Core To Shore update

[Doug Loudenback]

Wow - that facade is hidden under that building??!! You are correct Doug - I agree that should be restored and it would be a significant addition (or 're-addition') to the area.

You'd never guess it was there if we didn't have people like Doug around to remind us of things like this. I've been visiting OKC since 1990 and lived here since 2002. I remember thinking the first time I visited that was a silly place for such a huge U-Haul building.

I stand corrected - thanks Doug.

Well, it must be said that I'm pretty ignorant of the warehouse district and that it was STEVE that educated me about this building -- not the construction detail but what it looked like in the 1st place. I learned the construction and historic detail early this morning when surfing the Oklahoman on-line archives. Steve has a photo, at least one, which shows this building in a pristine and utterly "white" mode state, with cars circa the 1910s circumventing the building, and that photo is included in his upcoming Bricktown Arcadia book.

While I'm not at liberty to share that photo, I don't think that Steve would mind me posting this concept drawing of this building back in Neal Horton's day since it has already been published in his OKC: 2nd Time Around. Bill Peterson (my son's godfather, as a matter of fact) was one of Horton's Bricktown associates, and Steve included the following concept drawing for this building ... which, of course, never happened ... at page 55 of his OKC: 2nd Time Around, the source for the image below:

Larger: http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49...cuitsquare.jpg



Now, to be sure, I'm in no position to say whether the nice "white" surface of this building, as shown in its very early day photos, is still "present" under the current U-Haul facade or not, and/or if it is not, what the cost would be to "reinvent" it as was done with so much of the much more recent Skirvin reconstruction, which was exceptionally pricey to do. I don't know. But, for sure, this building was, in its time, one of the most distinctive buildings in the warehouse district ... and, actually, downtown generally. It's construction being done in 1912, it remains as one of the oldest remaining "downtown" buildings that exist today.

[jbrown84]

Would be great for a project with retail on the ground floor and lofts above, like Ft. Worth's Montgomery Plaza.



Not so magnificent a building, but you can see the similarities. And if the canal were ever extended between Harkins and the Centennial as originally planned, this would be right on it.

[Urbanized]

Doug, to answer your question, the facade of that building IS in fact substantially intact. In fact, the metal facade has actually entombed and preserved it.

Additionally, the original casement windows are there too. Highly unusual this day and age. I have a storage space in the building, and everytime I am in there I marvel at the condition of the windows, which you can see from the inside. The storage units have all been built freestanding in the space itself, and haven't altered interior of the building in any way that can't be undone with a Caterpillar and a dumpster. It would be possible for someone to do an amazing preservation/restoration of that place.

It's perhaps the best-suited building in the city for true New York-style loft housing, for instance, other than the old Fred Jones Manufacturing plant on west Main.

The challenge would be for someone to make it worthwhile for the U-Haul folks to move to a new facility, and not go broke doing it. That thing has to be a cashflow bonanza as it sits. It would probably be difficult to talk them into going through the hassle of moving all of their tenants. But hopefully the numbers will one day work to do just that. The building is beautiful under that skin, and it would be a shame for that beauty to never again see the light of day.

[Urbanized]

Forgot to mention: those casement windows are floor to ceiling, and wrap the building on all four sides. EVERY apartment would have a view, assuming it was adapted to lofts.

[TaurusNYC]

It never ceases to amaze me how anything really cool in OKC is ignored. Are there no developers with any vision there? You could have awesome loft spaces in a historic building in Bricktown and yet we get crap like the Legacy at Arts. Will OKC ever join the rest of the country in turning its historic places into real assets?

[kevinpate]

Is it lack of vision, or lack of adequate wallet.

Presume you're the U-haul chap. You've been in that location over 25 years. Via the rooftop truck, you own your own billboard next to a route tens of thousands travel daily. When it goes, there's supposed to still be local traffic via a new blvd.

You're in place, minimum expenses at this point, lots of space rented contracts, likely many customers who prefer the convenient access to you.

And so, you should give this up, relocate, disrupt your customers, possibly lose some long term customers, advertise to reestablish what you already possess so someone can have a nifty loft in a few years.

Can't speak for you, but if I'm the UH chap, yes, it's going to cost someone, if I'm even willing to consider it.

[sgray]

TaurusNYC, I hear your point, but would you mind watching the language? Thanks.

[Turanacus]

Oooohhh, TaurusNYC got in trouble.

[lasomeday]

Well when they move the crosstown, they won't be as close and hence they won't have the advertising spot anymore. Maybe that will help?

[Platemaker]

Will OKC ever join the rest of the country in turning its historic places into real assets?

Please.... I've live all over and it's just as bad ir worse. I've lived in NYC and Boston... I remember this being a joke "New York tears it down and builds new... Boston puts a plaque on it and calls it 'historical'

[BDP]

Yes, those places have probably lost more historical buildings than we have ever had, but there is a reason for that. Obviously, their inventory of buildings is both larger and older, but they also have a lot more limited real estate than we do and often have to sacrifice old structures to create real estate for new projects. And they can tear down 30 buildings without eliminating a whole era of architecture from their inventory. In some cases, we could tear down 3 and it would be hard to tell OKC built in anything in some periods.

On the flip side, those cities are usually more successful with the properties they do preserve and that has a lot to do with critical mass. Their markets are large enough that even a small percentage of consumers who put a premium on preservation can support a lot of their efforts to offset additional costs.

And you will also find a lot more respect for the market from outside developers when they bring their concepts to those cities. Many chains who place businesses in Oklahoma City force their model on the city. In places like NYC or Boston you often see them force the city into their models. Beyond simple pride, the companies know that they will be able to get a return even after accommodating historic or other aesthetic sensibilities and will actually gain good will in doing so. Unfortunately, in OKC they often simply see a chance to go as cheap as possible and know that they will gain little if any good will from the community, especially in the way of tangible premium for their products or services, by investing more in aesthetics or historical renovation.

[bombermwc]

I would to see something build over the canal like that. Give yourself some truly covered area for some protected Outdoor plaza development. It has the potential to be so awesome. I've often wondered about putting a glass ceiling over upper bricktown.

I think it would be very cool to redevelop the Uhaul building back to it's Biscuit days.

[Luke]

I would to see something build over the canal like that. Give yourself some truly covered area for some protected Outdoor plaza development. It has the potential to be so awesome. I've often wondered about putting a glass ceiling over upper bricktown.

I think it would be very cool to redevelop the Uhaul building back to it's Biscuit days.

Not a bad idea at all. In fact, to compensate for the less than Orlando/Anaheim type weather that Tokyo gets, Disneyland built a huge roof over Main Street at Tokyo Disneyland.



That would be a pretty cool idea for Bricktown.

[Midtowner]

I don't trust the practice of taking land for the "public good", usually way under paid of market value.

Actually, I've been involved in a few condemnation cases (we do a few of those where I work). To be honest, I've never seen a land owner get paid less than market value for property. In fact, in just about every case, we've collected enough money that the condemning entity has been responsible for our attorneys fees (if the landowner ends up with 10% more than the original Commissioner's Award, attorneys fees are paid).

Assuming the landowner's lawyer knows what he or she is doing, it's a decently fair process.

And in Oklahoma, the property has to be taken for a public use, not for a public purpose. In other words, what went down in Kelo v. Rhode Island (city condemned a neighborhood to sell to a private firm which would build condos in order to increase the tax base was given the green light because the project was for a public purpose) can't happen here as the Oklahoma Constitution provides a greater degree of protection than does the U.S. Constitution.

[CuatrodeMayo]

I would to see something build over the canal like that. Give yourself some truly covered area for some protected Outdoor plaza development. It has the potential to be so awesome. I've often wondered about putting a glass ceiling over upper bricktown.

I think it would be very cool to redevelop the Uhaul building back to it's Biscuit days.

That would be the last thing that would cure that districts ills.

[jbrown84]

Yeah, indoor malls are out, remember?

[Luke]

It would be more of a clear glass awning... that green iron between the panes would fit with the brick theme, too, I think.

[jbrown84]

Sounds kind of like what they did to Penn Square 20 years ago.