View Full Version : Preftakes Block



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

Spartan
01-14-2014, 04:30 PM
So, in essence, spending over $20M to do nothing with these properties over the last seven years? That doesn't sound like he's just speculating. That much investment, to me, points towards some end goal.

Nobody is denying that he obviously possibly maybe probably has plans. But the entire block has been in steep decay and decline for the last 6-7 years that he has been consolidating ownership.

Pete
01-16-2014, 06:25 AM
http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/6174d1389878152-preftakes-block-preftakes11314b.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/6175d1389878152-preftakes-block-preftakes11314c.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/6176d1389878153-preftakes-block-preftakes11314d.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/6177d1389878154-preftakes-block-preftakes11314e.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/6178d1389878155-preftakes-block-preftakes11314g.jpg

bombermwc
01-17-2014, 06:30 AM
I've been wondering if he thought he would have an inside edge for OG&E's new building, but it ended up working out later for Stage Center instead. If that's the case, he's stuck with a block of prime land that's going down the crapper.

Pete
01-17-2014, 07:06 AM
I know someone involved in the site selection process for OG&E and was told they never considered this block.

Nick
01-17-2014, 08:58 AM
I know someone involved in the site selection process for OG&E and was told they never considered this block.

This is extremely frustrating. What in the world is he doing then? Sitting on land like this should be unacceptable. There were viable businesses in this block that he kicked out and for what? It's ridiculous that this is block is now like this.

OKVision4U
01-17-2014, 09:10 AM
I've been wondering if he thought he would have an inside edge for OG&E's new building, but it ended up working out later for Stage Center instead. If that's the case, he's stuck with a block of prime land that's going down the crapper.

so who is the most logical (tenant) for Preftakes?

Bellaboo
01-17-2014, 09:13 AM
so who is the most logical (tenant) for Preftakes?

The guess is a Devon overflow building....... some year.

Pete
01-17-2014, 09:16 AM
Yes, Devon expansion.

Plus housing or a hotel in One North Hudson, a renovated bus station and like a parking structure along Sheridan.

Urbanized
01-17-2014, 09:17 AM
It's possible (even likely) that he needed possession of ALL of the properties before he can execute his master plan for the site. The bus station vacated only a few weeks ago. As has been pointed out, there are still remaining tenants in other buildings who have been given firm relocation deadlines. Sometimes you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette, and development on the scale that I'm sure we're all hoping for takes time.

I'm not defending homeless people sleeping in doorways, but I think it is OK that the buildings have been vacant during assembly of the properties. I suspect that we will see something very soon on his plans.

Nick
01-17-2014, 09:25 AM
It's possible (even likely) that he needed possession of ALL of the properties before he can execute his master plan for the site. The bus station vacated only a few weeks ago. As has been pointed out, there are still remaining tenants in other buildings who have been given firm relocation deadlines. Sometimes you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette, and development on the scale that I'm sure we're all hoping for takes time.

I'm not defending homeless people sleeping in doorways, but I think it is OK that the buildings have been vacant during assembly of the properties. I suspect that we will see something very soon on his plans.

I appreciate your reasoned post. I hope you're right about the last part.

OKVision4U
01-17-2014, 09:26 AM
Yes, Devon expansion.

Plus housing or a hotel in One North Hudson, a renovated bus station and like a parking structure along Sheridan.

thank you Pete. The Concord on the east side of the Devon Tower and a newly rennovated "Black Hotel" @ One North Hudson on the west side? ...w/ an overflow building of ( 20 - 30 stories?) It would frame things up nicely. ...I like it.

Pete
01-17-2014, 09:26 AM
I don't think anything is imminent here.

Absolutely zero activity, they just re-boarded the properties along Main, the two existing tenants in One North Hudson are being allowed to stay at least until the summer.


But here's a juicy bit of information: I was told by someone with connections to Pickard Chilton (Devon architects) that they are working on a second building for Devon of about half the size. However, I believe it's all very preliminary.

That building would almost have to go on the SW corner of Main & Hudson (Carpenter Square, et al).

Urbanized
01-17-2014, 09:26 AM
so who is the most logical (tenant) for Preftakes?

My guess is Devon leased space combined with spec office plus hotel and/or housing. I think Devon needs room to expand/contract outside of their own building based on commodity prices and other factors, room for partners and suppliers close by.

Considering the current investor climate, they can't build it themselves or they will risk the perception that they planned poorly for growth when building their headquarters OR that they are being extravagant (in a market that investors are indifferent about). Therefore, it makes sense for them to lease space. And with a tenant like that, it makes sense for a developer to build.

Urbanized
01-17-2014, 09:31 AM
I don't think anything is imminent here.

Absolutely zero activity, they just re-boarded the properties along Main, the two existing tenants in One North Hudson are being allowed to stay at least until the summer.


But here's a juicy bit of information: I was told by someone with connections to Pickard Chilton (Devon architects) that they are working on a second building for Devon of about half the size. However, I believe it's all very preliminary.

That building would almost have to go on the SW corner of Main & Hudson (Carpenter Square, et al).

By "very soon" I meant within the next year, which is in reality but a blip, though it might seem like an eternity to those of us who are obsessing on downtown development. I think the key bit of information is the deadline given to tenants. I would expect things to start moving (information, not bulldozers) within a few months of that date.

Pete
01-17-2014, 09:34 AM
I will say that with Devon at least partially behind this whole block that we can be guaranteed things will be done right.

And I also believe that with 21c drawing more attention west and the OG&E Tower to the south, there will be pressure and incentive to get things going here.

OKVision4U
01-17-2014, 09:52 AM
I will say that with Devon at least partially behind this whole block that we can be guaranteed things will be done right.

And I also believe that with 21c drawing more attention west and the OG&E Tower to the south, there will be pressure and incentive to get things going here.

Yes, we are so fortunate to have serveral "civic leading" energy companies that set the bar in DT real estate. The other private groups should be in a great postion to build to that standard.

I don't see why they would wait at all, this area is hot.

jccouger
01-17-2014, 10:07 AM
Take it for what its worth (not a lot), but I've heard from people inside of Devon that they are planning an aggressive expansion in the coming years. Money is money, and they have a lot of it. They want to start turning that money in to assets and investments.

PhiAlpha
01-17-2014, 03:14 PM
Don't forget about Devon's MLP in Dallas. I don't know how likely it would be, but they could be planning on bringing it to OKC eventually. Right now, with the office space situation downtown, it might not have been a good scenario for them.

OKVision4U
01-17-2014, 04:03 PM
Don't forget about Devon's MLP in Dallas. I don't know how likely it would be, but they could be planning on bringing it to OKC eventually. Right now, with the office space situation downtown, it might not have been a good scenario for them.

we have more demand than supply, ...so why aren't we building?

Spartan
01-17-2014, 04:50 PM
I will say that with Devon at least partially behind this whole block that we can be guaranteed things will be done right.

And I also believe that with 21c drawing more attention west and the OG&E Tower to the south, there will be pressure and incentive to get things going here.

If historic preservation isn't key to their plans then things AREN'T going to be done right. It's that simple.

ljbab728
01-18-2014, 12:46 AM
If historic preservation isn't key to their plans then things AREN'T going to be done right. It's that simple.

Spartan, does that mean you have reason to think that historic preservation isn't being considered?

Pete
01-18-2014, 11:46 AM
I just noticed that Pizza Town (#2 in the article above) is for sale for $950,000.

That's exactly what Preftakes paid for similar-sized buildings on that block over six years ago.

Wonder why Nick hasn't jumped on this?

Spartan
01-18-2014, 12:17 PM
Spartan, does that mean you have reason to think that historic preservation isn't being considered?

I have reason to think the Carpenter Square building and others are coming down. That's continued historic destruction, is it not?

Urbanized
01-18-2014, 12:21 PM
Saw a transient leave his shopping cart outside, push aside the plywood blocking the front entry at Pizza Town, slip inside and replace the plywood from the inside the other day, just two doors down from 420 W. Main. Perhaps Pizza Town will burn down soon and save everyone the effort of figuring out what to do with it.

Rover
01-18-2014, 12:24 PM
I have reason to think the Carpenter Square building and others are coming down. That's continued historic destruction, is it not?

Suspicion or reason?

UnFrSaKn
01-18-2014, 12:28 PM
Pizza Town is next door to Coney Island, one of the most unique and colorful "mom and pop" restaurants downtown. I do not want to see anything burn down because it could take the valuable properties with it.

Pete
01-18-2014, 12:40 PM
It's pretty incredible that the City has it's main offices two doors down from Pizza Town and the rest of this block, which has become a nearly empty shambles.

I've got to believe there is a big plan in the works but they need to get on it.

Jeepnokc
01-18-2014, 12:44 PM
Saw a transient leave his shopping cart outside, push aside the plywood blocking the front entry at Pizza Town, slip inside and replace the plywood from the inside the other day, just two doors down from 420 W. Main. Perhaps Pizza Town will burn down soon and save everyone the effort of figuring out what to do with it.

That is Al. PizzaTown has two sets of doors and he sleeps between the two. He is not actually inside the interior of the building (ie...not inside the 2nd set of doors) but in the foyer. He gets his coffee from Coney Island in the morning and then sits outside Lunchbox in the sun to read the paper and drink his coffee.

UnFrSaKn
01-18-2014, 12:49 PM
Oh that man. See the Preftakes block photos to see who he is talking about.

I badly want to see the Coney Island building renovated like The Marion. Just imagine the arched windows restored and the west side built out like the Braniff Building.

Pete
01-18-2014, 12:51 PM
^

Coney Island could sell to a developer who could finish out the top two floors then lease the ground floor back to them.

UnFrSaKn
01-18-2014, 12:59 PM
I've spent plenty of time there for lunch with Steve and it's one of his favorite places. His kids like to watch the owner and his son play chess when orders slow down. According to the owner's son, who is the only one who has attempted to see what is in the top floors with only a flashlight, his father has no interest at all what's up there. He is just happy that the City finally finished Project 180 and his customers can get food. It was close to putting them out of business.

UnFrSaKn
01-18-2014, 01:02 PM
Coney Island Hot Dogs (February 19 2012) - a set on Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/williamhider/sets/72157629100876064/)

hoya
01-18-2014, 01:17 PM
I think the Coney Island building is owned by the old guy who runs it. I don't think he's gonna be renovating the building anytime soon.

Spartan
01-18-2014, 01:57 PM
Suspicion or reason?

What an absurd post. This is typical of the Rover belittling act. I am responding to both suspicions and reason within this thread itself, but you don't read that, you just zero right in on my post and badger me with the most epically pointless post ever.

Are you debating that there are development plans perhaps for this block? Because earlier in this thread you were attacking people for complaining about the current condition because there might be development plans after all. Those are conflicting thought patterns.

I am concerned by the emergence of two trends within the downtown design discussion: 1, we are now tearing down LANDMARKS (Stage Center, India Temple, KerMac, Hale Photo Bldg, Film Row Bldg, and on and on, not to mention less significant structures) at an astonishing rate. 2, anytime someone has credible (especially) concerns with downtown development, the response from a reliable corps of posters who always defend business interests is to belittle, then say too late, then to rub it in. It plays out in every thread.

This, along with the underwhelming "mystery tower" phenomenon, has become the hallmark of OKC Talk that continuously drives this forum like a machine. A machine doesn't care how clear and cogent its logic is.

Plutonic Panda
01-18-2014, 02:50 PM
This is extremely frustrating. What in the world is he doing then? Sitting on land like this should be unacceptable. There were viable businesses in this block that he kicked out and for what? It's ridiculous that this is block is now like this.But we don't know if he is just sitting on it man. He could be planning something big, we just don't know. I'd say just chill and wait another 1-3 years and just forget this block and look to all the other awesome development taking place; if something isn't then done about this block in 3 year, then raise hell.

Snowman
01-18-2014, 09:50 PM
My guess is Devon leased space combined with spec office plus hotel and/or housing. I think Devon needs room to expand/contract outside of their own building based on commodity prices and other factors, room for partners and suppliers close by.

Considering the current investor climate, they can't build it themselves or they will risk the perception that they planned poorly for growth when building their headquarters OR that they are being extravagant (in a market that investors are indifferent about). Therefore, it makes sense for them to lease space. And with a tenant like that, it makes sense for a developer to build.

Since it sounds like Devon is out of parking already, I would not be shocked to see the lots labeled 5, 6, 7, 8 & 10 be the tower and 11 through 15 wind up a parking garage with retail/restarants at ground level

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/misc/precor4.jpg

ljbab728
01-18-2014, 10:25 PM
I am concerned by the emergence of two trends within the downtown design discussion: 1, we are now tearing down LANDMARKS (Stage Center, India Temple, KerMac, Hale Photo Bldg, Film Row Bldg, and on and on, not to mention less significant structures) at an astonishing rate.

Spartan, there are certainly instances of buildings being razed, but it's hardly an "astonishing rate". I know that is contrary to your belief that it mirrors the 70's but it doesn't.

bchris02
01-19-2014, 08:54 AM
we have more demand than supply, ...so why aren't we building?

Because in OKC development, no matter what it is, investors are afraid of risk. They build the absolute bare minimum, like we are seeing with the Stage Center Tower, and refuse to think ahead and have vision. This goes for all aspects of development, from size down to style, from downtown to I-35 and Covell. Then OKC ends up losing out on a corporate relocation because there isn't enough Class-A office space. Why do you think investors in the OKC area are so afraid of taking risks?

OKVision4U
01-19-2014, 09:26 AM
Because in OKC development, no matter what it is, investors are afraid of risk. They build the absolute bare minimum, like we are seeing with the Stage Center Tower, and refuse to think ahead and have vision. This goes for all aspects of development, from size down to style, from downtown to I-35 and Covell. Then OKC ends up losing out on a corporate relocation because there isn't enough Class-A office space. Why do you think investors in the OKC area are so afraid of taking risks?

bchris02, It is fueled by a history of failures ( The Dust Bowl / The Great Depression / Oil Busts of 83'), mixed with snake-bit lending institutions ( Penn Square / 08'), and the "wait and see" approach. ..by the time this plays out, they have missed the true opportunity ( on the positive curve of trends).

This is why MAPS was so successful. It doesn't get "caught up / held-up / slowed down" by our own undoing. We make a list of large projects / we fund it / we build it.

The real estate investment community outside of the Oklahoma borders, build their portfolio in the same way. They have 100% financing, they build the next best idea, and they break ground. The consumers know this, and they sign up for it. They want to be where the "Hot place to be is", and trendy sells. ex. Deep Duece. / Aloft / 21c Museum.

Continuing to do the Okie standard, will hold us back.

The commercial lending institutions should be handing out money to those that want to build in DT ( anything under $1B), this IS the time they make money too. They should be lining up, the A&D firms should be slammed w/ projects & busting at the seams so they have to hire more, the large GC's should be mobilizing for their next project, the marketing groups should be promoting it big time. OKC we have this time, don't let it pass by ....again.

Spartan
01-19-2014, 09:52 AM
Spartan, there are certainly instances of buildings being razed, but it's hardly an "astonishing rate". I know that is contrary to your belief that it mirrors the 70's but it doesn't.

We have so many more buildings on the chopping block, already lost or about to be lost. Look at the Film Exchange Bldg, being razed just because an out of town consultant from SF wants it out of their mcmasterplan.

Bellaboo
01-19-2014, 10:51 AM
Since it sounds like Devon is out of parking already, I would not be shocked to see the lots labeled 5, 6, 7, 8 & 10 be the tower and 11 through 15 wind up a parking garage with retail/restarants at ground level

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/misc/precor4.jpg

The rumor has it that One North Hudson (15), is going to end up being housing. Possibly starting this year.

bchris02
01-19-2014, 10:55 AM
We have so many more buildings on the chopping block, already lost or about to be lost. Look at the Film Exchange Bldg, being razed just because an out of town consultant from SF wants it out of their mcmasterplan.

It's sad, especially when you look at what Tulsa has planned for their park and how far ahead it is of ours. I am alright with razing certain historic buildings if it is to be replaced with something special, but not the minimalist crap so often pushed here.

PhiAlpha
01-19-2014, 02:13 PM
It's sad, especially when you look at what Tulsa has planned for their park and how far ahead it is of ours. I am alright with razing certain historic buildings if it is to be replaced with something special, but not the minimalist crap so often pushed here.

I'm not sure how you can look at the two conceptual drawings of OKC and tulsa's parks and determine that Tulsa's is "far ahead of ours." They both look about the same at this point.

Rover
01-19-2014, 04:04 PM
What an absurd post. This is typical of the Rover belittling act. I am responding to both suspicions and reason within this thread itself, but you don't read that, you just zero right in on my post and badger me with the most epically pointless post ever.

Are you debating that there are development plans perhaps for this block? Because earlier in this thread you were attacking people for complaining about the current condition because there might be development plans after all. Those are conflicting thought patterns.

I am concerned by the emergence of two trends within the downtown design discussion: 1, we are now tearing down LANDMARKS (Stage Center, India Temple, KerMac, Hale Photo Bldg, Film Row Bldg, and on and on, not to mention less significant structures) at an astonishing rate. 2, anytime someone has credible (especially) concerns with downtown development, the response from a reliable corps of posters who always defend business interests is to belittle, then say too late, then to rub it in. It plays out in every thread.

This, along with the underwhelming "mystery tower" phenomenon, has become the hallmark of OKC Talk that continuously drives this forum like a machine. A machine doesn't care how clear and cogent its logic is.

Wow. What an overreaction. I was merely asking if you were saying things because you had specific knowledge of something, or just was suspecting things. Didn't mean to trip your trigger and have you explode. Ease up man.

I am disgusted with the current condition and the deterioration that is happening. But I don't happen to be jumping off the ledge just yet. People are assuming so much and then getting angry at what they THINK might or might not happen.

Spartan
01-19-2014, 08:10 PM
Sorry Rover, it was an overreaction, but I am very serious about this historic preservation issue and I am throwing all of my weight behind it because obviously nobody else will. OKC has a demolition addiction. I am tired of two steps forward, one step backward, all the time.


I'm not sure how you can look at the two conceptual drawings of OKC and tulsa's parks and determine that Tulsa's is "far ahead of ours." They both look about the same at this point.

Not at all, you should see Steve Lackmeyer's recent blog post on the matter.

PWitty
01-19-2014, 08:41 PM
Sorry Rover, it was an overreaction, but I am very serious about this historic preservation issue and I am throwing all of my weight behind it because obviously nobody else will. OKC has a demolition addiction. I am tired of two steps forward, one step backward, all the

Not at all, you should see Steve Lackmeyer's recent blog post on the matter.

Yeah, here's the link for that blog post.

Steve's Blog Entry (http://newsok.com/who-is-excited-about-the-future-core-to-shore-park/article/3924209)

If Tulsa's park ends up like those conceptual shots, it would be much more impressive than what OKC has planned.

Spartan
01-19-2014, 08:45 PM
Here's the kicker: The firm that did Tulsa's designs, with roughly the same public cost (and such a strong, compelling vision that they received huge private and philanthropic contributions), applied to work on our park and was rejected. We instead gave the contract to a firm that Jim Couch likes from his own past experience. They did reliable, mediocre work for us before, so they will probably keep doing reliable, mediocre work for us.

bchris02
01-19-2014, 09:28 PM
The Tulsa way is to take OKC's idea and do it bigger and better. Most of the time they are successful. That wouldn't always be the case if OKC didn't always accept such a mediocre, bare minimum development standard.

PhiAlpha
01-19-2014, 10:17 PM
Sorry Rover, it was an overreaction, but I am very serious about this historic preservation issue and I am throwing all of my weight behind it because obviously nobody else will. OKC has a demolition addiction. I am tired of two steps forward, one step backward, all the time.


Not at all, you should see Steve Lackmeyer's recent blog post on the matter.

Didn't see that, yes it looks like their design has surpassed ours.

ljbab728
01-19-2014, 10:36 PM
We have so many more buildings on the chopping block, already lost or about to be lost. Look at the Film Exchange Bldg, being razed just because an out of town consultant from SF wants it out of their mcmasterplan.

Of course there are a few building up for being demolished but it is still hardly an "astonishing rate". I'm not arguing in favor of any building being demolished but it happens constantly in every major city in the US.

ljbab728
01-19-2014, 10:39 PM
The Tulsa way is to take OKC's idea and do it bigger and better. Most of the time they are successful.
That would be a true statement except it isn't.

AP
01-19-2014, 10:49 PM
That would be a true statement except it isn't.

+1

PhiAlpha
01-19-2014, 10:50 PM
That would be a true statement except it isn't.

Well they did see how we got the Thunder and promptly 1-upped us with the Shock, so there's that...

Spartan
01-20-2014, 05:31 AM
Of course there are a few building up for being demolished but it is still hardly an "astonishing rate". I'm not arguing in favor of any building being demolished but it happens constantly in every major city in the US.

What is a few vs several? This is splitting hairs.

sgt. pepper
01-20-2014, 05:52 AM
the tulsa way is to take okc's idea and do it bigger and better. Most of the time they are successful. That wouldn't always be the case if okc didn't always accept such a mediocre, bare minimum development standard.

"like"

Spartan
01-20-2014, 06:30 AM
This is more complicated than Ye Ole Tulsa v. OKC. Our city has pulled so far ahead of Tulsa it isn't a debate anymore, and we have 5 times the downtown development they do. We have new developments announced every week and a half on average, whereas it takes them a few months to get a new development. I think they are just finishing up a wave and their developers are waiting to see how new projects are absorbed into the market.

All that said...the perspectus for any city wanting to compete with OKC is to take any of these projects and actually spend time and effort on it. They'll all spend the same or a little more money, but what it comes down to are the two things that are in short supply in OKC: attention span and caring.

Jim Kyle
01-20-2014, 08:32 AM
What is a few vs several? This is splitting hairs.Well, I could say that there's a number of thousand-meter supertowers going up in the CBD and it would be true, since "zero" is a number. Would that also be splitting hairs? Sometimes connotation is everything, as any politician or journalist knows...

BDP
01-20-2014, 08:48 AM
Of course there are a few building up for being demolished but it is still hardly an "astonishing rate". I'm not arguing in favor of any building being demolished but it happens constantly in every major city in the US.

When you look at all the under developed land in the core, any demolition is pretty astonishing at this point. And when you consider not just how much, but what we like to demolish, then it just becomes bizarre.

Rover
01-20-2014, 08:54 AM
Would preservationists prefer a total moratorium on demolishing any structures in downtown? Elsewhere?

Which city has the best policy/set of laws, etc. for building preservation that we can lobby to poach from or incorporate into our own? Is it just a set of laws or is it the judgement of the overseers that makes the difference?

Pete
01-20-2014, 09:14 AM
When you look at all the under developed land in the core, any demolition is pretty astonishing at this point. And when you consider not just how much, but what we like to demolish, then it just becomes bizarre.

Yes, there is empty space but very little completely empty space.

More often than not, there is some lone, stray, neglected building in the middle of a large area that is to be redeveloped. And that's when a building tends to come down.


SandRidge was an exception and I think those demolitions should never have been approved.