OG&E Tower

[Spartan]

Again if they deny him on the basis that they have to preserve the structure (the only way they can deny him) that would apply to every one else as well. What he builds is not part of the application

You couldn't be farther off, stop thinking binary. These things are decided by votes. This isn't aerospace engineering or whatever your expertise is in.

[Paseofreak]

Shouldn't the India Temple Building razing by Sandridge be a good model for the process and outcome for Stage Center? Wasn't restoration cost a huge factor in the ultimate decision? Last I saw we were hearing $30MM to breath life into Stage Center, and then something would have to be found to do with it.

[Rover]

Pete, or any others here, at what price would you by the SC for with the intent to rehab or save it? What is it worth on a private sale basis if you know you can do nothing but rehab and preserve the building?

[Just the facts]

They're not. Some folks in the planning department made a courageous and correct stance in recommending denial, but don't confuse that with an overall desire on the City's part to preserve and rehabilitate the existing structure. DDRC likely approves, and if not the BOA overrules. The building WILL come down.

My understanding is that it takes $100K per year just to keep it from coming down all on its own. He really doesn't need to apply for a demo permit - he just needs to do nothing for a couple of years.

[MustangGT]

For all the folks who want to save Stage Center GET A CLUE. Here it is. Pool your money and buy it. Then do with it as you please. Since you are not willing to spend your money you have NO BUSINESS telling anybody else who owns the property what to do with it. With no financial involvement the naysayers are just busybody ninnyhamer obstructionists.

[David]

Yeah, no. By that logic building codes couldn't exist, and since they do exist we know that it is bunk.

[Spartan]

You realize right that the public process exists for a reason??

[Spartan]

My understanding is that it takes $100K per year just to keep it from coming down all on its own. He really doesn't need to apply for a demo permit - he just needs to do nothing for a couple of years.

Correct, so deny it now for any reason and the next time someone else comes along it will be a totally different situation. Also on the plus side we all know Rainey's commitment to the Stage Center site won't last. He'll just flip it to someone else, maybe (hopefully) the city can buy it for what he paid and do an RFP process. Or we could just deal directly w OG+E which would be nice, too.

[kevinpate]

In other words, abuse the process to deny a demolition permit so hopefully the tall and shiny crowd can abuse the process a different way later down the road.

The irony in this thread is nearing overwhelming proportions.

[Questor]

Stage Center aside, it horrifies me that we essentially have demolition and redevelopment processes in place no better than we apparently did in the 1970s. Is there nothing to stop another urban renewal fiasco in this town should someone decide to start knocking down buildings with no guarantee of ever redeveloping said sites?

[OkieNate]

In other words, abuse the process to deny a demolition permit so hopefully the tall and shiny crowd can abuse the process a different way later down the road.

The irony in this thread is nearing overwhelming proportions.

No, you just seem to not understand what 90% of the people on this thread do understand. Its about quality. What Rainey proposed/budgeted is not worthy of demolishing the only internationally recognized building in OKC, on some of the most prime real estate, for a parking garage and no new jobs.

Question though, can a refurbishing also be a relocation? I like the idea of salvaging all usable parts and rebuilding stage center in the new park. It could certainly be used there.

[OKCRT]

In other words, abuse the process to deny a demolition permit so hopefully the tall and shiny crowd can abuse the process a different way later down the road.

The irony in this thread is nearing overwhelming proportions.

That's not any different from the back room handshake buddy system that was used to get the bid the property in the first place,is it?

[Spartan]

In other words, abuse the process to deny a demolition permit so hopefully the tall and shiny crowd can abuse the process a different way later down the road.

The irony in this thread is nearing overwhelming proportions.

Kevin, I don't understand what you're getting at. What process is being abused? The planning staff wrote a report that objects to the demolition of an iconic structure. That's not an abuse of process no matter what means to an end it may be.

The end goal is to prevent an iconic piece of architecture being demolished for a development with MAJOR concerns. Rainey Williams clearly doesn't have the financing or resources he pledged that he did. He now has to demo the Stage Center (step 1), plan the whole development around the premise of parking revenue streams (step 2), and then sell off other buildings in NW OKC and subdivide a plot along Sheridan (step 3), just to finance a small office building that already has a master lease for downtown's most stable office tenant with ZERO competitors.

This is fast becoming bad news. I was championing this dude's development plan last week, up until the latest revelation, and I think the latest revelation should flip a lot more posters than just myself. Don't forget that. I was initially a big fan of what RW was proposing, so don't attack me for being unreasonable. I'm practically the only poster on this forum that ever evaluates things case by case, AND I would still support this development if it looked like Rainey was a developer who knew what he was doing.

Just for perspective, not only is Rainey having some evident difficulties pulling this development, but his only prior downtown development experience involved placing a new corporate plaza in front of the BOK Tower. This guy is not a veteran developer, as evidenced by the worst case of "over promise, under deliver" I have ever seen. "Under deliver" usually comes at the end of construction, not every month, when a little more information gets out.

My negative reaction this time is due to my discomfort of tearing down Stage Center when we have no idea or assurances in any way how this is going to end up. I still don't want to see an imposing, sterile corporate tower here, which I'm sure many still do want to see. I just want to see a real development here, not a suburban tower, parking garage, and a pad site for sale by owner.

[bchris02]

Kevin, I don't understand what you're getting at. What process is being abused? The planning staff wrote a report that objects to the demolition of an iconic structure. That's not an abuse of process no matter what means to an end it may be.

The end goal is to prevent an iconic piece of architecture being demolished for a development with MAJOR concerns. Rainey Williams clearly doesn't have the financing or resources he pledged that he did. He now has to demo the Stage Center (step 1), plan the whole development around the premise of parking revenue streams (step 2), and then sell off other buildings in NW OKC and subdivide a plot along Sheridan (step 3), just to finance a small office building that already has a master lease for downtown's most stable office tenant with ZERO competitors.

This is fast becoming bad news. I was championing this dude's development plan last week, up until the latest revelation, and I think the latest revelation should flip a lot more posters than just myself. Don't forget that. I was initially a big fan of what RW was proposing, so don't attack me for being unreasonable. I'm practically the only poster on this forum that ever evaluates things case by case, AND I would still support this development if it looked like Rainey was a developer who knew what he was doing.

Just for perspective, not only is Rainey having some evident difficulties pulling this development, but his only prior downtown development experience involved placing a new corporate plaza in front of the BOK Tower. This guy is not a veteran developer, as evidenced by the worst case of "over promise, under deliver" I have ever seen. "Under deliver" usually comes at the end of construction, not every month, when a little more information gets out.

My negative reaction this time is due to my discomfort of tearing down Stage Center when we have no idea or assurances in any way how this is going to end up. I still don't want to see an imposing, sterile corporate tower here, which I'm sure many still do want to see. I just want to see a real development here, not a suburban tower, parking garage, and a pad site for sale by owner.

Completely agree, Spartan.

This is from the July 26th chat transcript:

"Steve Lackmeyer 10:07 a.m. Thanks Gary. No, it's not safe to assume the tower anchor will be associated with OG&E, Enogex or Centerpoint. It's possible. But as I've said before, there are a lot of missing pieces. Consider what I've told you before; in March a completely different developer was on the verge of getting this contract for the Stage Center property. It was not a reflection on that developer that the deal fell through. He had other tenants lined up, and it is still quite possible he may build a tower elsewhere downtown. In the meantime, let my article sink in - this tower is being built by Rainey Williams, not OG&E, not Enogex, not Centerpoint. Could any mix of these three end up as tenants? Maybe. But don't make any assumptions. As for those who question whether Rainey Williams is just a front, and question his capacity for doing this development, well, you don't know Rainey Williams."

It seems to be that Rainey Williams doesn't have the capacity for doing this development and the result is, as you said Spartan, the worst case of over-promise, under-deliver I have ever seen, and this is still in the early stages. He is obviously not the esteemed, experienced developer he was made out to be. Usually down-scaling comes about in later stages of construction or in later phases of multi-site developments such as Lower Bricktown, NOT just before getting a demolition permit for the site in which you plan to build, and especially not when that site has an international landmark that many citizens of your city are emotionally attached to. This entire thing smells real bad.

[Spartan]

Thanks for getting the quote, especially since I think I've been paraphrasing it badly on the last few pages. But my point with that was that Steve nailed it, I don't know Rainey Williams and nobody else does, either.

These are all omens.

[flintysooner]

Lease negotiations won't even begin seriously until (and unless) someone gets control of the property so that it can actually be developed.

[jccouger]

Lately it seems as though all of the Rainey support has come in form of belittling write offs of legitimate concerns, or of just pure biased hatred towards the Stage Center.

[catcherinthewry]

I'm practically the only poster on this forum that ever evaluates things case by case

Note to self: Start evaluating things case by case.

Can't believe the vast majority of the board had never thought of this.

[gurantula35]

Everyone needs to back off the bashing of rainey williams until we actually know what is going on. Everyone is just assuming right now and will look like idiots if it turns out into a good development.

[hoya]

Everyone needs to back off the bashing of rainey williams until we actually know what is going on. Everyone is just assuming right now and will look like idiots if it turns out into a good development.

Nice try, Rainey.

We know what is going on. What is going on is he took a giant dump and presented it as his plan. Saying we need to wait and see what happens is like saying "just close your eyes and reach under her skirt, I know she's got an Adam's Apple and big hairy hands but maybe everything down there is in the right place". No way. Fool me three times, shame on you. Fool me four, shame on me.

[kevinpate]

Kevin, I don't understand what you're getting at. What process is being abused? The planning staff wrote a report that objects to the demolition of an iconic structure. That's not an abuse of process no matter what means to an end it may be.

The end goal is to prevent an iconic piece of architecture being demolished for a development with MAJOR concerns. ...

The denial rec was based specifically on the provisions the existing structure should be preserved and protected based on historical improtance. What might come after is not a consideration in the denial rec. It is based on what is there.

Contrary to what some are turning that into, there is no process for the denial to be shield to a development someone does not like, or to compel a better, bigger, whatever development.
Read your final sentence again. You sum up how most are fine with denial, but ignore the why of the denial and that potential impact.

Either the structure needs to be protected from demo based on its historic importance, or it does not. If not, then whether what comes after is the current proposal, or a surface lot, or a p-garage, the demo should not be denied. If folks want tall and shiny as a minimum standard in the CBD, they need to have that written in by their elected leadership,and those their leadership hire.
Otherwise, any currently confirming use may be unpopular, but that is not the same as being improper.

[Spartan]

Where there is a will, there is a way. These things are decided in singular instances by votes and turnout, not by recommendations.

Focus a little less on what's better for Rainey, and a little more on what is best for OKC. We still have a chance to avoid a failed development fiasco like "The Pit" in Parks and Rec or this one on today's front page:
Oklahoma lawsuit claims Texoma developer has 'completely failed' | News OK

[soonerguru]

Where there is a will, there is a way. These things are decided in singular instances by votes and turnout, not by recommendations.

Focus a little less on what's better for Rainey, and a little more on what is best for OKC. We still have a chance to avoid a failed development fiasco like "The Pit" in Parks and Rec or this one on today's front page:
Oklahoma lawsuit claims Texoma developer has 'completely failed' | News OK

This was / is a real scandal, IMO.

[shawnw]

Video I took walking around on this beautiful day, for those wanting some SC pr0n:

[UnFrSaKn]

I could post a video I did like 2-3 years ago and it's pretty much unchanged. Plus or minus some graffiti and litter.