OCURA just cancelled it's November meeting, so forget about what I said about learning more next week.

from yesterdays EDtrust meeting Cathy O'Connor gave her overview for the Alliance 1st Q report (report is in the packet)

the housing is still a go from her verbal report they expect 60 units on top of the parking ... and they also expect more garages to be needed soon and they are working on several to follow the 750 space garage on this site

from yesterdays EDtrust meeting Cathy O'Connor gave her overview for the Alliance 1st Q report (report is in the packet)

the housing is still a go from her verbal report they expect 60 units on top of the parking ... and they also expect more garages to be needed soon and they are working on several to follow the 750 space garage on this site

Now this is very positive in accordance with the Mystery Tower thread. The garages come first.

Good news about the housing.

Wonder who will be the developer?


And the urgency for more downtown parking is very telling in terms of what they expect in near-term development.

I think the fact that this has come so far so fast is also a very good sign for future developments.

Yes, the people at the EDT know better than anyone about what's in the development pipeline.

The fact they hurried up a recent parking study, proposed several large garages on the west side of the CBD, are fast-tracking this project and the Century Center expansion while already looking to do more in the immediate future... As I said, it's all very telling and consistent with much of the speculation in the New Tower(s) thread.

Makes one wonder if the other parking garage spaces they are looking into might also be eligible for residential icing.

Good news about the housing.

Wonder who will be the developer?


And the urgency for more downtown parking is very telling in terms of what they expect in near-term development.

I am hearing that of the developers that got shut out for the Mercy site, the one who was most gung-ho and already had secured financing is also interested in this project.

The problem is that 1/2 of downtown sits on a shallow water table. The original riverbed stops at about Main St.

The problem is that 1/2 of downtown sits on a shallow water table. The original riverbed stops at about Main St.

This doesn't seem to stop underground parking. I think Leadership Square has 4 levels underground, and we just saw what Devon did and the Cox is ditto.

For that matter, the 'Peake is underground a couple of levels as well.

That's just the magic that made the Myriad so incomparable...

Will they be doing a RFP for the housing on top?

Will they be doing a RFP for the housing on top?

I was under the impression they had already done so and that there was at least one response.

This is also in a former warehouse/dock district in SF, not their historic civic center.

I was under the impression that a district's historical significance is irrelevant here.

Just kidding.

Yeah, it fits in better in Mission Bay for sure. Most of it is now new construction. But, good luck coming up with a new parking garage design that compliments the historic structures without looking way cheesy.

Does anyone even know how to build this now:

http://media.spokesman.com/then_now_item_images/CITY_RAMP_HISTORICAL_LIB_r910x697.jpg?fbe36b071a0a d48e03350a35305624e16c1bc5b4

I was under the impression that a district's historical significance is irrelevant here.

Just kidding.

Yeah, it fits in better in Mission Bay for sure. Most of it is now new construction. But, good luck coming up with a new parking garage design that compliments the historic structures without looking way cheesy.

Does anyone even know how to build this now:

http://media.spokesman.com/then_now_item_images/CITY_RAMP_HISTORICAL_LIB_r910x697.jpg?fbe36b071a0a d48e03350a35305624e16c1bc5b4

That's a work of art. Is this really a parking garage? It looks more like the ediface to a museum or art gallery. Come to think of it, it looks a bit like The Montgomery.

Wonder what the coloration was like. Any color photos of this?

I was under the impression that a district's historical significance is irrelevant here.

Just kidding.

"Unveiled at the Sept. 19 Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority meeting by Anthony McDermid, principal of TAP Architecture, the preliminary design included nods to the city’s historic architecture with a modern flair."

okcBIZ: News: Preliminary designs for downtown parking garage unveiled (http://okc.biz/oklahoma/article-6424-preliminary-designs-for-downtown-parking-garage-unveiled.html)

Basically.

Does anyone even know how to build this now:

Sadly, no they don't. That was constructed back in a time when buildings were built on the human scale to create a sense of place. Today’s modern buildings reflect their simple internal structure with just enough artistic features to make them tolerable. However, what they lack in style they make up for with lighting.

Sadly, no they don't. That was constructed back in a time when buildings were built on the human scale to create a sense of place. Today’s modern buildings reflect their simple internal structure with just enough artistic features to make them tolerable. However, what they lack in style they make up for with lighting.

I doubt it's an issue of *building* these types of places (although they would certainly take a different skill set than we're used to)...it's the design that doesn't happen anymore.

Art of all types took a turn toward minimalism in the 20th century, that doesn't mean that the ornate is no longer possible. You would just need someone to design a building in this genre and send it to the builder.

It would be expensive though, and I imagine the maintenance on them is more grueling.

That being said, I would like to see more builders make an effort to use ornamentation with contemporary building materials.

Kunstler calls that cartoon building. Take an arch doorway as an example. Do you want a real arch where the arch is bearing the weight of the structure above, or would you be happy with a fake arch attached to 2X4 studs with nails. Columns are another one. I have 4 columns in my house. They don't hold anything up, and in fact, they are hollow. It is all fakery. If I was going to build a building and money wasn't an object, I would want arches and columns to actually support something. However, I think that is actually illegal now.

Kunstler calls that cartoon building. Take an arch doorway as an example. Do you want a real arch where the arch is bearing the weight of the structure above, or would you be happy with a fake arch attached to 2X4 studs with nails. Columns are another one. I have 4 columns in my house. They don't hold anything up, and in fact, they are hollow. It is all fakery. If I was going to build a building and money wasn't an object, I would want arches and columns to actually support something. However, I think that is actually illegal now.

Right, I'm saying they could still build it without it being a cartoon building. All they have to do is hand off designs to an engineer, and the Engineer could make something work. You don't actually build that way because it's not practical and would not stand the test of time (structurally) nearly as well as modern building standards. Just because there are new, better ways to build things, doesn't mean past techniques cannot be utilized or are forgotten.

Kunstler calls that cartoon building. Take an arch doorway as an example. Do you want a real arch where the arch is bearing the weight of the structure above, or would you be happy with a fake arch attached to 2X4 studs with nails. Columns are another one. I have 4 columns in my house. They don't hold anything up, and in fact, they are hollow. It is all fakery. If I was going to build a building and money wasn't an object, I would want arches and columns to actually support something. However, I think that is actually illegal now.

Well back then they utilized limestone to build columns and arches and other ornamentation. Limestone is capable of load-bearing... what we use today is mostly not.

Wonder what the coloration was like. Any color photos of this?

It's in Spokane and actually still in use. I believe it was recently renovated.

http://media.spokesman.com/then_now_item_images/City_Ramp2_r910x697.jpg?fbe36b071a0ad48e03350a3530 5624e16c1bc5b4

You don't actually build that way because it's not practical and would not stand the test of time (structurally) nearly as well as modern building standards.

I don't know about that. There are lots of ruins around the world still standing that have survived everything from earthquakes to world wars and haven't had any maintenance for the better part of 2000 years. Meanwhile, you can see hundreds of building less than 70 years old in OKC that are falling in on themselves. Before London burned the original St Pauls Cathedral had been there for 600 years.

Oklahoma City group seeks proposals for housing in Deep Deuce, atop garage | NewsOK.com (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-group-seeks-proposals-for-housing-in-deep-deuce-atop-garage/article/3730699)


The next request, for the housing atop the new garage, will have a short timeline with proposals due by late January.

Cathy O'Connor, Urban Renewal director, said design work is well under way for the 830-space, 10-story garage to be built west of the Hightower Building, 105 N Hudson, immediately east of the city's finance building at 100 N Walker Ave. — between Colcord Avenue and Main Street.

While acknowledging the solicitation requires a quick turnaround on the housing development, O'Connor said multiple established developers have indicated they are prepared to submit bids.

“Building atop the garage will be an opportunity for a developer to go 10 stories up without the cost of getting there,” O'Connor said.


Article also says the RFP will be for 60 units.

Also the text below the rendering on the left of the article, says the garage will now be 10 stories of parking, with an additional 3 of housing -- total of 13 floors.

All these promised TAP revisions are awesome. These designs show promise in a neat right direction but all aren't quite there yet..

New renderings are up for this project, too.

Article Photos: Revised plans submitted for downtown Oklahoma City elementary, garage Gallery (http://newsok.com/gallery/articleid/3737026/pictures/1906509)

And the article in the Oklahoman.

Revised plans submitted for downtown Oklahoma City elementary, garage | NewsOK.com (http://newsok.com/revised-plans-submitted-for-downtown-oklahoma-city-elementary-garage/article/3737026)

It doesn't even look like housing was added to the project.

It doesn't even look like housing was added to the project.

I don't think there is really any way to tell with the new rendering. Of course, there would be no detailed plans for housing at this point anyway. It just a conceptual drawing.

I don't know. People who pay a lot for apartments generally tend to like windows... Which TAP apparently has no use for anymore judging by a few more of their recent projects.

Well, I would think that anyone making a serious proposal to put housing there would be allowed to have a little imput on the design for that area so I wouldn't get too concerned yet. Of course, why wait to worry when you can start now. LOL

It seems strange to live on top of a seven-story parking garage, but I will withhold skepticism until I see the final renderings.

It seems strange to live on top of a seven-story parking garage, but I will withhold skepticism until I see the final renderings.

If the parking garage was out adjacent to Integris Baptist or Mercy, I'd likely agree (unless many I was a resident and wanted to be a short hop from work.) But a residence in town, a view that's not at all shabby, and if you work in the core of DT, a premiere location? Even an aging lad like me, who greatly prefers having open fields and rabbits and mini-bears in ample supply outside my windows, can see some serious appeal in housing sitting atop this garage project.

It seems strange to live on top of a seven-story parking garage, but I will withhold skepticism until I see the final renderings.

That is done everyday by millions of people in every city around the world. However, it will be interesting to see the final result.

From the Oklahoman:


Urban Renewal Director Cathy O'Connor said talks are under way with the city and the Central Oklahoma YMCA to open a fitness branch for municipal employees in half the garage's first floor space.

She said city officials also have indicated they are interested in leasing the remaining space for meeting rooms if the garage does not attract retailers.

Revised plans submitted for downtown Oklahoma City elementary, garage | NewsOK.com (http://newsok.com/revised-plans-submitted-for-downtown-oklahoma-city-elementary-garage/article/3737026)

If they slap residential on top, that will provide a nice boosted demographic in the area for the retail spaces below. Not to mention any additional high-rise residential that will [hopefully] be developed in the future, will only be able to be built in this same area and points southward.

I feel like this will really help this area have more foot traffic etc.

Downtown is shaping up to have Deep Deuce in the northeast and east, and will now have a developing area to the southwest and west of downtown starting with projects such as this one.

That is not a "modernist" building. Just a poorly-executed abomination in EIFS.

Separating the elevator towers?

I don't understand why the elevator accommodation MUST protrude outward and why the City Hall-facing facade can't replicate the Main Street facade, which isn't bad.

Discussion of 100 N. Walker has been moved here:

100 N. Walker - OKCTalk (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=100+N+Walker)

Are they planning to put in the two mid-block crosswalks?

Are they planning to put in the two mid-block crosswalks?

Sure looks that way:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/garage2.jpg

Here's a new drawing that shows a cross-section of the structure:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/wikiphotos/mainstreetgarage1.jpg

Is it just me or is this 3 stories taller than before?

Never mind - it's just me. Same height as before but why did I think it was a 7 story parking garage?

So are the proposals for housing not in yet?

So are the proposals for housing not in yet?

Correct.

They just issued the RFP -- not sure when they are due but should be soon.

Is it just me or is this 3 stories taller than before?

Never mind - it's just me. Same height as before but why did I think it was a 7 story parking garage?

It definitely hangs much higher over the Hightower Building now. Are we sure that they didn't even add another floor of parking to accommodate the residential? I also don't understand the point of rushing through design approval if/when they don't even know what the upper floors of housing might look like.

What if a developer recognizes this as an awesome opportunity to do high-rise residential without paying for a high-rise structure just for housing, and wants to do more than 3 floors of housing??

It definitely hangs much higher over the Hightower Building now. Are we sure that they didn't even add another floor of parking to accommodate the residential? I also don't understand the point of rushing through design approval if/when they don't even know what the upper floors of housing might look like.

What if a developer recognizes this as an awesome opportunity to do high-rise residential without paying for a high-rise structure just for housing, and wants to do more than 3 floors of housing??

This was kind of my thought. 3 floors of housing on top of 10 floors of parking might look a little odd. Couldn't already having the garage mean you could add more floors of housing rather easily? But I guess we need to see what the proposals even call for.

With about 100 spaces per garage level, if they could get 1 level devoted to residential parking, I don't know why this couldn't go much, much taller. Like 10 floors of residential? Even your "bottom floor units" have 10th floor views. The penthouse level would have 20th floor views in the heart of the CBD.

You might not want to use the entire available floorplate if you only want to do around 100 apartments on 10 floors, so then you could do the residential tower portion closer to the Hightower Building which would give better views over City Hall and the new Bicentennial Park.

I think there is an extremely vested interest in getting as much residential as possible here, because that just makes the street-level retail more feasible. Why this development isn't being thought of as an opportunity for cutting-edge park-frontage infill, beats me.

It does look like they added more height, but not levels:


The rendering in the Oklahoman today:

http://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/r960-aa7c88c6da8f89cf63c5aa1cb611a8d2.jpg

versus what was previously sumbitted:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/garage3.jpg

Oh okay, that's the difference. Thanks for the clarification, and for taking a closer look, Pete.

Or maybe they did add one level?

Hard to tell -- but it's definitely taller now.

Add 3 levels of residential and we'll have a nice mid-rise structure.

The old is 9, the new is 10.

I think they added the extra level in anticipation of the residential parking demands now.

I really hope they do add residential above... it would be something that i would be interested in looking into.

I wouldn't bet against residential on top at this point. I believe I read there were two responses to the RFP, so unless both are just really really bad, I don't think both would be turned down; especially since this seems to be something that have been pushing for.

Some more information on the RFP for housing units on top on this garage...

They are due by February 1st and will be shared in a meeting that day.

Below is part of the RFP that provides some parameters; it also should be noted the developer would be asked to add structural reinforcement to support the apartments at their own cost.



http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/mainstreetgaragehousing.jpg

With residential on top, the whole building reminds me a little of parts of Mockingbird Station in Dallas.

The RFP also said that they hope to have the garage complete by Spring of 2014, at which time the prevailing developer would be expected to start construction on the living units.

Also said the units could be for sale rather than for lease -- developers option.

And the use of EIFS is completely prohibited.

And the use of EIFS is completely prohibited.

:rock_on:

The RFP also said that they hope to have the garage complete by Spring of 2014, at which time the prevailing developer would be expected to start construction on the living units.

Also said the units could be for sale rather than for lease -- developers option.

And the use of EIFS is completely prohibited.

What is EIFS?

Cheap faux stucco.