Steve has an interesting post on his blog now. Basically one of the largest razing of downtown buildings ever may happen...I know lots of you on here will probably not be pleased with this news. Im in the boat with you...

Steve's blog :

OKC Central — All about downtown OKC (http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral)

I hope not...

If removal of the buildings are part of a larger redevelopment project then I would be in favor of it. Why do buildings constructed 80 years ago have any more right to exist than a building that is to be constructed today?

Yep.. if the buildings are being razed in order to create surface parking, I'm 'agin it. If the buildings are being razed in order to build highrise condos, I'm very much in favor.

If we're able to command prices in the $250/sq. ft. range, it becomes very profitable to build high end luxury condos (that's about what they're going for in Dallas).

If removal of the buildings are part of a larger redevelopment project then I would be in favor of it.

The buildings that were razed during the height of urban renewal were part of a larger redevelopment project.


Why do buildings constructed 80 years ago have any more right to exist than a building that is to be constructed today?

You should already know the answer to that question...

I hate to be rude or offensive when I say this but....

F%&$ those old buildings, tear em down the newer the better

The buildings that were razed during the height of urban renewal were part of a larger redevelopment project.

Yes, but we aren't talking about tearing down half of downtown this time. But hey, if someone wants to propose a billion dollars in new development I am willing to listen.

If the development is already funded, begins immediately following the razing and is an improvement over the existing buildings it is worth considering. But, we've all seen buildings torn down and the development not proceed. That should not be allowed to happen.

Preliminary funding, "gap" funding and construction financing are different things entirely. If they are demo'ing building hopefully they are "fully" funded projects so there isn't a bunch of surface lots there for 20 years like much of Downtown Dallas was after the 80's oil bust.

not "ever" ... but certainly in the last 20 years

Betcha it's Preftakes...

He's spent a lot of money assembling the properties west of the proposed Devon Tower and he must have some sort of plan in mind. Otherwise, why acquire a bunch of adjacent real estate?

Betcha it's Preftakes...

He's spent a lot of money assembling the properties west of the proposed Devon Tower and he must have some sort of plan in mind. Otherwise, why acquire a bunch of adjacent real estate?


Is there much in the way of historic properties west of the devon tower site? Its been awhile since ive been done there, but i dont remember any buildings of significance. Hopefully its a fully funded, worthwhile project...

I hate to be rude or offensive when I say this but....

F%&$ those old buildings, tear em down the newer the better

You're not being rude or offensive, but you're being stupid. Historic buildings add charm to cities. Can you imagine going to Paris or London and all the buildings you see reflect the architectural trends of the past 10 years?

Here's all the property Precor owns on that block... Different colors used to highlight separate properties.

Interestingly, the only thing he doesn't own is the bus station and the city-owned office building and adjacent parking (apart from Coney Island and the pizza place, labeled #2 & 3). It could very well be that he's working a deal with city for all those properties, which would give him control of the entire block.

http://mysite.verizon.net/res17zef/precor3.jpg

One North Hudson:

http://www.oklahomacounty.org/assessor/Searches/sketches/picfile/2730/R010018176001zA.jpg

Parking Garage:

http://www.oklahomacounty.org/assessor/Searches/sketches/picfile/2730/R010018392001yA.jpg

Carpenter Square (vacant):

http://www.oklahomacounty.org/assessor/Searches/sketches/picfile/2730/R010018385001vA.jpg

Totally agree.....let's tear down all of these ancient eye sores.

Because if there is one thing we don't have in Oklahoma....it's SPACE.

(sarcasm)

You're not being rude or offensive, but you're being stupid. Historic buildings add charm to cities. Can you imagine going to Paris or London and all the buildings you see reflect the architectural trends of the past 10 years?

No, but I can imagine going to Dubai or Hong Kong and seeing all the modern architecture.

I think Preftakes previously stated that he planned to preserve most of those buildings. I bet it's Sandridge.

You're not being rude or offensive, but you're being stupid. Historic buildings add charm to cities. Can you imagine going to Paris or London and all the buildings you see reflect the architectural trends of the past 10 years?

Yeah, I have and did. You see if for the last 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 40,...... yrs.
Just because a building is old, doesn't mean it's worth saving. An ugly building sitting on a corner 50 yrs ago, is still ugly today.
A building needs more than just age to be salvaged. What if it sat empty for those 50 yrs? Is it worth it to preserve? What if it has no historic significance? Wouldn't it be smarter to take the historic money and put it towards something that is meaningful. OKC was screwed when we had everything demolished for the bigh I.M. Pei design. It's a historic time in OKC where we were won over with flare and flashing lights without actually thinking about it.
So should we saved old unnecessary and unuseful buildings for newer green buildings? Do you want your grandkids to have to deal with these renovated buildings down the line that we saved just because they are old?

Well, unfortunately due to the city selling off the tax payer funded City Center to Devon, And Devon's building occupying the rest, there is going to be a large need for parking in that area. If they need to tear out buildings for that, I guess they should have thought of that before selling off the parking garage. Its unfortunately if historic buildings have to be torn down, but some of those buildings are roach motels.

I think Preftakes previously stated that he planned to preserve most of those buildings. I bet it's Sandridge.

Could be right... I was just speculating.

But I think Precor must have some sort of master plan for that block, even if that means preserving most/all of the buildings.

It's actually an excellent location, directly west of the Devon complex and park, adjacent to the soon-to-be-improved Myriad Gardens, north of the theater complex, just south of the Civic Center and Art Museum and with a huge parking garage to the west.

Most of the smaller buildings they own on that block are vacant or in need of serious help.

So should we saved old unnecessary and unuseful buildings for newer green buildings? Do you want your grandkids to have to deal with these renovated buildings down the line that we saved just because they are old?

Re-using existing buildings is more sustainable than any type of new "green" construction.

I go by the Preftakes buildings every day. Most of them need either torn down or completely renovated. They sit empty, the windows are cracked or boarded up. It looks bad. If he has any sort of plan that involves simple renovation, there's no reason for him to wait on getting the bus station or any other property on that block. He's got to be thinking new construction.

I hate to be rude or offensive when I say this but....

F%&$ those old buildings, tear em down the newer the better

You're becoming quite an ignorant poster lately. What gives?

Is there much in the way of historic properties west of the devon tower site? Its been awhile since ive been done there, but i dont remember any buildings of significance. Hopefully its a fully funded, worthwhile project...

Uh yeah, specifically the old Hotel Black.

Yes, the fact that so many of those buildings remain vacant and no work has been done on them despite the fact he paid a pretty penny tells me something bigger is brewing.

He paid $1 million for a small building on that block that is in bad shape. He also acquired a little parking lot just north of the bus station... Can't imagine why he'd make these moves if he wasn't trying to put together a much bigger project.

Of course that could mean keeping some of what is there, like One North Hudson.

Some of those buildings have a lot of character, and I'm not really itching to see them torn down. Of course, that depends on the plan. Those buildings aren't exactly irreplaceable, and the thought of (possibly) some midrise residential buildings, with street level retail and restaurants, well, that's pretty cool. Certainly better than them sitting empty for another 10 years.

hoya, if the Devon tower stays on track as planned, I doubt any building near it will stay vacant for another 10 years.

I'm thinking this might be a building in Bricktown since yesterday Steve said he'd have an update from the Bricktown committee. Remember the "Cotton Exchange" and how he wanted to tear down that old Margarita Mama's bldg? Perhaps this project could have evolved or sold to someone else and is still wanting demolition? Just a thought since he mentioned more to come out of Bricktown yesterday.

I guess we're just waiting on an update from Steve then. Perhaps if I sit and think a while I can come up with a few more wild ass guesses. :)

Those buildings aren't exactly irreplaceable

All buildings are replaceable, but they won't ever be built like that again. Just look down the street at what actually gets built... Legacy Arts Summit.

They way I see it we have a few problems:

1) We tore down so much from that era that it sometimes seems like downtown Oklahoma City didn't even exist 50 years ago or that it was at least much smaller, which is not the case.

2) We have an amazing history of tearing down buildings and building nothing in their place, creating less density and destroying any sense of established identity, character, and tradition of which the city seems in total short supply, relative to most cities of its age.

3) We have very poor oversight of projects that allows great compromises during the development. No matter what is proposed, even if it seems like an easy "upgrade", there is a very good chance that we won't get it or that it will be severely compromised before completion.

4) The fact that these buildings are not renovated is not a question of possibility. These kinds of buildings are renovated all the time across the country. It really is a product of our culture that does not seem to place much of a value on history and seems to place little value on tradition or character. Renovation seems infeasible to developers because they know we just don't give a crap about preserving our city in any real usable way. So, it really is the lack of demand for recapturing and updating the character of our city's past that leads them to demolition. They can't get premiums for old building renovations like they can in a lot of cities, so they dispose them.

5) we seem to have a serious lack of vision for anything that is not new, despite the fact that bricktown showed us that some of our best assets already exist. We can imagine a glorious new core to shore district, but no one can picture a vibrant arts district neighborhood that utilizes the existing structures?? That's crazy.

The reason for saving buildings like these is simply that they just don't build them like that anymore and destroying them decreases an already small inventory of unique structures in our community that outlast generations and therefore create a sense of community and history. Compound that with the fact that Oklahoma City has this dream of updating the core to shore district with new construction and then it just begins to make less and less sense.

Clearly, several people in this city and even in this very thread are indifferent to the city's historic structure or identity, but there are many that do care as well. Many have a hard time envisioning the future when looking at the older structures. However, we are in a unique position where we shouldn't have to choose. We can have a major state of the art brand new live/work district in the core to shore area that would replace not historic structures, but dumps... literally. At the same time, we can make an effort to renovate and preserve these old structures in the arts district giving it a unique character of its own and creating a neighborhood unlike any other in the city...

Or, we can destroy these buildings for new construction which will only decrease the value of any core to shore possibilities as it will all be positioned the same way and saturate the core with similar works. Meanwhile, we’d be lessening the possibility of multiple neighborhoods downtown with their own identity and simply drag and drop in new ones that differ only in street name.

We are a small city and any time we destroy something, we often lose the ONLY thing like it. To many, that alone is reason for preservation. However there is a very utilitarian and broader economic motivation for preserving districts like these in our city. IMO, the goal is not to wipe out the city as is and replace it with the next big fad or inexpensive construction, but to preserve what we have left in order to create a city that has surprisingly varied options for living and working for a city of its size. You can't do that with new construction alone and is exactly how we can continue to position Oklahoma City as an up and coming city that leaves little to be desired in living and working options. If we preserve our old districts as we build new ones, then we increase our competitive position as a place to live instead of continuing to make lateral moves by replacing options instead of adding them.

Sure, we can continue to destroy all of our old assets and replace them with today's newest and greatest, but it seems to me that is simply the best way to become Any City, USA, one which is barely discernible from any other emerging city of the last 20 years. It certainly isn't a very good way to position Oklahoma City as one with unique character and sense of identity that embraces both its past and its future…

Of course, all of this is based on speculation. :)

BDP-I was trying to formulate an offering for this thread in my own head, but you have said what I am feeling so well that there is no reason to repeat it. OKC has a throw-away mentality, and as much as I love my hometown, that is a major stumbling block towards us forging any kind of real identity for ourselves. St. Louis is full of building-huggers and they sometimes go way behond the pale in advocating the saving and renovation of absolutely every historic building, but OKC definitely goes too far the other way.

I keep hearing Preftakes, what is that? Was that a developer? A building?

I've always thought the Hotel Black building was really cool. (bukding 16...One North Hudson) I've never been inside, don't know what condition it's in, and don't know what the plans are for the site. That said I do think its a great site for future development. I guess I must be a fence sitter because I want something incredible built on that block but would love to see the history preserved. With Devon going in just across the street I can understand a developer wanting to do something with this property. What I'd really like to see is the Hotel Black building incorporated into whatever is built (if its structurally sound). The old Maywood church at 8th and stiles comes to mind. Has anyone seen the interior of that building? Its awesome. I looked online and couldn't find any interior pix of it but heres the building from the outside. Oklahoma Department of Commerce - About Commerce - Locations (http://www.okcommerce.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1606&Itemid=748)

Maybe some of you have more insight to the condition of the Hotel Black, or hopefully Doug or Steve know something about the old Maywood church and could offer some ideas/info. More examples of mixing the old with the new or incporporating an old building with an atrium for a new tower:

http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee79/STOREYS39/BathHotel11.jpg

http://www.thedctraveler.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/old-post-office-atrium-in-washington-dc-at-night-.jpg

Im sure theres better examples out there but Ive gotta get back to work.

I keep hearing Preftakes, what is that? Was that a developer? A building?

Nicholas Preftakes who owns Precor Realty which in turn owns all the buildings I highlighted through a series of LLC's.

He's the former head of Henderson Properties and did the first loft renovations in the downtown area some years ago.

home (http://www.precorruffin.com/)

http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee79/STOREYS39/BathHotel11.jpg


I saw that picture, started thinking it was Old St. Joseph's in the foreground and started to get excited about a new project announcement. That's what wishful thinking will do for you....

Yes, but we aren't talking about tearing down half of downtown this time.

Right. So let's just tear down everything that's left.

If this is the Preftakes properties, I will be very upset--especially the Hotel Black, the Motor Hotel, and Main Place.


5) we seem to have a serious lack of vision for anything that is not new, despite the fact that bricktown showed us that some of our best assets already exist. We can imagine a glorious new core to shore district, but no one can picture a vibrant arts district neighborhood that utilizes the existing structures?? That's crazy.

The reason for saving buildings like these is simply that they just don't build them like that anymore and destroying them decreases an already small inventory of unique structures in our community that outlast generations and therefore create a sense of community and history.

:congrats:

No, but I can imagine going to Dubai or Hong Kong and seeing all the modern architecture.

I respectively disagree.

While I enjoy the creative architecture of Tokyo, the wooden houses sprinkled around metro neighborhoods....survivors of war, earthquakes and urban projects.....are such gifts.

Like discovering roses in the desert.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but didn't Devon annouce that they bought some of those buildings just a month or 2 before they unveiled the tower???? Did they sell them after that or what. I could have sworn I saw that somewhere.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but didn't Devon annouce that they bought some of those buildings just a month or 2 before they unveiled the tower???? Did they sell them after that or what. I could have sworn I saw that somewhere.

NO. They bought the Colcord Hotel so that it will stay financially afloat in case the Devon Tower construction hinders patrons away during construction. I imagine they will sell it to the right investor after their tower is complete. They are also purchasing the west half of the Galleria Parking Garage for their employees and adding 5 floors to it. That's it.

It's Sandridge.

http://newsok.com/sandridges-transition-may-alter-face-of-downtown/article/3316779/?custom_click=lead_story_title

Yep, thanks Hoya, I also posted that in a new SandRidge thread too for discussion.

Rogers Marvel Architects (http://www.rogersmarvel.com/publicspaces.html)

I can live with this.

Sandridge, ok I knew it was one of the energy folks.