Bricktown SpringHill Suites

[bchris02]

NWOKCGuy is right.

This and the Staybridge Suites belong out on Memorial. It's hard to believe stuff like this is still being approved in 2015. I can understand in the early 2000s when Lower Bricktown was being built because the city had the attitude that any development at all was better than nothing, but today downtown OKC has come far enough that developers should be expected to meet a higher standard.

[Urbanized]

jccougar, my comment wasn't directed at you. I agree that there is an in-between area, and this project, while it could be better in some ways, could also be much worse. And like you, I also cringe at some of the "OMG THIS SUCKS!!" comments made here, which are rarely helpful and nearly universally off-putting, especially to those who don't fully get why they are being made. I lock horns with people making them on here about as often as I do anti-urbanists; maybe even more.

I don't think abuse or trolling have any place here; they're polarizing and unproductive, just like the comment I was responding to.

That said, good urbanism/walkability/land use is rooted in decades of research - and truthfully thousands of years of human experience that we "forgot" for about 50 years - and (importantly to me) GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICE. When executed correctly in a downtown environment IT CAUSES THE BUSINESS ITSELF TO BE MORE SUCCESSFUL and it causes the NEIGHBORHOOD to be more successful.

Some people are predisposed against urbanism because they think it leans away from them politically - and we know that these days most things political are polarizing and cause unthinking, knee-jerk reactions, but truthfully urbanism is APOLITICAL. It's one of the rare places where there are as many takeaways for one political bent as another.

For me, some of the most important aspects are that it makes for better economic development, a stronger business environment, plus long-term economic stability/viability. Also in the longterm, it requires fewer government resources and creates better efficiencies and economies of scale. For other people, of course, it's important that it is green, etc. that's fine, too. There's room for everybody under the tent.

What there is NOT room for are the ****ty, caustic, trolling comments we see on here like the ones I was responding to in that post.

[betts]

Holiday Inn Express is not an upscale brand, and yet they did it right. They were held to a standard, complied and built something that manages to look like a midern reno of an old building. Every other hotel in Bricktown looks like a variant of the same "doesn't quite get it" model. I just wish there were a way to make them get it just a bit more right.

[bchris02]

Holiday Inn Express is not an upscale brand, and yet they did it right. They were held to a standard, complied and built something that manages to look like a midern reno of an old building. Every other hotel in Bricktown looks like a variant of the same "doesn't quite get it" model. I just wish there were a way to make them get it just a bit more right.

This.

The term "upscale" is thrown around too lightly on OKCTalk in my opinion for anything that is quality. It doesn't have to be upscale to be a quality development. The Holiday Inn is a perfect example of that.

[Urbanized]

Building finish/materials is important too, but for different reasons than walkability/land use. Sometimes we obsess too much about one and don't pay enough attention to the other.

[betts]

For walkability to be as critical as design in this setting, you have to have something to walk to and from. And enhancing walkability usually improves design. I think they are both very important, especially in a place like OKC, which has so much open land. If we screw up either aspect in new construction, we're stuck with it for quite awhile. Better to do it right the first time.

[Motley]

So what is the main concerns with this building (asking this to better understand what we are looking of in urbanism)? It isn't the most lovely, but it sits near the corner of the property only with a sidewalk between it and the street. These hotels are basic, so they don't typically provide restaurants and such for the public, but it will provide hungry mouths to feed in nearby restaurants, increasing traffic for them. There is not onsite parking, so it will encourage walking to nearby eateries and entertainment. Is the main issue with the building, the lack of windows on the street level? The material at the top of the building? I get that it isn't a re-creation of a warehouse building mimicking the others in bricktown, so is that the main issue?

[Urbanized]

I wasn't specifying which we obsess over at the expense of the other; you merely made an assumption regarding which I meant. In fact it varies from project to project.

One place where I do think we miss the mark, however, is in the unimaginative stance that "good" in Bricktown requires a building be a replica of its historic neighbors. It merely needs be complementary to the historic fabric.

[Teo9969]

So what is the main concerns with this building (asking this to better understand what we are looking of in urbanism)? It isn't the most lovely, but it sits near the corner of the property only with a sidewalk between it and the street. These hotels are basic, so they don't typically provide restaurants and such for the public, but it will provide hungry mouths to feed in nearby restaurants, increasing traffic for them. There is not onsite parking, so it will encourage walking to nearby eateries and entertainment. Is the main issue with the building, the lack of windows on the street level? The material at the top of the building? I get that it isn't a re-creation of a warehouse building mimicking the others in bricktown, so is that the main issue?

Before reading this post, look at the last picture of NWOKCGuy's post and just imagine yourself walking around the area and decide for yourself which provides a more appealing environment.

It completely ignores its N/S street wall. It is located a corner lot and totally ignores the intersection. These are the most egregious sins, most especially ignoring the intersection.

When you're walking along Sheridan from the West, you will arrive at this intersection and be faced with a big blank wall on the corner. If you're just wandering around, that's likely to be a visual cue to reroute so that you can pass more interesting things. If I'm staying in the hotel, I exit and I'm faced with a drive and a limited view of the surrounding urban fabric. That would be okay if my building sat on a mid-block lot, but it's not.

And while it's pushed to the street for a large portion of the development, the ONE aspect that interacts with the street is setback. They've also introduced a twisted sidewalk that is a nuisance for pedestrians.

Is it the worst thing proposed in the last 24 months? Not at all. Does it miss the mark on several important urban design principles. Absolutely it does.

[Motley]

Before reading this post, look at the last picture of NWOKCGuy's post and just imagine yourself walking around the area and decide for yourself which provides a more appealing environment.

It completely ignores its N/S street wall. It is located a corner lot and totally ignores the intersection. These are the most egregious sins, most especially ignoring the intersection.

When you're walking along Sheridan from the West, you will arrive at this intersection and be faced with a big blank wall on the corner. If you're just wandering around, that's likely to be a visual cue to reroute so that you can pass more interesting things. If I'm staying in the hotel, I exit and I'm faced with a drive and a limited view of the surrounding urban fabric. That would be okay if my building sat on a mid-block lot, but it's not.

And while it's pushed to the street for a large portion of the development, the ONE aspect that interacts with the street is setback. They've also introduced a twisted sidewalk that is a nuisance for pedestrians.

Is it the worst thing proposed in the last 24 months? Not at all. Does it miss the mark on several important urban design principles. Absolutely it does.

Thanks, that is very helpful. if they had faced the lobby/entrance to the intersection they could have made a huge difference in the relationship of this building to the street.

[Motley]

Before reading this post, look at the last picture of NWOKCGuy's post and just imagine yourself walking around the area and decide for yourself which provides a more appealing environment.

It completely ignores its N/S street wall. It is located a corner lot and totally ignores the intersection. These are the most egregious sins, most especially ignoring the intersection.

When you're walking along Sheridan from the West, you will arrive at this intersection and be faced with a big blank wall on the corner. If you're just wandering around, that's likely to be a visual cue to reroute so that you can pass more interesting things. If I'm staying in the hotel, I exit and I'm faced with a drive and a limited view of the surrounding urban fabric. That would be okay if my building sat on a mid-block lot, but it's not.

And while it's pushed to the street for a large portion of the development, the ONE aspect that interacts with the street is setback. They've also introduced a twisted sidewalk that is a nuisance for pedestrians.

Is it the worst thing proposed in the last 24 months? Not at all. Does it miss the mark on several important urban design principles. Absolutely it does.

Thanks, that is very helpful. if they had faced the lobby/entrance to the intersection they could have made a huge difference in the relationship of this building to the street.

[Jeepnokc]

Before reading this post, look at the last picture of NWOKCGuy's post and just imagine yourself walking around the area and decide for yourself which provides a more appealing environment.

It completely ignores its N/S street wall. It is located a corner lot and totally ignores the intersection. These are the most egregious sins, most especially ignoring the intersection.

When you're walking along Sheridan from the West, you will arrive at this intersection and be faced with a big blank wall on the corner. If you're just wandering around, that's likely to be a visual cue to reroute so that you can pass more interesting things. If I'm staying in the hotel, I exit and I'm faced with a drive and a limited view of the surrounding urban fabric. That would be okay if my building sat on a mid-block lot, but it's not.

And while it's pushed to the street for a large portion of the development, the ONE aspect that interacts with the street is setback. They've also introduced a twisted sidewalk that is a nuisance for pedestrians.

Is it the worst thing proposed in the last 24 months? Not at all. Does it miss the mark on several important urban design principles. Absolutely it does.

Excellent explanation. I am one also that doesn't necessarily understand urbanism and when I see the urbanist comments...my thoughts are probably similar to those others that don't understand it. Sometimes it comes across a little extreme. I had no real issues with this building other than I think it is not very attractive. Now that Teo has explained why the issues with the N/S wall and ignoring the intersection matter for good urban design...makes more sense why this design really is wrong for this location. Much better (and more convincing) argument than "I just threw up a little in my mouth"

[pickles]

You know there is actual field research (decades of it, in fact) and in fact sound business reasoning behind the desirability of adherence to good urban design principles in a downtown, right?

I fully understand all of this.

[Urbanized]

Then why the ****ty, demeaning, derisive and trolling comments?

[traxx]

Much better (and more convincing) argument than "I just threw up a little in my mouth"

I wasn't making an argument. That was my response to Pete passing along the info that this was the final design. Don't take my post out of conext and try to make it fit your narrative. The thing is, Motley came right out and asked why it was bad design. If you want to know, ask. Don't just say, "It could be worse," or "It's not that bad." I would at least try to answer a direct question like that. I don't know if I could do it as well as Teo, but I'd try.

[jccouger]

Thanks for the responses & insight Urbanized & Teo9969, I echo the replies of Jeep & Motley.

It makes a lot of sense to focus the entrance on the intersection. Does anybody know if the steelyard phase 1 & phase 2 will be divided by a continuation of Byers Avenue? Hopefully it is, and hopefully the bass pro & events center parking lots can reap the benefits of the positive momentum occurring in East Bricktown. We could be cutting off that momentum by all recent developments focusing directly on Sheridan Avenue.

[Teo9969]

Excellent explanation. I am one also that doesn't necessarily understand urbanism and when I see the urbanist comments...my thoughts are probably similar to those others that don't understand it. Sometimes it comes across a little extreme. I had no real issues with this building other than I think it is not very attractive. Now that Teo has explained why the issues with the N/S wall and ignoring the intersection matter for good urban design...makes more sense why this design really is wrong for this location. Much better (and more convincing) argument than "I just threw up a little in my mouth"

As a brief aside, this is one of the reasons everyone loves your building, jeep. You absolutely CRUSHED the intersection at Dewey/Sheridan and you don't even run a business that is trying to capture business from the street. You simply built something with the intent of creating an inviting environment for the passerby that would work well with the development around you. As a completely unseasoned developer, your natural instincts led you to help define space by making the corner the focal point of your development (this was not one of your design changes).

[CuatrodeMayo]

It's good to push the building close to the sidewalk, however it has to be done the right way.

The west facade of this building fails the following respects:
1) It's a solid, blank wall.
2) The building is up against a narrow sidewalk that is in close proximity to the street. This creates an uncomfortably narrow pedestrian passage.
3) There is no room for street trees, which provide immense benefits in the urban environment.

[turnpup]

(In addition to everything else that's been mentioned already) I'm particularly off-put by the curvy window wall.

And whoever mentioned upthread about curvy sidewalks--so true! Why oh why are so many of the new sidewalks in this city being made curvy (when they don't have to be)? Does somebody have something against straight lines? I personally don't think they're especially pretty, either. It's like a sidewalk trying too hard.

[betts]

I wasn't specifying which we obsess over at the expense of the other; you merely made an assumption regarding which I meant. In fact it varies from project to project.

One place where I do think we miss the mark, however, is in the unimaginative stance that "good" in Bricktown requires a building be a replica of its historic neighbors. It merely needs be complementary to the historic fabric.

I agree completely that it just needs to be complementary. That's why I used the Holiday Inn Express as an example. I love the way the form and materials used in the building pay homage to Bricktown, while the signage, lighting, canopy, etc. are more contemporary. It reminds me of old buildings in other cities converted to hotels. And I think there are other ways to do the same thing. But, as I have said other places, I think we sometimes sell the desirability of this area short (and will likely do the same in Core to Shore). There's a reason there are so many new hotels springing up. And the desirability of the area gives the Bricktown Association and the city some power to make sure people don't skimp on design or materials. We have evidence that people will bring new designs if they're told their original is not good enough. Yes, it's great to have a range of hotel prices in the area, but we have evidence from other cities that there are designs that are more urban than the ones we're seeing. I'd like to see the hoteliers recognize where they are and what new trends in urban hotels are.

[Tigerguy]

It's standard for all their suburban hotels, that's for sure. Here's a few of their urban concepts.

Nice projects, all, though it might be said that the latter two were more exceptional in nature. The first (Dallas) appears to be "what could have been" in Bricktown, as it was built in the West End in the 1990s, and it looks like it fits in rather well. The second (Baltimore) was a renovation of an existing building. I don't know off the top of my head if any buildings in Bricktown would qualify, but I stand to be corrected. The third (Denver) was built in conjuction with a university, who uses the hotel as part of its Hotel and Hospitality Learning Center.

In any case, however, I think I see a common bond: as long as the hotel owner wants something really nice there, that's what may very well happen. How, then, do we get property owners to want their properties to really be a cut above?

[Just the facts]

In response to some of the questions about what makes good urban design and why it is important here is a video I have posted several times in the past. It is well worth the 22 minutes it takes to watch it. It does have some foul language so consider yourself warned.

https://youtube.com/#/watch?v=Q1ZeXnmDZMQ

[Stickman]

It's not all bad. If the MOTEL does not survive financially, they can always turn it into a mental health facility

[Spartan]

For a budget hotel, it is not bad. Take a look at other Springhill designs; this one is fairly standard, only with red brick and no parking.

And a huge gob of EIFS. And a car drop-off island in the front.

When the Hampton Inn proposed its massive porte cochere, they also had to enhance the streetscape presence (added the waterfall).

J Pitman did a good job with that development. Since then, a lot of these hotel developers have done lesser versions of that, pushing the envelope against the BUDC. The problem is that all real estate investments in Bricktown should be protected from lesser developments.

[NWOKCGuy]

It's not all bad. If the MOTEL does not survive financially, they can always turn it into a mental health facility

Underrated.