Maywood Apartments Phase II

[Pete]

This is what was requested and approved by the DDRC on 12/18:

Revise the original approval that required the existing buildings on-site to
be incorporated into the east elevation of the project to allow these
buildings to be disassembled, to store those building materials, and then
reassembled in place using the original materials.

[Urbanized]

Looks like they forgot to tell the equipment operators...who are bashing the old brick into red dust.

[BDP]

I've gotta say, the Christmas Day tear down also strikes me as curious. Might be the cynic in me, but were the "relocation/restoration" talk and holiday tear down a way to circumvent demolition permitting and review by DDRC? If called on it, will the response be "oops...sorry"?

Yep. It's interesting because Bradshaw was such a big part of setting up guidelines for the area, but has been the most active in trying to dismantle them or ignore them. I guess it's still possible they will do what they say, but if they don't, it won't be much of a departure from what's become typical from his projects.

[Pete]

But if he wanted to demolish those structures out-right, it wouldn't have been hard to get approval to do so.

He could have done it at the outset or more recently, when their application stated the received no bids from companies willing to move them offsite.

[BDP]

But if he wanted to demolish those structures out-right, it wouldn't have been hard to get approval to do so.

He could have done it at the outset or more recently, when their application stated the received no bids from companies willing to move them offsite.

Very true. Then again, Christmas day? Kind of fishy. But who knows. Bradshaw has done a lot of head scratchers lately.

[Urbanized]

Call it whatever you want, but "disassemble" and "store" to me doesn't bring to mind smashing the buildings into splinters and brick dust and then unceremoniously scooping the combined pile into roll-off dumpsters. Call me crazy.

[catch22]

Wow. I can't wait to hear his excuse.

Was TIF funding granted? Can we revoke building permit?

[Pete]

Yes, they were granted $1 million in TIF dollars.

[Teo9969]

I don't even have words.

All I can really say is McKown and Bradshaw have proven to be the kind of developers you can't hate because of the amount they are investing but you can't love because they just can't seem to do things without doing something that makes you shake your head in disbelief.

[Pete]

Reminder that McKown is restoring The Plow building at great expense and risk.

[Urbanized]

What exactly has Richard done to merit "shaking your head in disbelief"? As far as I know he had some unexpected complications with the exterior finish of LEVEL, which he quickly rectified. Does that about cover it? Otherwise he has had an incredibly positive influence on both Deep Deuce and Bricktown.

[Pete]

Just received these videos showing them laying waste to the two buildings:

[Teo9969]

I could very well be mixing-up who has done what where. The LEVEL thing was one of the things I was thinking about, but if that's the only thing, then it's not a good reason to include him with a shaking head. Maybe some of the sidewalk issues/store front issues with Maywood Flats and the landscaping at LEVEL as well, but definitely nothing quite on the scale of proposing and preparing site work for the Flats, the lack of any sort of street presence for Maywood I [on edit…originally said Maywood II], and now the renege on the preservation of the 2 small buildings w/ Maywood II.

[Pete]

^

Not to mention the pretty ugly final product of the Maywood Apartments by Bradshaw.

Worst looking residential project in all of downtown, taking the spot held for years by Avana.

[Urbanized]

McKown had nothing to do with Maywood Lofts. Regarding landscaping issues at LEVEL - much like the exterior finish problem - he rectified it as soon as problems became apparent. In the case of the landscaping he replaced it all, and changed it where necessary to accommodate the previously-unanticipated trampling by people traipsing through flower beds.

[ksearls]

I just about threw up this morning on my drive in. Can't believe they did this, and snuck it in over holiday. Boooo!

[Anonymous.]

I guess I was originally confused. I thought the plan all along was to demolish these and rebuild. Look at the renderings from Page 1. It looks like they will just rebuild them to look like the pre-existing structures. Maybe use some of the old materials for exterior?



"Existing structures to remain"

[Pete]

To clarify, they originally planned to keep the two structures and build around them.

Then just a few weeks ago, received approval to disassemble them and then reassemble with the original materials.

It's possible that they ultimately received approval to completely demolish and the application just hasn't been uploaded to system as of yet. Won't know for sure until next month's meeting where they also list the administrative approvals that were given over the previous period.

[bchris02]

I don't understand why everybody is so upset about these two small buildings. Is it just because they are old?

[BDP]

I don't understand why everybody is so upset about these two small buildings.

Character, charm, history, unique nod to neighborhood's roots.

Both the Maywood Apt complexes are blah, though this one might be better. These buildings would have a least brought some character to this one.

[bchris02]

I see nothing charming or unique about those two buildings. I am all for preserving character and uniqueness but this is an instance when I would side with those who say just because its old doesn't mean its worth preserving.

[BDP]

I see nothing charming or unique about those two buildings. I am all for preserving character and uniqueness but this is an instance when I would side with those who say just because its old doesn't mean its worth preserving.

I'm not saying it's just because they're old. These buildings certainly had more character than what will replace them and it would have made the complex more unique compared to the other newer developments in the district.

[David]

I see nothing charming or unique about those two buildings. I am all for preserving character and uniqueness but this is an instance when I would side with those who say just because its old doesn't mean its worth preserving.

Honestly, I'm with Chris on these two buildings. They've always looked out of place on that lot to me.

[BDP]

They've always looked out of place on that lot to me.

That's because of everything that was torn down a long time ago.

[Plutonic Panda]

Those buildings were a peice of crap anyways. They were just shacks, wtffff.