BOK Park Plaza

[Pete]

By the way, remember a couple of months ago when I said that Prefatkes had been talking to local restaurant operators about leasing the bus station, then suddenly came back to them and asked if they would still be interested if they built new construction the same site? And this is how I knew they were planning to construct a big parking garage on that site and thus demolish almost the whole block?

Today in a blog post Steve said out-right what I had been hinting at (wasn't sure AGE wanted this public): A conditional deal had been struck with A Good Egg Group to put a RePUBlic in the remodeled station.

So, that's a little glimpse of not only what could have been but would could still be.


Also, imagine if Hotel Black had been in the mix when 21c was looking! Remember, the hotel first struck a deal to remodel the Journal Record Building, and Hotel Black would have been much more up their street.

Of course we'll never know the possibilities because all Preftakes & Co. did was drive people out without even attempting any renovations. And willfully chose to let buildings rot right in the middle of biggest boom in the history of downtown OKC.

[UnFrSaKn]

Reverse side.

https://twitter.com/benfelder_okg/st...43605930663936

[turnpup]

Back side of the petition brochure from Ben Felder on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/benfelder_okg/with_replies

[turnpup]

Will, you just beat me to it!

[Pete]

2. The projects will replace buildings that have been decaying vacant or losing tenants for a long time.

Those buildings were almost all occupied and functioning before purchase by the current owner / backers.

[UnFrSaKn]

1. 499 Sheridan will continue downtown Oklahoma City's momentum that is attracting new residents, new business and national attention, represented in part by the city's changing skyline.
2. The projects will replace buildings that have been decaying, vacant, or losing tenants for a long time.
3. 499 Sheridan will maximize space on that valuable corner and breathe new life into an area that connects the thriving and redeveloped historic Film Row and the energy of downtown.
4. 499 Sheridan will address needs for additional downtown Oklahoma City office space and parking.
5. The planned projects will pay homage to the history of the area by encorporating some of the previous buildings' designs into the new buildings, but they will also enhance that corner with new buildings, amenities and landscaping.

[turnpup]

Interesting how they invoked Film Row.

Film Row became "thriving and redeveloped" because its developers did the exact opposite of what 499 Sheridan's are proposing to do.

Film Row restored its historic structures rather than demolishing them. And new construction there has been done responsibly and respectfully so as to complement the existing buildings.

[BDP]

Those buildings were almost all occupied and functioning before purchase by the current owner / backers.

Yeah, and every successful district they mentioned on the front was full of buildings that were further decayed and vacant or losing tenants for a lot longer time and none of that was deliberately engineered.

I'm not a fan of this projects based on its merits alone, but these tactics are disgusting and insulting, really. It's one thing to make a case for the development based on its own elements, but intentionally deceiving and manipulating city leaders, not to mention insulting their intelligence, is something else entirely.

[gopokes88]

The problem as I see it is that people like SouthsideSooner have simply set their bar of acceptability far too low. That is not surprising in a city dominated by Walmart. It is hard to stay motivated in a City dominated by people in a race to the bottom.

This isn't a fact, its an opinion and a hyperbole.

Wal Mart dominates everything everywhere not just OKC. (and really, Bentonville Arkansas would probably have the best argument) If we were a city dominated by people in a race to the bottom things would be getting worse not better.

If you're going to carry the mantle of "just the facts" do a better job.

Here's a start,
"What we are seeing with 499 Sheridan is business people doing business the way they have for hundreds of years. They want to win. So they will call powerful allies in to help. It's nothing new, and if we want to save these buildings it will require a hell of a fight, one we probably won't win."

[onthestrip]

1. 499 Sheridan will continue downtown Oklahoma City's momentum that is attracting new residents, new business and national attention, represented in part by the city's changing skyline.
2. The projects will replace buildings that have been decaying, vacant, or losing tenants for a long time.
3. 499 Sheridan will maximize space on that valuable corner and breathe new life into an area that connects the thriving and redeveloped historic Film Row and the energy of downtown.
4. 499 Sheridan will address needs for additional downtown Oklahoma City office space and parking.
5. The planned projects will pay homage to the history of the area by encorporating some of the previous buildings' designs into the new buildings, but they will also enhance that corner with new buildings, amenities and landscaping.

Hard to say which is the most BS. Number 2 has already been addressed by posters but number 3 is quite bogus too. Maximize space? They are arbitrarily "cranking" the layout off of the corner which is wasting some prime street frontage. Not to mention not including any garage space in the bottom floors of the tower.

Hell, no need to point these bogus things out, most posters here, whether for or against, realize they are bogus.

[Paseofreak]

RE: No. 3', this complex faces their taxpayer funded new front yard and shows their backside to the rest of the city. Complete and utter disregard for anything but the inhabitants with respect to the street level. It won't breathe life into anything connecting to anything.

[warreng88]

[LIST=1]The planned projects will pay homage to the history of the area by encorporating some of the previous buildings' designs into the new buildings, but they will also enhance that corner with new buildings, amenities and landscaping.

Or... You could pay homage to the history of the area by leaving the buildings alone and building on the EMPTY PARKING LOTS! Jesus F%^kin' Christ!

[BDP]

Hard to say which is the most BS. Number 2 has already been addressed by posters but number 3 is quite bogus too. Maximize space? They are arbitrarily "cranking" the layout off of the corner which is wasting some prime street frontage. Not to mention not including any garage space in the bottom floors of the tower.

Very true. And even if they were "maximizing" the space on that corner, they're dedicating over half the block to parking. That's a bad trade and actually misses an opportunity for more development.

[jccouger]

I just had a business lunch with a visitor from Pennsylvania. We ended up going to Automobile Alley and drove through Midtown & she could not stop gushing about how amazing it was that we were refurbishing & redeveloping our old building stock in to new uses. I told her what was going to happen to the Preftakes block & she was devastated.

Our city has reinvented itself with an image of restoring our old buildings & creating amazing districts. This has become our identity, and now Devon doesn't want anything to do with it by just blatantly destroying history & forcing people to sign a petition. Its sickening, and I've lost a ton of respect for their company because of it.

[betts]

Interesting how they invoked Film Row.

Film Row became "thriving and redeveloped" because its developers did the exact opposite of what 499 Sheridan's are proposing to do.

Film Row restored its historic structures rather than demolishing them. And new construction there has been done responsibly and respectfully so as to complement the existing buildings.

Downtown will remain sterile and devoid of life once 5 o'clock rolls around. This obsession with parking is ridiculous. Better transit and redevelopment of existing structures would decrease the need for parking and add life to the CBD.

[Oklachusetts]

Here's an interesting case study that shows you can build a new building without tearing down everything around it to make a plaza. Take the example of the Perrine Building at the corner of Park and Robinson. Use to look like this in the 1920s: Perrine Building. According to Doug Loudenback on his blog, the building was scheduled for demolition in the 1970s but somehow escaped. Then, in the 1980s when the Oklahoma Tower was originally proposed, the developer wanted to do this: okc2nd_p62.jpg Photo by DougLoudenback | Photobucket. Tear down the Perrine Building to create a plaza to offer an "unobstructed view" of the new building (to borrow from Sandridge's parlance). But somehow this too was thwarted and the building was kept and renovated into the Robinson Renaissance Building: 119 N. Robinson Avenue, Oklahoma City, OK, 73102 - Office Building Property - Off-Market on LoopNet.com. I don't know exactly how the Perrine was spared. But guess what? The damn Oklahoma Tower still got built.

One lesson to derive from this: you can rehab "functionally obsolete" old buildings. Another lesson: you can build new buildings while keeping the old buildings around a proposed development. Another lesson: we never learn any damn lessons in this city. And by "we" I mean the big wigs who call the shots. Meanwhile, we can only stand on the sidelines and shake our heads in disgust and dismay. I feel like I'm a member of the Chorus in a Greek tragic play: it's the Chorus's job to remind the protagonist what he ought to do, but the protagonist never listens.

[BDP]

Another lesson: we never learn any damn lessons in this city. And by "we" I mean the big wigs who call the shots. Meanwhile, we can only stand on the sidelines and shake our heads in disgust and dismay. I feel like I'm a member of the Chorus in a Greek tragic play: it's the Chorus's job to remind the protagonist what he ought to do, but the protagonist never listens.

The interesting thing is that many of the big wigs in this town are old enough to remember what demolition did to this city 30 years ago.

But, really, given the fact that they totally acknowledged the power of renovation before giving it the finger, I'm pretty sure they just don't care.

[BoulderSooner]

Sorry, but the Chamber promoting this and putting it on each table for the Mayor's speech is a massive conflict of interest and highly inappropriate.

499 Sheridan would provide TIF funds that would help build the new OG&E HQ; Pete Delaney is chairman of OG&E and his term as Chamber Chair just expired but he is still on the Chamber Executive Committee.

This is a huge overstatement. Of course the chamber is pro business. (Every chamber in the entire country is). That is not a conflict.

A bunch of people see old buildings that they could not car less about. For evey 1 person that is pro renovation. I know 5 that live or work down town that a very excited about the new construction and growth of the city.

Old building that are in no way "special". Should not stand in the way of private property rights

[Paseofreak]

This is a huge overstatement. Of course the chamber is pro business. (Every chamber in the entire country is). That is not a conflict.

You think that they, a partially tax funded entity, should unconditionally stand behind any business proposal? Regardless of how completely self-serving it is while ignoring the negative impacts? It sounds like it. I don't think that's right. The Chamber should be promoting great development that carefully considers all the impacts and makes substantial efforts to mitigate the negative ones. It's in the best interest of everyone involved. This proposal doesn't do that as far as I can tell.

[Just the facts]

Old building that are in no way "special". Should not stand in the way of private property rights

I have to ask, what are your thought on protecting public property rights? Or do those even exist? If they do exist, and there is a conflict between public and private rights, which in your opinion should prevail? Many people on the political left have adopted the philosophy of "do whatever you want so long as it doesn't bother me" while those on the right seem very protective of the collective society by adopting the philosophy of "if your actions degrade society your actions should be restricted". This creates a strange situation when the subject is private and public property rights where the roles for both political spectrums get switched. Thanks goodness I am consistent because I don't know how some of you reconcile this in your head - then again - maybe you just haven't thought about it enough. In the end, it is amazing how many so called 'right wingers' are actually full fledged members of the corporate left.

[Village]

I'm not going to lie, I wouldn't miss the Hotel Black much, But i've always loved the brick work on The Motor Hotel.....Wouldn't there be some way to at least save the facade and turn it into a entrance/cafe for employees? I think they did the same with the heart tower in ny.

[David]

This is a huge overstatement. Of course the chamber is pro business. (Every chamber in the entire country is). That is not a conflict.

The conflict is that this was the Mayor's annual State of the City speech. If it was just a random chamber meeting then of course they should be free to distribute whatever petition full of lies that they please.

Old building that are in no way "special". Should not stand in the way of private property rights

I see it's time for the "private property rights should triumph" discussion for the nth time. The very fact that Devon has to go in front of multiple city committees to get approval for these demolitions should tell you that you are simply not correct about private property rights versus the public interest. Admittedly, what the public interest actually is could be up for discussion, but that doesn't appear to be the point you are making.

[Motley]

I always thought the public interest in a historic building was protected by designating it as of some significance (like the National Register of Historic Places or a similar local register), and then if it receives that designation, it is protected.

[BoulderSooner]

You think that they, a partially tax funded entity, should unconditionally stand behind any business proposal? Regardless of how completely self-serving it is while ignoring the negative impacts? It sounds like it. I don't think that's right. The Chamber should be promoting great development that carefully considers all the impacts and makes substantial efforts to mitigate the negative ones. It's in the best interest of everyone involved. This proposal doesn't do that as far as I can tell.

The chamber is in no way "tax funded"

[Paseofreak]

I was pretty sure they were contracted to perform business development functions for the city. Please correct if I'm wrong. Nonetheless, in principle they should promote high quality development in every respect.