The Rise

[IanMcDermid]

The cost is unlikely the case. In my dealing with HP and the city I've learned loads...like for instance: You knock a building down and rebuild now you have to deal with new code: sight triangles, setbacks, right of way, revocables, the list goes on. All having to be approved by the UDC (if they decide to let you knock down the historic overlay site) BEFORE the city can even look at it for a SPUD. It's easier (not cheaper) to gut and rebuild.

In my situation at the pump. There's no way HP would let me raze that piece of junk from 1929 and build it back to look exactly like it was, using the same metal panels even. It's a non starter, even though it would be a better building. Instead I have to furr out walls to insulate it, replace lentels, re-pour the finished floor, build additions, even tint new concrete to look 70+ yrs old(which is needed to shore up a man made lake of water held by poorly engineered concrete). The masonry is so poor, as it sits now I can see daylight through many of the joints.

I might be venting a bit, I'm not mad, but I'm in the same boat as landrun. The money spent in building cost less than the time to make a change. Every time you run into that needs to pass through committee, it takes 30-60 days.

[IanMcDermid]

At any rate, landrun is competent and I have faith in their ability and skill to get this done as fast as they're allowed. No one is deliberately dragging their feet on this project.

[Pete]

Landrun just received design approvals to rework many of the storefronts, utility placements, parking configuration and even added two new staircases to the back.

I'm sure this was all necessitated once they got deeper into the renovations.

I'm also sure they largely had to stop work while they figured this out and waited for the necessary approvals. As Ian noted, there is a timing cycle every time you make these sort of changes.


I've been told that Landrun has been very good about communicating with the tenants, and I think they largely remain committed.

And credit should be given to them for renovating these structures and doing things the right way.

[Pete]

These are the changes I mentioned...

Both staircases and almost all the window and storefront openings have changed for various reasons:

[ljbab728]

A surprise at The Rise.

http://www.oklahoman.com/article/3947335?embargo=1

A building once slated for demolition and considered one of Uptown’s worst eyesores has caught its owner and future tenants by surprise as they tore off green-painted brick from the front of the former nightclub and discovered an intact art deco cast stone original facade.

[DammitDan]

It makes me wonder what's hiding beneath other garishly covered properties-- namely that neon-colored asian store across the street to the east.

[ljbab728]

Steve's update.

http://www.oklahoman.com/article/4012195?embargo=1

Uptown developer Johnathan Russell will never look at old buildings the same way after discovering another historic facade hidden for decades by awnings and “modern” touches added more than 40 years ago.
Russell is set to unveil yet another rediscovered facade Thursday night for the main building at The Rise, which once was home to a used hotel furniture and equipment store. The granite, streamline-modern style facade, stretches across the western three-fourths of the building.

[Pete]

Very cool about uncovering the original facade! I hadn't even seen photos of it... It was obviously covered very early on.

Credit to Land Run for doing this project right. Sometimes it's better to be methodical, especially when it comes to renovation/preservation projects.

[AP]

Will, do have a link to the mobile version?

[shawnw]

Will, do have a link to the mobile version?

Here's the magic formula for all embargoed links:

http://www.oklahoman.com/article/4012195?embargo=1

1 - replace www with m
2 - replace oklahoman with newsok
3 - remove question mark and all that follows

Construction on NW 23 project again unveils historic facade covered for decades in Oklahoma City | NewsOK.com

[AP]

Here's the magic formula for all embargoed links:

http://www.oklahoman.com/article/4012195?embargo=1

1 - replace www with m
2 - replace oklahoman with newsok
3 - remove question mark and all that follows

Construction on NW 23 project again unveils historic facade covered for decades in Oklahoma City | NewsOK.com

I thought it was something similar to that, but wasn't sure.

[AP]

It's pretty cool the stuff they keep uncovering. The Rise is going to be really cool when the get it finished.

[BillyOcean]

Nice find for them. They keep saying they will be open this summer and I don't buy it...Again, Thanksgiving at best.

[PhiAlpha]

Nice find for them. They keep saying they will be open this summer and I don't buy it...Again, Thanksgiving at best.

My friend that owns a business that's going into the rise said that his opening date will likely be September or early fall so if it is going to be summer, it will be very late summer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[5alive]

They knew what was under the ugly awning. Compare their rendering with the actual photo.
. Look at the far left end of the illustration.

[Teo9969]

They knew what was under the ugly awning. Compare their rendering with the actual photo.
Photo by Todd Fraser, The Oklahoman. Look at the far left end of the illustration.

ish

[Steve]

They did not know for sure until they got the awning covering off. They did not know prior to buying the building.
As for the photo, please do not post Oklahoman photos without getting permission. Thank you.

[Pete]

Yes, upon further investigation this whole story is very misleading.

When the original renovation plans were approved on 3/27/13 -- more than a year ago and long before they started construction -- the plans clearly show the original facade in detail with plans for "existing stone veneer to remain" and to paint the original awnings. This has not changed in any way since then.

[Steve]

Yes, upon further investigation this whole story is very misleading.

Whatever. I already said, he didn't know before he bought the building, and didn't know whether it was intact.
Now unless you received permission, please remove the photos Pete.

[sroberts24]

Wow

[Plutonic Panda]

What photos are being requested to be removed? That seems kind of messed up...

[Pete]

I already removed the one Steve was concerned about.

It just showed the exposed stone.

[Plutonic Panda]

I'll go take one here in a minute...

[HangryHippo]

edit: Let's please not get into this. Thanks.

- Pete

[Steve]

Steve, I enjoy the hell out of your articles and downtown OKC coverage, but what is the problem? You used to be a valued contributor to this community and it was always great to see your posts here. But you've become so defensive regarding OKCTalk. I understand you got your feelings hurt on here sometime ago, but you slight this forum regularly and you're upset about a small photo that was attributed to the guy who took it. What's the deal man?

I'm no longer a participant in OKC Talk. I have no issue with most of its members. I'm not defensive - I am simply asking that work we create be respected and not treated as public domain. These photos can be seen at NewsOK. Pete knows this. That's pretty much all I've got to say.