

[MustangGT]

I won't miss that eyesore one bit. From a functionality standpoint it has been a debacle since day one. That is only one of the multiple negatives about it. I say adios.

[OKCisOK4me]

Luckily, there are human beings that are so young they'll never be aware of the atrocious Stage Center...

[Urban Pioneer]

Pete- no problem. What you wrote is exactly how it works. I just wanted to stress that public involvement can and often does have a positive impact in those meetings. I'm not advocating either way on the Stage Center site. I see the merits of preservation as well as the positive outcomes of a well designed urban block.

And of course the discourse on this blog has an incredible impact as well. One that is often difficult to measure.

[bluedogok]

Over time and lack of anything being done for so long about Stage Center I have pretty much accepted its fate.

[Paseofreak]

Given the public nuisance (makeshift homeless shelter) and and safety hazard it's devolved into, I can't see DDRC responsibly doing anything but approving it's demolition. And I hate to see it go. It attracted my attention immediately when I got here in 2004. Unfortunate that bad design with respect to the elements and apparently it's utility ultimately will be it's downfall.

[Spartan]

UP is right, that the new urbanist and historic preservation voices need to merge in this case. The replacement building for the site must be a higher and better use than Stage Center. That means we should demand more than a parking garage.

That's the strongest argument for design review to take an active role in the design of this tower. This is how you tell the developer to go back to his architects for some fine tuning.

[Pete]

Just wanted to make this point one more time regarding the height vs density debate: In the case of this project, we are only talking about one block.


If Williams builds one 35 story building or 3 that are each 15 stories, it doesn't change density one bit. Everything would all still be on that one block with a parking garage at the base and even with multiple buildings there is no guarantee the street interaction would be better than just one. Or another way to say it: Street interaction on that block could be just as good with one tall building than with multiple.

Absolutely nobody is arguing against more density; it's just in this particular case that density won't change regardless of the height of the main building. So why not make it tall, add to the skyline and create further excitement for the casual citizen, which is the huge majority?

I suspect the reason is that the one building is essentially OG&E's and the remainder Williams has to develop on his own steam and either doesn't want to take the risk of building too much, or doesn't have the ability to secure enough financing for anything more than a second, 8-12 story structure.

[Urban Pioneer]

Several people have pointed out to me that the proposed smaller tower is fairly respectful in scale to new school across the street.

What do people think about that?

[Pete]

The main tower is a full block from the school.

The parking garage alone will be much taller than the school.

[Urban Pioneer]

Interesting

[Prunepicker]

... If Williams builds one 35 story building or 3 that are each 15
stories, it doesn't change density one bit.

Physically speaking it does change the density by 10 stories.

... Absolutely nobody is arguing against more density; it's just in this
particular case that density won't change regardless of the height
of the main building. So why not make it tall, add to the skyline and
create further excitement for the casual citizen, which is the huge
majority?

Agreed. I'd like to see the skyline point skyward but leave the
population in Manhattan.

[zookeeper]

I won't miss that eyesore one bit. From a functionality standpoint it has been a debacle since day one. That is only one of the multiple negatives about it. I say adios.

Some serious thoughts on Stage Center. Give me a minute or so?

In a quick answer to MustangGT, many thought otherwise. Very conservative people didn't like it one bit. If there was a computer forum of progressive city thinkers (like this board) when the Mummer's Theater was built, we would have all been thinking it was the coolest thing to ever hit Oklahoma City. As for the division, I remember it from the day it opened, but it wasn't one-sided. It certainly was "love it or hate it," but it was unique - in the truest sense of the word. Many loved it - many hated it. But the awards rolled in.

I've read people on this board write about how actors and producers of theater today don't even like it. But I know quite a few theater types who tell me that's a minority viewpoint and the intimate, close atmosphere was a chance to really showcase great talent.

With a last and faint breath, I argue that Stage Center could again be an incredible facility. In a time where we can turn the North Canadian River into the Oklahoma River, an abandoned warehouse district into Bricktown, renovate old, dusty, decrepit buildings into beautiful new urban landscapes, we can surely turn the Stage Center into a world-class facility. Is there the will? Probably not. But, is there a way? Of course. Things have been transformed all over this country from much worse. The propaganda campaign of such normally optimistic people in this city about so many things became so negative about Stage Center it finally wore down those who support this incredible building. It wasn't a matter of how, or if, or if there's a way, (there was always a way), it was just a matter of cost and will. There was simply no will. Art (no matter how well recognized around the globe) had no way to compete with very powerful monied interests who had their eyes on this property for a long time. They will most probably soon have their demolition permit in hand. So sad. So terribly, terribly sad.

[kevinpate]

... The replacement building for the site must be a higher and better use than Stage Center. ...

Well, that certainly is no high standard. Excluding festival of the arts week, one could park a hot dog cart, an Elvis on velvet seller, and a out of tune banjo player with a tip jar and argue rather successfully they created a higher and better use of this lot than it has seen in recent years.

[Of Sound Mind]

Well, that certainly is no high standard. Excluding festival of the arts week, one could park a hot dog cart, an Elvis on velvet seller, and a out of tune banjo player with a tip jar and argue rather successfully they created a higher and better use of this lot than it has seen in recent years.

+11

[Urban Pioneer]

Some serious thoughts on Stage Center. Give me a minute or so?

In a quick answer to MustangGT, many thought otherwise. Very conservative people didn't like it one bit. If there was a computer forum of progressive city thinkers (like this board) when the Mummer's Theater was built, we would have all been thinking it was the coolest thing to ever hit Oklahoma City. As for the division, I remember it from the day it opened, but it wasn't one-sided. It certainly was "love it or hate it," but it was unique - in the truest sense of the word. Many loved it - many hated it. But the awards rolled in.

I've read people on this board write about how actors and producers of theater today don't even like it. But I know quite a few theater types who tell me that's a minority viewpoint and the intimate, close atmosphere was a chance to really showcase great talent.

With a last and faint breath, I argue that Stage Center could again be an incredible facility. In a time where we can turn the North Canadian River into the Oklahoma River, an abandoned warehouse district into Bricktown, renovate old, dusty, decrepit buildings into beautiful new urban landscapes, we can surely turn the Stage Center into a world-class facility. Is there the will? Probably not. But, is there a way? Of course. Things have been transformed all over this country from much worse. The propaganda campaign of such normally optimistic people in this city about so many things became so negative about Stage Center it finally wore down those who support this incredible building. It wasn't a matter of how, or if, or if there's a way, (there was always a way), it was just a matter of cost and will. There was simply no will. Art (no matter how well recognized around the globe) had no way to compete with very powerful monied interests who had their eyes on this property for a long time. They will most probably soon have their demolition permit in hand. So sad. So terribly, terribly sad.

I love your passion. So few people have it.

[OKCRT]

Several people have pointed out to me that the proposed smaller tower is fairly respectful in scale to new school across the street.

What do people think about that?

Just wondering how tall is the new school going to be? The project for stage center site will be about as tall as the Colcord Hotel if they stay at 14 floors. The Colcord doesn't even register in most skyline pics that I see. What a waste of prime real estate.

[OKCisOK4me]

Just wondering how tall is the new school going to be? The project for stage center site will be about as tall as the Colcord Hotel if they stay at 14 floors. The Colcord doesn't even register in most skyline pics that I see. What a waste of prime real estate.

The school is only 3 stories tall on the east side.

[catch22]

Just wondering how tall is the new school going to be? The project for stage center site will be about as tall as the Colcord Hotel if they stay at 14 floors. The Colcord doesn't even register in most skyline pics that I see. What a waste of prime real estate.

Lol it will be much taller than the Colcord. Lolol

[Mel]

I think it would make a cool childcare facility for Downtown workers with kids.

[Spartan]

Some serious thoughts on Stage Center. Give me a minute or so?

In a quick answer to MustangGT, many thought otherwise. Very conservative people didn't like it one bit. If there was a computer forum of progressive city thinkers (like this board) when the Mummer's Theater was built, we would have all been thinking it was the coolest thing to ever hit Oklahoma City. As for the division, I remember it from the day it opened, but it wasn't one-sided. It certainly was "love it or hate it," but it was unique - in the truest sense of the word. Many loved it - many hated it. But the awards rolled in.

I've read people on this board write about how actors and producers of theater today don't even like it. But I know quite a few theater types who tell me that's a minority viewpoint and the intimate, close atmosphere was a chance to really showcase great talent.

With a last and faint breath, I argue that Stage Center could again be an incredible facility. In a time where we can turn the North Canadian River into the Oklahoma River, an abandoned warehouse district into Bricktown, renovate old, dusty, decrepit buildings into beautiful new urban landscapes, we can surely turn the Stage Center into a world-class facility. Is there the will? Probably not. But, is there a way? Of course. Things have been transformed all over this country from much worse. The propaganda campaign of such normally optimistic people in this city about so many things became so negative about Stage Center it finally wore down those who support this incredible building. It wasn't a matter of how, or if, or if there's a way, (there was always a way), it was just a matter of cost and will. There was simply no will. Art (no matter how well recognized around the globe) had no way to compete with very powerful monied interests who had their eyes on this property for a long time. They will most probably soon have their demolition permit in hand. So sad. So terribly, terribly sad.

I agree. Stage Center was and is and could be phenomenal. The question should be, "Is what we're getting better?"

For those of you who want a more impressive development in order to justify the demolition of a great landmark that DOES and COULD contribute to the Myriad Gardens, here is your argument.

[Pete]

I agree. Stage Center was and is and could be phenomenal. The question should be, "Is what we're getting better?"

For those of you who want a more impressive development in order to justify the demolition of a great landmark that DOES and COULD contribute to the Myriad Gardens, here is your argument.

That's always been a part of this... We all just assumed there was going to be something great on that spot, so losing the Stage Center wasn't the end of the world.

But what if from the beginning it was clear were would be getting a 14-16 story building, maybe another 8-12 story building and a huge parking lot with virtually nothing for the public, no new jobs coming downtown, etc. ?

How many people would have been for losing the Stage Center if we knew all along that's what we'd be getting??


I'm not a huge SC fan but thought we'd get something special in it's place. This seems to be about the least special development that could have ever been imagined.