I think they did mention it before this whole controversy, and they said it would be office space. During the hearings they alluded to street level retail as well, so that's a start...but still not beginning to touch on mixed-use.

It's over, I suggest moving onward...

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

Just like no one knows about Urban Renewal from 30 years ago.

Oh wait...

The real question is whether people will still care as little about what happens to the city and downtown as they do now. We have more empty space in the downtown area than I have ever seen in any other city and just about all of it once had structures on it that someone at some point decided to tear down in the name of progress. It is almost an Oklahoma City tradition.

It's over, I suggest moving onward...

I see it as...let's move backward

It's over, I suggest moving onward...

It would be nice to..but now people are implying that we say the following to SandRidge: "Thank you sir, may I have another?"

So you're saying we should be thanking SR for historic preservation?
NO! Sorry, I'm not being clear - I'm saying that that is what SR wanted to present - "look at us, we're preserving a building" - they thought that would cover their tails for demolishing 5 other buildings. I'm not saying they were RIGHT, I'm saying that is how they've presented their actions - "look how wonderful we are for saving this building and spending tons of money on it, all for the good of the City." The response shouldn't be "thank you," but rather, "excuse me, you missed a few."

Just like no one knows about Urban Renewal from 30 years ago.

Oh wait...

The real question is whether people will still care as little about what happens to the city and downtown as they do now. We have more empty space in the downtown area than I have ever seen in any other city and just about all of it once had structures on it that someone at some point decided to tear down in the name of progress. It is almost an Oklahoma City tradition.

Most of you were not even around for the original urban renewal...most of the change was very positive...leadership square was a bunch of cheap arse parking lots...they were pathetic....

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

If they maintain their profitability and growth they recorded this past quarter, they may hit that in 3-4 years.

My question for all who are so upset (personally, I am pretty neutral on the issue) is just why you feel that a vibrant, successful downtown can only happen with converted and renovated old buildings. I too wish all those old buildings hadn't been torn down in the 70's but it is what it is. There isn't any reason a successful downtown can't be rebuilt organically. There just need to be some developers out there willing to take the chance to do it.

If they maintain their profitability and growth they recorded this past quarter, they may hit that in 3-4 years.

Before you make a statement like that I suggest you read this article posted yesterday. Sandridge was the NYSE percentage loser for the day, the article suggests they will be taken over.

http://247wallst.com/2010/08/05/sand...a-me-bp-chk/2/

Yeah plazas......

Planetizen.com - How Yorkville Ended Up With So Much Dead Public Space (http://www.planetizen.com/node/44816)

Most of you were not even around for the original urban renewal...most of the change was very positive...leadership square was a bunch of cheap arse parking lots...they were pathetic....
Most of us were around and the pathetic parking lots followed the Urban Renewal destruction. Anything would be better than that. But have you ever wondered why all we get in replacement is cheap glass buildings now. Sandridge is proposing to build another CHEAP GLASS building. We can't afford to replace our beautiful brick and mortar buildings. So we can't afford to lose them.

Why do I get the distinct impression that a number of people here HOPE SR fails just so they can have their revenge for SR Commons? It seems some would rather the city suffer than to have things go better than they predicted. All in all, just seems sad.

The downtown should be mixed use. Doesn't mean every building or every project should be.

Most of us were around and the pathetic parking lots followed the Urban Renewal destruction. Anything would be better than that. But have you ever wondered why all we get in replacement is cheap glass buildings now. Sandridge is proposing to build another CHEAP GLASS building. We can't afford to replace our beautiful brick and mortar buildings. So we can't afford to lose them.

You have no idea what u r talking about...

My question for all who are so upset (personally, I am pretty neutral on the issue) is just why you feel that a vibrant, successful downtown can only happen with converted and renovated old buildings.
That isn't the only way but how does the destruction of the oldest standing building in downtown and being replaced by a corporate plaza lead to "a vibrant, successful downtown"?


I too wish all those old buildings hadn't been torn down in the 70's but it is what it is.
You wish those old buildings hadn't been torn down in the 70s, but you are perfectly ok with tearing down even more of them now? They might be replaced with other buildings but those buildings that we lost are never coming back. Once the building is gone. It is gone.


There isn't any reason a successful downtown can't be rebuilt organically.
Of course it can be rebuilt but the owners of the property aren't rebuilding, they are destroying and replacing with yet another under utilized corporate plaza (there is nothing to indicate that this corporate plaza will be utilized any more than the 5 or 6 corporate plazas/parks in the immediate area).


There just need to be some developers out there willing to take the chance to do it.
It has been well documented that developers have wanted to take the chance on renovating, but the owners after Kerr-McGee have not been willing to sell the properties.

Total bs.

Before you make a statement like that I suggest you read this article posted yesterday. Sandridge was the NYSE percentage loser for the day, the article suggests they will be taken over.

http://247wallst.com/2010/08/05/sand...a-me-bp-chk/2/

LOL! I don't think you read the right article. MIKELS, when a company is a serious contender for takeover, the price goes up due to speculation. Read about Sandridge and the natural gas industry. Yes, Sandridge may be a takeover target because the major O & G companies are looking to spend the billions they have hoarded in recent years while other natural gas companies also look for opportunities for growth. However, Mr. Ward isn't one to sell considering how and why he came to acquire Sandridge. If he were presented with a huge offer, he might take it and start a new company or Sandridge could be bought through a hostile takeover which would be very expensive. Its a smaller version of Chesapeake - he wants to grow and be a big player.

http://247wallst.com/2010/08/05/sandridges-pain-today-one-huge-opportunity-ahead-sd-xom-apa-me-bp-chk/

You have no idea what u r talking about...


Total bs.

Please refute and give examples if you think that is the case.

The downtown should be mixed use. Doesn't mean every building or every project should be.

Certain buildings are key opportunities for mixed-use, others aren't.. I totally agree that there shouldn't be a blanket approach. I agree there shouldn't be a ban on demolishing anything, building any green space, forcing everything to be mixed-use (even though that would be GREAT, just not necessary..).

Clearly we were never broken hearted over all 6 bldgs SR wanted to tear down. That's to say, it's case-by-case..some buildings you just hate to lose. Some things represent enormous opportunities. Some opportunities you hate to waste.

You have no idea what u r talking about...

"U R" lacking in room to talk..

Granted, I don't think SR's "Corporate Activities Building" is cheap looking.

100% agree Spartan

Sounds like another "decrepit" building that needs to be replaced with a corporate plaza. Just think of the site lines a company could have on those 15 acres!


Renovation, restoration sought for Oklahoma Capitol (Oklahoman, 8/8/10)

At the Oklahoma Capitol, some of the original electrical wiring and plumbing still is being used. In the nearly 100-year-old building, water is seeping in through the building's limestone exterior, a state report shows.

The nearly 100-year-old state Capitol needs a thorough restoration to prevent major failures in its exterior walls and its plumbing, electrical, and heating and cooling systems, according to state officials who have studied building conditions.

Full story here: http://newsok.com/renovation-restoration-sought-for-oklahoma-capitol/article/3483420?custom_click=headlines_widget


Interesting that the cost to build from scratch is the same amount to renovate ($160M)

Wow. I bet State Capitol renovations go to a special interest... $160 mil?? I guess you can add these renovations I don't think we're in dire need of to the new county jail I'm pretty sure we also do not need.

Sounds like another "decrepit" building that needs to be replaced with a corporate plaza. Just think of the site lines a company could have on those 15 acres!


Renovation, restoration sought for Oklahoma Capitol (Oklahoman, 8/8/10)

Full story here: http://newsok.com/renovation-restoration-sought-for-oklahoma-capitol/article/3483420?custom_click=headlines_widget


Interesting that the cost to build from scratch is the same amount to renovate ($160M)
I can see the headlines now ...


World's Largest Super Super Wal-Mart Plaza To Be Built On State Capitol Location
Associated Press
December 5, 2010

In a measure put together virtually overnight and passing both the republican controlled House and Senate, a bill to sell the grounds and structures consisting of the Oklahoma State Capitol Building and four other state properties immediately north of the Capitol along Lincoln Boulevard was sent to Governor Brad Henry for signature late last night.

The action was prompted by the unequivocal suggestion by a high-ranking Wal-Mart executive that unless the the transaction would occur by midnight last night, Wal-Mart would pull all of its retail operations from Oklahoma, not just Oklahoma City but from the entire state. "This cannot be allowed to happen," said House Speaker Chris Benge of Tulsa. "Without the world's largest retailer operating in our state, our state's image would suffer irreparable harm," he said. Glenn Coffee, President Pro Tempore of the state Senate agreed. "If any single company has done more to develop retail throughout our state than Wal-Mart, I'd like to know who it is. With this move, strong suggestions have been privately given that Wal-Mart might well consider moving its corporate headquarters to properties to Oklahoma City on land presently owned by the Oklahoma Publishing Company along the Broadway Extension corridor in Oklahoma City."

Whether outgoing Governor Brad Henry, a democrat, will sign, veto, or not act at all on this legislation during the last few days of his term before Governor-Elect Mary Fallin takes office is unknown. State capital insiders say that he was not informed of the whirlwind process and knew nothing about it until late afternoon yesterday.

In related news, in the event that the bill becomes law the Oklahoma Publishing Company has offered to donate property immediately east of its corporate offices at 9000 Broadway Extension for the construction of an entirely new state capitol complex. Funding for constructing the new state campus would derive from the sale of the existing campus on NE 23rd and Lincoln Boulevard, said an unnamed OPUBCO official, who said, "We see this as a win-win for everyone concerned."

Contacted late last night for a reaction to yesterday's stunning developments, Mayor Mick Cornett applauded the move saying, "This just goes to show, once again, that Oklahoma City is continuing its progress as being and becoming one of America's up and coming big league cities." He added that plans were immediately being laid to rename Lincoln Boulevard as the Sam Walton Thoroughfare.

^ That's great.

Doug, where can I sign up to take your writing class? Love it!

He should have added somewhere that "We are keeping the momentum going strong."

He should have added somewhere that "We are keeping the momentum going strong."
That which is obvious and self-evident does not require restatement ... e.g., things such as :ou

LOL. Nice Doug!

As SandRidge’s downtown campus moves forward, what will the demolition mean for OKC’s future?
http://www.okgazette.com/article/08-11-2010/As_SandRidge_s_downtown_campus_moves_forward_what_ will_the_demolition_mean_for_OKC_s_future.aspx

http://www.newsok.com/two-pieces-of-good-news-regarding-oklahoma-roads-and-bridges/article/3484920?custom_click=pod_headline_opinion-oklahoman-editorials


Overhaul of state
For 85 years, Oklahoma had a state Capitol without a dome. Unless structural problems are addressed soon, the state could have a dome without a Capitol. The building will turn 100 in the next decade. It needs work that could cost as much as $160 million — about what it would take to build the six-story, 450,000-square-foot building from scratch. The Capitol was finished in 1917, but the dome didn't come along until 2002. Fixing the building will take more than construction money. It would mean temporary relocation of the tenants — including the governor and the Legislature. Where would they go? Tulsa boosters have long coveted a bigger state government presence. Is that city's former city hall building still available?

Or could put the Legislature back in their former digs at the India Temple...oh wait, SandRidge is tearing that down...

As SandRidge’s downtown campus moves forward, what will the demolition mean for OKC’s future?
http://www.okgazette.com/article/08-11-2010/As_SandRidge_s_downtown_campus_moves_forward_what_ will_the_demolition_mean_for_OKC_s_future.aspx
Anthony McDermid's (the "blood on our hands" guy on the DDRC) comments are so very self serving and either disingenuous or hypocritical ...

In light of the SandRidge decision, McDermid said he hoped it opened the eyes of many to be more vigilant and to speak up for historic buildings downtown.

“Regardless of your view on the merits of recent events, I believe the awareness and dialogue that took place during the SandRidge approval process showed we are maturing as a city and learning to value our built heritage and how it illuminates our history,” he said. “These challenges are more like complex equations than arithmetic, but historic preservation is here to stay in Oklahoma City, and we should expect more advocacy for our built legacy as the historic building stock dwindles.”
If HIS eyes were opened, as they apparently were, he nonetheless voted with the majority to approve the demolition of whatever SandRidge asked the DDRC to authorize.

"We should expect more advocacy for our built legacy as the historic building stock dwindles," he said. Too bad that he was persuaded by something other than his conscience and principles.

The lesson learned, I think, is this: If you have big money and big friends with money backing you, you have NO WORRIES if you want to do something downtown ... whatever that might be, it will be approved. If you don't, then a different set of rules will probably apply and, to use a phrase of my grandmother, "you're a blowed up sucker."

McDermid is not the guy I thought he was before this issue came to the fore. I'll just leave it at that and say, as well, that I'm not one to beat my head against the wall for pleasure and I'm pretty sure that I'm out of this game in the future wars ... there is just no point in resisting the borg.

"Resistance is Futile" (they would LOVE for everyone to believe that) but, as any good Trekkie/Trekker or whatever we are calling ourselves knows....

Anthony McDermid's (the "blood on our hands" guy on the DDRC) comments are so very self serving and either disingenuous or hypocritical ...

If HIS eyes were opened, as they apparently were, he nonetheless voted with the majority to approve the demolition of whatever SandRidge asked the DDRC to authorize.

"We should expect more advocacy for our built legacy as the historic building stock dwindles," he said. Too bad that he was persuaded by something other than his conscience and principles.

The lesson learned, I think, is this: If you have big money and big friends with money backing you, you have NO WORRIES if you want to do something downtown ... whatever that might be, it will be approved. If you don't, then a different set of rules will probably apply and, to use a phrase of my grandmother, "you're a blowed up sucker."

McDermid is not the guy I thought he was before this issue came to the fore. I'll just leave it at that and say, as well, that I'm not one to beat my head against the wall for pleasure and I'm pretty sure that I'm out of this game in the future wars ... there is just no point in resisting the borg.I agree with you a lot Doug but my perspective is different in this case.

What McDermid is quoted as saying appears to be true to me. And I can certainly understand how one can serve on a public board and vote one way to fulfill the obligations one perceives to that appointment while holding personal opinions to the contrary. Actually happens a lot in all areas of life whether public or private in fact.

There was a time not so many years ago that you and I both recall when someone with the Sandridge clout would have had no opposition at all and there would have been no or much less public discussion and scrutiny than what we've just seen. Surely the Sandridge side won but it wasn't the skate I bet they thought it would be at the beginning.

And the opposition learned a lot in this fight and the next time -- and I'm pretty sure there will be a next time -- they will be better prepared, organized, and motivated.

There is so much more public involvement across the board now, too, than I've ever observed previously. Maybe there's not as much as needed but it does appear to me, at least, to be increasing.

I think it is disadvantageous to throw aside McDermid or any other for that matter because of this particular action. Because those that were on the opposition might actually be interested in changing positions for that next and future project. For those like McDermid who have a history of not only supporting preservation but actually doing preservation I think it is important to keep them in the fold and to both support their positive efforts and reward their leadership.

McDermid is rare in my experience because he has an interesting mix of idealism and vision coupled with a sense of the practical that has apparently accrued from his own hard won experience. That's a pretty significant resource and not everyone is able retain both aspects as they travel through life.

I like what you said and I hope that you are right.

I like what you said and I hope that you are right.Course the side that will be trying to destroy something will be better prepared, too.

http://www.newsok.com/two-pieces-of-good-news-regarding-oklahoma-roads-and-bridges/article/3484920?custom_click=pod_headline_opinion-oklahoman-editorials



Or could put the Legislature back in their former digs at the India Temple...oh wait, SandRidge is tearing that down...

Wow. Talk about people who have evidently not been paying attention to ANY of the development in downtown Tulsa.

I don't know, is Tulsa's former city hall complex still available? (What do you guys think?)

OKC isn't the only place going through significant changes to urban fabric.

The Kansas City Star - Irate Plaza fans object to law office building plan (http://www.kansascity.com/2010/08/20/2164294/irate-plaza-fans-object-to-law.html)

He also was confident the city will approve the rezoning for the $57 million project, which is intended to accommodate 500 Polsinelli Shughart employees.

And if the council turns it down?

“I think it would be very unfortunate when Highwoods is spending this kind of money and we’re keeping jobs when so many people are leaving town,” he said.

Hmmm, where have we heard this "reasoning" before? Why does it have to be built right there? Why not a block away (where they could actually build the 8 story height), instead they are restricted to 3 stories at that location. Or on the perimeter (which the zoning allows). If the building is restricted to 3 stories, that would most likely mean it would no longer be a $57M project and could you still get 500 employees in only 3 stories? Why destroy something that has value to people when you don't have to?

OKC isn't the only place going through significant changes to urban fabric.

The Kansas City Star - Irate Plaza fans object to law office building plan (http://www.kansascity.com/2010/08/20/2164294/irate-plaza-fans-object-to-law.html)

At least they are getting an 8 story building out of the deal. Imagine how pissed they would be if all they were getting was some native plants (that are by definition - all over Oklahoma) and benches.

Sandridge has started the demo process...I walked by yesterday...

. . . if all they were getting was some native plants (that are by definition - all over Oklahoma) and benches.

Pls don't dismiss "native plants". . .they do well here because they are native. Better some good natives rather than dead blue spruce.

The Plaza deal is different from ours. They have a large, successful, visually homogeneous shopping, restaurant are with some offices strewn within. Ours is a downtown, not homogeneous area. The Plaza exists for its patrons. The CBD exists for businesses.

The Plaza deal is different from ours. They have a large, successful, visually homogeneous shopping, restaurant are with some offices strewn within. Ours is a downtown, not homogeneous area. The Plaza exists for its patrons. The CBD exists for businesses.

So you are against the Kansas City plan?

So you are against the Kansas City plan?

Without putting any real thought into it, I am.

Without putting any real thought into it, I am.

What about private property right or the threat that 500 jobs might leave the area? I mean, if they own the building shouldn't they be able to tear it down?

What about private property right or the threat that 500 jobs might leave the area? I mean, if they own the building shouldn't they be able to tear it down?

Have you been to the Country Club Plaza? Apples and oranges:

1. The CBD is business-centric. The CCP is consumer-centric. Makes sense that we prioritize our businesses in the CBD.
2. The archtecture of the CCP is uniform and this would have a pretty significant negative impact. Ours isn't and a change wouldn't have any sort of major scarring of the CBD.
3. The buildings appear to currently be in use in the CCP.
4. Assume this place does, indeed, move out of the CCP. KC has a downtown that would LOVE 500 more employees that would be an option. KC doesn't really suffer much there. Our CBD NEEDS the office worker and population density.
5. SR would, hypothetically, abandon a skyscraper pretty much completely. That's not occurring in KC.

Sandridge has started the demo process...I walked by yesterday...

What exactly are they doing at this point?

What exactly are they doing at this point?

It was in Tuesday's Oklahoman...couldn't locate it though for a link...think it said the were starting the demo of the old YMCA building??

...it appears that way downtown...

Which ones exactly and what did you see?

I thought they weren't doing this?!?

Lol. How did you not know? The whole site was talking about it for months.

How something like this go about? Do they evacuate everyone in the downtown area?

I walked by yesterday - along robinson street half of the road is closed and there are large fences up... construction crews setting up road closure sings, etc.... not sure exactly how they will take it down, but I would guess a wrecking ball.... any sort of explosive would be too risky for the surrounding buildings

Would it be? I'm not qualified to know for sure but I thought implosions are very carefully coordinated and exact. A dust cloud is usually the only offense surrounding buildings have to endure. It's not actually an explosion, merely small and coordinated detonations across the building that weaken the structural support system and bring it down quickly and cleanly.

Would it be? I'm not qualified to know for sure but I thought implosions are very carefully coordinated and exact. A dust cloud is usually the only offense surrounding buildings have to endure. It's not actually an explosion, merely small and coordinated detonations across the building that weaken the structural support system and bring it down quickly and cleanly.

I'm no expert but my guess is that some kind of implosion would not be a practical way to bring down buildings that small. A wrecking ball is much more likely.

True, I didn't take that into consideration. A wrecking ball just isn't any fun. :P

Wrecking ball = less dramatic photos for the history books.