SandRidge Center & Commons

[Doug Loudenback]

As corporations go, SandRidge is little more than an infant, corporately and in the community, but it has managed to get others in the community to put on rose-colored glasses when viewing it ... and in buying into what it proposes to do in downtown. In the DDRC procedures, only one voice, the chair of the committee, suggested bonds and/or other constraints or guarantees should be involved to insure that SandRidge actualy did what it said that it would do, but her voice was a voice in the wilderness. I truly hope, now that the municipal procedures are done, that SandRidge will DO what it said that it WILL DO and get this thing done. The worst case, but perhaps the best teaching case, is that it does not do that. Maybe then some lessons will really be learned. But, again, I'm hoping against that possibility.

[Doug Loudenback]

From Bloomberg Businessweek, http://www.businessweek.com/ap/finan.../D9HDEE300.htm ...

A preservation group says it won't appeal a decision by a city board allowing SandRidge Energy Inc. to tear down five buildings as part of a planned development of its downtown campus.

The decision by Preservation Oklahoma announced Thursday removes a roadblock to SandRidge's plans to demolish the buildings, including one of Oklahoma City's oldest structures, the India Temple Building.

Also, see http://www.ksbitv.com/news/Historic-...100069734.html

[Spartan]

Haha. Gotta love it when Bloomberg is the first to break a big downtown (un)development story..

So that's it. We lost, now to move on to the First National I guess, and hopefully the SR backers were genuine in their concern for the next looming big battle.

[Spartan]

Well, there are shades of gray, Doug. Best case is SR doesn't do any of it, of course. The worst case would be SR demo's the buildings and then does nothing, as you were alluding to.

Btw, I had responded to a quote of yours that I am keenly interested in your response to. Was there some reason that you alluded to the Braniff being mixed-use in the end?

[jbrown84]

Do we know how soon the buildings are coming down?

[jbrown84]

The right decision. Wasn't worth fighting any further. Sandridge was a bully, no doubt about it. Let them wallow in the wake of their shady practices. Ward should be ashamed. He's lost a lot of people's trust, and his legacy is tainted.

[Doug Loudenback]

Well, there are shades of gray, Doug. Best case is SR doesn't do any of it, of course. The worst case would be SR demo's the buildings and then does nothing, as you were alluding to.

Btw, I had responded to a quote of yours that I am keenly interested in your response to. Was there some reason that you alluded to the Braniff being mixed-use in the end?

I don't know what you are referring to, Nick. Give me a link and I'll respond.

[mugofbeer]

10 years from now I doubt too many people will even know anything happened.

[jbrown84]

We'll see about that.

[krisb]

It's hard for people to appreciate what's not there anymore.

[krisb]

Spartan, can you comment on the proposed retail on Hudson connected with Devon? Is it going to be on the street level of the parking garage?

[Spartan]

Kris, it will be on the street level facing Hudson. You can go by the site right now and the individual retail bays are right there, it's the glass boxes. They closed them in with cinderblocks for the remainder of construction but it will be street-level retail. I also believe that SR wants to put street-level retail in the Braniff, but is staunchly opposed to any other mixed-use activity on their 2 blocks.

Doug:

Doug, I'm pretty sure that SR is NOT proposing a mixed-use renovation of the Braniff. The only thing SR has offered up to "mixed-uses" is the "Corporate Activities Building" which is hardly mixed-uses in my opinion (corp restaurant, employee gym, auditorium). Devon is putting all of those things in their parking garage for the most part and hardly calling it "mixed-use" despite that Devon could actually end up being very mixed-use, with integration of the Colcord and street retail on Hudson.

Devon has accepted, embraced, and exemplified mixed-use and being a part of a connected urban fabric. SR has repudiated that idea at every turning point, and that's what my opposition to SR Commons was predicated on all along. I just hope in the future that the winners (SR) will recognize the need for mixed-uses downtown and include it in their vision, rather than spreading their thin corporate existence all over an unprecedented 2 entire city blocks.

[ljbab728]

10 years from now I doubt too many people will even know anything happened.

You're probably right but that will be unfortunate. Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.

[Spartan]

I think it will be remembered as long as we're painfully cognizant of how damaged our downtown streetscape is.

And we keep doing the OKC thing where we take one step forward and two steps backward, both in the name of progress.

[Rover]

If Ward adds 1000 more employees to downtown I doubt everyone will be as bitter as a few seem to be. I doubt he is worrying about this real estate deal destroying his legacy. He has bigger ambitions.

[Spartan]

You're absolutely right Rover. I'll be waiting for those 1000 jobs.. (holding breath)

[HOT ROD]

so they will be saving one building? anybody know what one it is?

I thought they wanted to tear down six buildings/garage, but now it's 5. Too bad for India Temple, would have made a killer boutique hotel (ala colcord).

[city]

Its on Bloomberg because it is a very bad, bad sign that a City boasting to be progressing, is allowing the destruction of this mass of building structure, polluting our air and filling our landfill to the high heavens ... the dust will never settle on this one. Everyone else but this city, these disgusting stakeholders, gets that that is the absolutelythe wrong thing to do. We're repelling the young professionals we say we are trying to attract.
Ward and his bullies(including the city management) are morally bankrupt .... but it looks like the company itself is treading water, now. We may not have to wait 10 years.

[Kerry]

so they will be saving one building? anybody know what one it is?

I thought they wanted to tear down six buildings/garage, but now it's 5. Too bad for India Temple, would have made a killer boutique hotel (ala colcord).

They are keeping the Braniff Building, but only because they have to. Given the choice, it would be coming down also. When they are done an entire city block will be reduced to grass with a single building in the center (and Braniff on one corner).

Given the choice, it would be coming down also - I hope something doesn't go wrong during the demo of the other buildings causing irreparable damage to Braniff and it falls down all on its own.

[boomergal]

They actually DON"T have to keep the Braniff - this is a common misconception, but a private entity can tear down a National Register property without getting any kind of approval from anyone - SHPO can't stop them. National REgister status only stops the federal government. My guess is they chose to keep that building to show that they care about preservation, and because they thought it was the right thing to do PR-wise.

[Doug Loudenback]

You may well be correct, Nick. Maybe I just assumed the Braniff would be mixed use. In searching just before I write this comment, I couldn't find anything about the Braniff's intended use.

[Kerry]

My guess is they chose to keep that building to show that they care about preservation, and because they thought it was the right thing to do PR-wise.

Um, they DON"T care about preservation and their P-R is shot to hell with anyone that could be swayed by 'saving' one building. If they care about preservation they sure have a a funny way to show it. I wish they cared about preservation as much as they do about improving sightlines.

[proud2Bsooner]

I talked to a commercial real estate friend this week about this, and he chuckled about the ordeal. Basically said that the minority was very vocal and most everyone else loves it that SD is making progress downtown. I tend to agree with him. I would say their reputation is very mildly blemished overall and some of you have sour grapes tainting your image of SD. One thing I think there is to keep in mind is that yes, they are taking some property down to the ground. But who knows what could eventually take the place of the grass. Perhaps one day a building will be built that is taller and prettier than the SD main tower in one of those spots in the plaza. Who knows? It would be easy to construct a new building there wouldn't it?

[Kerry]

I talked to a commercial real estate friend this week about this, and he chuckled about the ordeal. Basically said that the minority was very vocal and most everyone else loves it that SD is making progress downtown. I tend to agree with him. I would say their reputation is very mildly blemished overall and some of you have sour grapes tainting your image of SD. One thing I think there is to keep in mind is that yes, they are taking some property down to the ground. But who knows what could eventually take the place of the grass. Perhaps one day a building will be built that is taller and prettier than the SD main tower in one of those spots in the plaza. Who knows? It would be easy to construct a new building there wouldn't it?

How much easier is it to construct a new building on a vacant site than it is on one that already has a building on it. How long did it take Devon to tear down the Galleria parking deck, a month? Oklahoma Cit already tried the "clear everything so we can build on vacant lots" approch. It didn't work. Forty years later we still have most of the vacant lots. I hope Sandridge does eventually build a new tower and unless Tom Ward is a liar, that is the plan.

[boomergal]

Um, they DON"T care about preservation and their P-R is shot to hell with anyone that could be swayed by 'saving' one building. If they care about preservation they sure have a a funny way to show it. I wish they cared about preservation as much as they do about improving sightlines.

I didn't mean to imply that they DID, just that I think the Braniff was the token to appease the preservation community and say "look at how much we care about downtown" - they've made a very big deal out of how economically challenging it will be to restore it (with hugely inflated numbers, in comparison to national averages for rehabs), and how they'll have to "subsidize" some use for the building, but they're keeping it out of their tremendous goodwill.